Archive

Business

Rock Bottom

September 24, 2023
Article, Business, Organisational Therapy, Rehab
Leave a comment

Rock Bottom

When Do Organisations Change?

Change can be difficult for organisations. They’re often stuck in their ways until a crisis point forces a reevaluation of the status quo. This critical juncture is similar to Kotter’s idea of a ‘burning platform’ or ‘melting iceberg’, suddenly urgent situations that demand immediate action.

What Does Rock Bottom Look Like?

In the context of addiction, rock bottom is often marked by life-altering consequences—losing a job, deteriorating health, or estranged family relationships. For organisations, it could manifest as a financial catastrophe, loss or market chare, regulatory penalties, or a severe talent drain. Essentially, it’s a point where carrying on as usual becomes untenable. The status quo not only fails to solve problems but exacerbates them.

Similar to Addiction Rehab?

Just like an individual might be addicted to drugs or alcohol, organisations can be addicted to dysfunctional assumptions and beliefs, and to the status quo. Both parties live in denial until they hit rock bottom or encounter a ‘burning platform’. For organisations, this addiction might manifest as an unhealthy obsession with outdated business models or dysfunctional management structures. For addicts, it’s the compulsive use of substances despite harmful consequences.

What’s the Turning Point?

Whether an addict faces legal repercussions or an organisation risks financial insolvency, a stark reality sets in, serving as the ‘melting iceberg’ moment. This sense of urgency then becomes the catalyst for meaningful change.

How Do Organisations React?

Upon recognising their ‘melting iceberg’, organisations often enact sweeping changes. This might involve introspection and reflection, restructuring departments, revisiting strategies, or even changing the entire business model. Like an addict entering rehab, there’s a shift from a state of denial to one of urgency and action.

Are There Risks?

Reaching rock bottom serves as a wake-up call but it’s a risky strategy. The longer one waits to enact change, the harder the path to recovery becomes. In both addiction and organisational crises, hesitating can exacerbate an already dire situation.But it’s not like addicts can choose when to change, at least, before they get to rock bottom.

What Are the Lessons?

  1. Be aware: Maintain a keen eye on the state of the organisation, akin to how an addict monitors their triggers.
  2. Act early: Don’t wait for the iceberg to melt; better to be proactive than reactive.
  3. Be committed: Both rehab and organisational change are continuous efforts, requiring long-term dedication and acceptance of pain.

Is Change Sustainable?

Sustaining change remains a challenge. Like an addict faces the risk of relapse, organisations can revert to old habits if the change isn’t deeply embedded. Keeping the urgency that originated from the ‘burning platform’ or ‘rock bottom’ experience is vital for ongoing transformation.

Both addiction recovery and organisational change are arduous journeys, triggered often by reaching a painful nadir. By acknowledging their own ‘melting iceberg’ or ‘rock bottom’,  organisations can harness the urgency required for lasting, positive change.

Ditch the Project Mindset?

September 24, 2023
Article, Business, Capability development, Culture change, Flowchain, Improvement, Memeology, NoProjects, Organisational effectiveness, Quintessence
Leave a comment

Ditch the Project Mindset?

Yes. Many organisations have yet to even hear of #NoProjects, let alone embrace the idea. Many still cleave to the idea of projects, despite it being an outmoded anachronism.

Why Are Projects Failing Us?

You’ve allocated resources, set deadlines, and monitored key performance indicators. Yet something’s off. Projects aren’t delivering as promised. Let’s cut to the chase: the traditional project framework is unfit for the agility and productivity demands of modern organisations.

What’s Wrong with the Project Model?

The project model suggests a start and an end, often disregarding what happens both before and after. This closed-loop system stunts innovation and adaptability. It also usually operates in isolation from other projects, creating silos rather than fostering integrated growth. Essentially, projects set us up for a short-term win but often ignore the long-term game.

Do Agile Methods Help?

Agile approaches tried to rectify some of these issues, but they often get shoehorned into the project mindset. In essence, the Agile Manifesto preaches responsiveness over rigid planning. However, an agile project is still a project; a cage is still a cage, even if it’s golden. Agile methods within a project framework can only do so much (and that’s precious little).

What Replaces Projects?

