Scientific management took centuries to evolve and become entrenched in the mechanistic mindset of Decartes, Newton and Taylor. The deep-seated desire for order, based on a certain sequential plan of action, is a remnant of this mechanistic thinking. Much of this thinking should be relegated to the scrap heap of history. I firmly believe we are at a point in organizational architectural development where we must begin with a clean slate, a fresh new sheet of paper and start the process of evolving new organizational patterns. These new patterns should be based on adaptive systems capable of sustaining all people within organizations through times of high ambiguity and change. Guided autonomy should replace command and control. A culture of pride should be blended with a culture of personal responsibility and shared performance. Structure should evolve into a flow of networks with people at its center. I don’t see this approach as a fad because it meets the test of reality.
The breakup of the centrally controlled mainframe computer into tens of millions of desktop units can serve as an excellent metaphor as to what is occurring within organizational life. The mainframe once only accessible to a select few has now been replaced by a desktop and the wired laptop, which taps into the intelligence of all users and allows for immediate distribution and access of information to all stakeholders. This use of technology helps to build organizations that are capable of continuous renewal and operate on the basis of self-regulation, and interdependence at every level rather than control by a select few. Technology when used effectively aids in the process of enhancing everyone’s ability to be committed to something bigger than themselves.
The future is unknowable, unpredictable and undetermined. However, many leaders and their organizations remain mesmerized by the Newtonian promise of control and certainty. This continued belief has taught us to do very little until the organization is absolutely certain they know what will happen in detail. When action is finally taken, the actions are taken as if the organizations truly can see the outcomes. This Practice of what is often called strategic planning, has been predicated on the collection and analysis of data about current conditions to produce what is felt to be a detailed picture of the future. Organizations then plan actions, which they believe are certain to lead them to a successful future.
This all seems very logical; however, today’s landscape is no longer logical. I have continually observed and as a result come to realize, the only thing certain about a five year strategic plan is that change will occur quickly and the plan will be dramatically wrong or obsolete within three months, one or two years. I am not advocating the removal of all planning, tactical or strategic. That would be foolish. Instead I am making the point that whenever plans are made they should be viewed as movable, flexible and dynamic enough to evolve and respond to an ever changing business landscape. In other words, a plan for continually changing the plan should be put in place. Contrary to the popular wisdom of strategic planning, McGill University professor Henry Mintzberg suggests what he calls “strategic thinking.” Quoting from The Boundaryless Organization “In Mintzberg’s view, strategic thinking is what successful companies use to track changing social and economic trends, to access their implications, to experiment with new ways of doing business, and to build on empirical experience.” He goes on to say, “It is a continuous process, inculcated into the fabric of the organization, rather than a one-time planning exercise.”
Complex events and chaotic developments are confronting most organizations with a compelling mandate for change of unprecedented proportions. The changes being required go far beyond tweaks, adjustments and modifications. There is a strong need to focus on breakthroughs rather than incremental change. The piecemeal augmentation of new data and facts will not sustain organizations in today’s turbulent world. We are moving out of a world of incremental alterations. Fluffing a few pillows and rearranging desk chairs on the Titanic simply will not do. We are quickly moving into a world of discontinuous transformational change.
I think it is safe to say that technology and complexity are inseparable components of this transformational change. Organizations must get comfortable in dealing with continual interruptions in their plan and transform themselves quickly on a continuous basis. The change goes beyond simply rethinking how work gets done. As individuals and organizations, we must learn to think at the same time we are thinking. The message is becoming clear. Virtually all organizations and teams of people within organizations must come to grips with the continuing explosion of information, technology, globalization, fierce competition, economic and social upheaval and the mixing of a remarkably diverse culture and workforce. The vast reservoirs of information, new technology and change are coming at us in such large amounts and at such high speeds, that we can often feel like we are drinking from a fire hose.
Organizations and their leadership must be prepared to throw away their insecurities and embrace new unconventional thinking. They must do this to deal more effectively with situations, which are complex, ever-changing, and for the most part uncontrollable. Mark McCormack states it very nicely in his book What They Don’t Teach You At Harvard Business School, when he says, “Have you noticed that the best-run companies all seem to be managed unconventionally?” He goes on to state, “Their success is attributed to breaking the rules, not following them; encouraging employee, departmental and divisional independence, not stifling it; bursting through the conventional wisdom, not perpetuating it.” This is definitely a very uncomfortable thought for most people to deal with. It is contrary to what we have been taught to believe.
When the steps are taken to embrace and apply the new scientific frame of reference to organizational dynamics, it requires a quantum leap in not only acceptance but also in action. In tapping the potential of each stakeholder and in the releasing of the creative power of those stakeholders, the organization can benefit from the whole, truly crafting a culture of innovation. I believe this “alignment with the future” will become critically important in an environment where we will never have all the data required to make solid important decisions. Taking a holistic view of your complex environment helps develop a more realistic and fluent capacity to survive and succeed now and in the future.
Human organizations are dynamic feedback systems. I believe it is critical that for organizations to survive in today’s chaotic environment, they need to be creative, self-organizing and adaptive. Organizational structure must follow the ever-changing business or reason the organization is in existence, not the other way around. As the business landscape changes the organization must quickly change. This demands that all members – including leadership – learn not to operate effectively in stable conditions, but rather in unstable ones, in which ideas and innovation form the organizations strategic direction.
Learning not planning has to a great degree become the key, which opens the door to the future. A learning adaptive organization is an enterprise that is capable of changing its mind at will and with skill, in order to realize the future it envisions and truly desires. This also clearly describes an effective project team in today’s environment.
Remember, most aspects of organizational activities are not repetitive or machine like. They are more organic relying less on analytic methods and more on tacit knowledge and intuition. This requires a big picture visionary view and wide latitude in which people can act. Willingness to experiment within a safe place to fail, coupled with constant communication and a high tolerance for ambiguity, paint a much more realistic picture of how we need to work now and in the future.
In this new organic environment a high degree of communication and information exchanges enhances the intuitive nature of a project team. As information flows, the team can begin to feel the gut reality of their decision-making. When it feels wrong they stop, gather more information and quickly make course directions. When it feels right they quickly move along a path towards success. The key is open honest communication and the willingness to deal with reality as it makes itself known.
If we define an organization as a – system of interdependent actions, which must be coordinated to accomplish a task among individuals whose beliefs, feelings, emotions, information and knowledge differ – I believe it then becomes clear that a central task of the leader is to “blend individual uniqueness into innovation and sustainability.” Blending individual uniqueness is not easy because almost every interaction between people is a form of conflict. Open and honest communication is a clash of beliefs, feelings, emotions, priorities and desired outcomes.
Stated another way, a leader needs to convert the conflict of ideas into the innovation of a more complete solution. Also, sustainability and conflict are constants, which must be built upon, worked and massaged everyday. This will no doubt require the very delicate conversion from territorial control into holistic or integrated cooperation. Such a conversion can be greatly assisted when all participants share a clear vision of the world they inhabit and an inspiring tangible vision of the desired future. This is why visionary thinking and the ability to clearly articulate the vision to an organization is so critical to the desired outcome. Differences in people will always be present; however, a powerful vision can go a long way to dispel differences and cause everyone to rise above him or herself. An exceptional leader is one who can artfully surface and orchestrate conflicts within the organization so the organization can get by individual differences and accomplish the objective.
Most organizations are designed to produce the results they obtain. No organization can deliver greater outcomes than its architecture is designed to deliver. If the desire is for the organization to soar too much higher levels of performance, a major paradigm shift needs to occur. It’s as simple as that.
When rethinking the preferred future organization, perhaps the best approach is to enter into true dialog, as opposed to simply a discussion of options. Discussions normally lead to decisions being made without fully exploring new possibilities. Dialogue does take more time and it is a more difficult approach but more informed outcomes will usually result. I am of the opinion that many people are the victims of casual thought. Our societal drive through, fast food mentality, seems to have permeated even our approach to information gathering. Some people appear to get a few bits of information, not necessarily challenging its truth and then quickly make decisions.
With all of its positive contribution, the Internet can also be the source of misinformation. News sound bites, meant to increase listening, viewing or readership, are often taken at face value as the truth. The quick approach to processing information can work fine in many situations; however, the skill or rather the “art” of dialogue is a form of communication that should be developed – especially by anyone in a leadership role – if meaningful transformation is to take place. This statement might seem like it is in conflict with “action beats brilliance” or “innovation belongs to the quick”; but as stated, it is a complex world we live in. Yes, an organization must be quick and action oriented but there are also times when new knowledge must be fully explored.
There are no easy answers or cookie cutter recipes for success, just the opportunities to continually develop learning points which lead to more educated truths. Dialogue can best facilitate seeking deeper truths, which aid the transformational process. The dilemma of opposites, quick action and deliberate dialogue, is just another example of the challenge and intrigue we face in the complexity of our chaotic world.