So if we throw the baby out with the bathwater, what’s left? Systems thinking, that’s what. Instead of isolating issues and opportunities as projects, look at them as ongoing aspects of your organisation’s functioning. Focus on products, processes, value streams, and organisational health. Work towards adaptability, building capability, and continuous improvement rather than temporary, isolated gains.

How to Make the Shift?

It’s a significant cultural shift and it won’t happen overnight. Employees need to understand the broader business landscape, not just their tiny slice of the pie. Training, communication and the buy-in of the Folks That Matter™ are key. It’s not about ticking boxes; it’s about ongoing, holistic improvement. Forget “project completion”; think “system capability.”

Are There Any Downsides?

Every coin has two sides. You’re moving from a structured, time-bound approach to something more fluid. That can be unsettling and might even meet resistance. However, the potential for increased productivity and agility far outweighs the initial discomfort.

Is It Time to Say Goodbye To Projects?

Short answer: Yes. Ditch the traditional project framework. Embrace a more fluid, systems-oriented approach and make room for real agility and productivity. It’s not just a change, it’s an evolution. Are you ready?

Riding Productivity Waves

September 24, 2023
Article, Business, Culture change, Memeology, Organisational Therapy, Patterns, Productivity, Psychology, Quintessence
Leave a comment

Riding Productivity Waves

Inspired by James Lawther’s recent book “Managed by Morons”

What Defines Productive Behaviour?

James Lawther’s recent book “Managed by Morons” provides sharp insights into organisational behaviours that make or break productivity. Highly productive organisations often display patterns such as open communication, frequent knowledge sharing, and constructive feedback loops. These patterns create a conducive environment for efficiency, adaptability, and consistent growth.

What Leads to Dysfunction?

On the flip side, dysfunctional organisations exhibit signs of poor communication, stifling bureaucracy, and a toxic work culture. These negative behaviour patterns often stem from flawed management practices, including the suppression of employee autonomy, micro-management, and an emphasis on rigid protocols over innovative thinking.

Are There Middle-Ground Patterns?

Yes, some organisations walk the tightrope between being productive and dysfunctional. Such organisations may have sporadic spurts of productivity, followed by phases of stagnation. Identifiable patterns in these organisations might include inconsistent management styles, fluctuating employee morale, and a lack of stable systems or processes.

How to Shift from Dysfunction to Productivity?

Organisational psychotherapy offers a profound approach to transition from dysfunction to productivity. Unlike traditional methods that may only tackle symptoms, organisational psychotherapy aims to address the root causes of the issues plaguing the workplace.

  1. Open Dialogue: Initiating open conversations allows for the identification of deeply ingrained patterns and beliefs that are contributing to dysfunction.
  2. Safe Space Creation: A non-judgmental and confidential environment enables employees and management to express and discuss concerns and insights that might otherwise remain unspoken and undiscussable.
  3. Deep Inquiry: This involves asking thought-provoking questions to stimulate critical thinking, and fostering awareness of underlying issues that demand attention and remediation.
  4. Shared Understanding and Action: Once there’s clarity about dysfunctional collective assumptions and beliefs, the organisation can decide on actions to disrupt the dysfunctional patterns and encourage behaviours that enhance productivity.
  5. Ongoing Reflection and Adaptation: Organisational psychotherapy is not a one-time event but an ongoing process. Consistently review behavioural patterns and make adjustments to ensure that the shift towards productivity is enduring and effective.

By utilising organisational psychotherapy, you go beyond surface-level fixes to foster a workplace culture that is inherently more adaptive, engaged, and ultimately, more productive.

Final Thoughts

In any organisation, behaviour patterns can indicate the level of productivity or dysfunction. Identifying these patterns early on can save an organisation from a downward spiral or propel it to new heights. It’s crucial to examine these cues critically and, when necessary, take decisive action to instigate change.

Culture isn’t just one aspect of the game, it is the game.

~ Lou Gerstner, former CEO, IBM

And what dictates the culture of any organisation…?

Are You Working In A Dysfunctional Organisation?

September 24, 2023
Article, Business, Memeology, Organisational effectiveness, Organisational Therapy, Psychology, Quintessence
Leave a comment

Are You Working In A Dysfunctional Organisation?

Inspired by James Lawther’s recent book “Managed by Morons”

What Shapes Dysfunctional Organisations?