The late David Bohm, physicist and founder of MIT’s dialogue project, saw dialogue as a way to deepen communication among stakeholders. He believed this could lead to new levels of awareness and ultimately to the transformation of collective consciousness. The word dialogue stems from the Greek roots “dia” and “logos” which means “through meaning”. Discussion has the same Greek root as percussion and concussion, “discus” meaning “to throw, fragment or shatter.” Bohm likened discussion to the activity where we throw our opinions back and forth in an attempt to convince each other of a particular point of view. In discussion we tell, sell and persuade to gain agreement. In dialogue we inquire to learn, to unfold a new meaning, to integrate many perspectives and uncover and then examine our beliefs. I believe dialogue can best be achieved through a long saturation of awareness and practice. In other words, through intense curiosity and discovery we can attempt to transform something to a new higher order.
In their book, Community Building: Renewing Spirit & Learning, Linda Teurfs and Glenna Gerard explain the “technology of dialogue.” As they conceive it for organizational settings, it consists of four main skill components or what they call building blocks. These blocks involve learning a new way of being together and interacting. They involve skills that overlap and interweave in various ways. Most often for one building block to develop, the others need to be practiced. Teurfs and Gerard do not ascribe any order of importance to the building blocks but do suggest introducing them in the following order. 1. Suspension of judgment, 2. Assumption identification, 3. Listening, and 4. Inquiry and reflection.
It is impossible to do away with our beliefs, opinions and judgment, but when we suspend them during a dialogue we become more open to other ways of seeing the same thing. Later we may find our original perspective is still correct or that it in fact needs to be either expanded or even changed. As has been stated earlier we are typically unaware of our beliefs or assumptions so we rarely stop to question them. Often important decisions are made on our unexamined beliefs or assumptions, which lead to disappointing or less than desirable results. It is only when we begin to honestly examine what we believe to be true, can we then be open to new beliefs. Listening is critical to our ability to dialogue. Someone once said, “God gave us two ears and one mouth, we should use them accordingly.” Dennis Waitley states it another way. “In our work, as well as our personal lives, how we listen is at least as important as how we talk.” Going a step further than active listening, we should focus on our capacity to stay in the present, remaining open to the meaning of what is being generated in a dialogue session. I call this the ability to “listen to the whole.” Slowing down to truly listen goes hand-in-hand with enhanced inquiry and reflection. By digging deeply into matters that concern us, we can create a break-through in our ability to better understand the big picture.
When we engage in good solid exploratory dialogue we can begin to propose ideas, consider new insights, expose facts, develop new beliefs, probing and testing their roots and move with a thinking mind to new points of view. When this is done, then a more reasonable judgment can be made and a more informed answer can be developed to address the questions. This is why I believe it is important to not merely discuss but rather enter into dialogue when rethinking the strategy and cultural initiatives of an organization. This approach allows for greater imagination and creativity to take place.
Copyright Information:
You MAY reprint the information contained in this article as long as no portion of the contents are modified and it used “exclusively” within your organization. You must also give credit to information by including the tag line...Roger M. Ingbretsen, Author, Speaker, Leadership Coach, Organizational and Career Developer.
Break The Rules - Think, And Be Adaptive - To learn more about this author, visit Roger Ingbretsen's Website.
Like this article? Share it with your friends
 |
Related Articles |
|
 Rule 20 Rules are Made to be Broken
|
| |
This is Rule #20 in a series of articles on "21 ways to Increase the Power and Profit of Your Advertising Without Spending an Extra Cent," by Brad Sugars.
|
|
Failure Comes From Not Following Your Additive Rules
|
| |
 The cliche “rules were meant to be broken” is a common one in the world of entrepreneurship. Paul Berberian – a great entrepreneur (and dear friend) almost died yesterday when flying his airplane because he broke t...
|
|
Q: How can I make my employees accountable?
|
| |
Accountability, the "A" word. Many employee issues find their root in accountability, or more specifically, the lack of accountability. Here's an overview on working with your staff to create accountability.
|
|
What is an Adaptive Organization
|
| |
The characteristics of an Adaptive organization.
|
|
Breaking the Rules
|
| |
Rules are part of life, from an early age onwards our lives are shaped by rules at home, at nursery, at school and eventually at work. There are rules in our society, rules of the road, social etiquette and so on. I...
|
|
|
Roger Ingbretsen's
Complete
List Of
Leadership
Articles
|
|
|
If you enjoyed this article, get Roger Ingbretsen's Complete List of Leadership Articles For FREE!
|
| |
|
|
|
![[Get Copyright Permissions]](http://license.icopyright.net/images/icopy-w.gif){kind=small}