It’s often the managers who most influence the organisational culture, a culture that’s deeply rooted in collective assumptions and beliefs. But the influence is two-way; these underlying assumptions and beliefs also shape managerial behaviour.

How Do Managers Create Culture?

When you walk into a dysfunctional organisation, one of the first things you’ll notice is the prevailing culture. It may be one of fear, distrust, or apathy. Managers play a significant role in crafting this culture. They set the rules, they define the goals, and they model the behaviour that’s expected from employees.

What’s the Role of Assumptions and Beliefs?

For better or worse, managers aren’t operating in a vacuum. The organisational culture, in many ways, pre-dates them. This culture is shaped by a set of collective assumptions and beliefs that employees share. These can range from “this is a zero-sum game”, through “people cannot be trusted”, to “management doesn’t have our best interests at heart”. These collective beliefs serve as a backdrop against which managerial decisions and actions play out.

Why Do Dictatorships and Businesses Share Traits?

What’s striking is how dysfunctional organisations, whether dictatorships or retail chains, manifest similar behaviours and cultures. Dictatorships often suppress dissent and centralise power, much like how a toxic corporate culture stifles employee feedback and hoards decision-making at the top.

Can Collective Beliefs Be Changed?

Changing a dysfunctional organisation isn’t just about swapping out managers or implementing new policies. You’re fighting against a tide of collective beliefs and assumptions that may have been years in the making. But it’s not impossible. Identifying these beliefs and tackling them head-on can be the first step towards organisational change.

What’s the Takeaway?

Dysfunctional organisations don’t just happen. They’re often the result of managerial behaviour influenced by collective beliefs and assumptions. Recognising this pattern can be the first step toward meaningful change.

People’s behaviour impacts performance far more than any technology, management idea or whiz-bang initiative ever will.

And what governs people’s behaviours…?

Coaching the Coaches?

September 22, 2023
Article, Business, Coaching, Deming, Improvement, Learning, Organisational effectiveness, Training
1 Comment

Coaching the Coaches?

Who’s Coaching New Coaches?

When an organisation decides to bring coaching into its culture, the focus is usually on its employees. Yet the coaches themselves are often left to endure rigid training, which stands at odds with the coaching philosophy. If organisations genuinely believe in coaching, why don’t they extend this to their new coaches?

What’s Wrong with Training Compared to Coaching?

Training enforces a rigid structure, pushing predetermined information towards the participant. This approach is inflexible and impersonal, falling short of individual needs. In contrast, coaching is a dynamic, two-way relationship tailored to the individual’s unique needs and objectives.

Why Do Organisations Stick to Training New Coaches?

Many organisations default to traditional training methods, even for roles better suited for coaching. This inclination towards training could be seen as a glaring oversight and a lack of genuine commitment to the coaching approach.

Is Training New Coaches a Misstep?

Absolutely. Training, with its push approach, is fundamentally ill-equipped for roles that demand behavioural change and personal development. Especially in the realm of Collaborative Knowledge Work. By clinging to training for their new coaches, organisations contradict and undermine their supposed endorsement of coaching.

Why Is Coaching New Coaches the Superior Option?

Coaching, unlike training, draws out an individual’s inherent potential. It enhances both the effectiveness and empathy of new coaches and helps foster a real coaching culture within the organisation.

What’s the Next Step?

Organisations might choose to move beyond training and embrace a coaching-centric approach universally, starting with their newest coaches. Doing so is not just lip service to a trend; it’s a necessary evolution for genuine development.

Is Coaching Itself Beyond Reproach?

As we sing the praises of coaching over training, it’s crucial to consider a larger issue: Is coaching itself the end-all solution for organisational development? No. According to quality management expert W. Edwards Deming’s 95/5 rule, most problems (95%) are the fault of the system, not the individual. Coaching often targets individual behaviours—the “5%”—and overlooks systemic issues that could be the root cause of performance limitations. Organisations might choose to scrutinise their coaching programmes to ensure they’re not just treating symptoms while ignoring the disease.

Conclusion: Where Does This Leave Us?

If organisations are serious about adopting coaching, they might choose to apply the coaching approach at all levels, including new coaches. However, it’s worth reflecting on whether coaching itself, focused as it often is on the “5%”, is enough to address the underlying systemic issues that are impeding progress. To achieve lasting change and growth, organisations must consider systemic improvements as paramount. Anything less represents a missed opportunity.

We’re Doing Continuous Improvement All Wrong

September 22, 2023
Article, Business, Culture change, Deming, Organisational Therapy, Rightshifting
Leave a comment

We’re Doing Continuous Improvement All Wrong

Why Is Continuous Improvement Still Rare?

Continuous improvement is seldom seen, despite its promised value. Could it be that the rarity of effective continuous improvement is due to flaws in the commonly employed PDSA model?

Does PDSA Trap Us in a Loop?

The PDSA cycle often ends up reinforcing rather than challenging the status quo. A major part of the problem lies in the unchanging collective assumptions and beliefs that underpin the PDSA process.

How Can Organisational Psychotherapy Help?

Organisational psychotherapy can play a crucial role in transforming PDSA from a loop of reinforcement to a cycle of genuine improvement. By focusing on continually shifting collective assumptions and beliefs, by degrees, organisational psychotherapy provides means to redefine the context of the PDSA cycle.

  1. Spot the Blind Spots: Psychotherapeutic techniques can help identify the invisible beliefs and assumptions that guide the organisation’s decision-making process. These revelations are critical in modifying PDSA to truly serve continuous improvement, especially improvement to the organisational memeplex. What counts as “improvement”, here? Improvement means shifitng collective assumptions and beliefs into more productive alignment with the goals, purpose and aspirations of the organisation.
  2. Change from Within: Organisational psychotherapy facilitates a deep, fundamental shift in collective beliefs. This sets the stage for a more meaningful and effective PDSA cycle.

Can Psychotherapy and PDSA Coexist?

The beauty of incorporating organisational psychotherapy into PDSA is that the two work in tandem, feeding into each other for a more dynamic and effective CI process.

  1. Continuous Self-Assessment: Just as in individual therapy, the organisation can choose to engage in continual self-examination to ensure that the assumptions driving the PDSA cycles are current and accurate.
  2. Diverse Perspectives and Open Dialogue: Psychotherapy encourages open communication, which can be valuable in diversifying the inputs in the PDSA cycle. The more perspectives you have, the less likely you are to perpetuate false assumptions.
  3. Mindfulness: While data is important, Cf. Statistical Process Control, organisational psychotherapy adds another layer by focusing on the far more significant emotional and psychological aspects of decision-making.
  4. Iterative Reassessments: Both PDSA and organisational psychotherapy are iterative by nature. Use regular checkpoints to measure the shift in collective assumptions and beliefs and adjust the PDSA cycle accordingly. Cf. Hearts Over DIamonds.

What’s the Way Forward?

By marrying the principles of organisational psychotherapy with the PDSA model, businesses can finally unlock the true potential of continuous improvement and the Deming Cycle. This dual approach not only revitalises PDSA but also equips it to genuinely drive Rightshifting change, rather than perpetuate the status quo.

Serving the Folks That Matter™: Hagakure Principles

September 18, 2023
Antimatter principle, Article, Attendants, Business, Quintessence, Requirements
Leave a comment

Serving the Folks That Matter™: Hagakure Principles

Commitment to the Folks That Matter™ Drives Satisfaction and Delight

Henry Ford once said,

It is not the employer who pays the wages; employers only handle the money. It is the customer who pays the wages.

This statement reinforces the Hagakure’s guidance on unwavering allegiance to one’s master. In modern product development, our true master becomes all the Folks That Matter™. Engaging fully with their needs and objectives doesn’t just improve the work; it also ensures outcomes align with the needs of those footing the bill.

Unwavering allegiance to one’s master is at the heart of Hagakure. In our setting, the Folks That Matter™ become the ‘master.’ To be truly committed means not just doing the work but understanding the why behind it. Are you meeting the needs  that matter to all the Folks That Matter™? Are you adding features that bring them value? Such targeted engagement ensures that your contributions align with the needs and objectives of those who actually pay your wage.

Loyalty: Team, Code, Customer?

Loyalty in the Hagakure transcends any transient obligation; it manifests as a lasting allegiance to your cause and your ‘master,’ in this case, The Folks That Matter™. How does this loyalty manifest in the workplace? It’s about becoming a reliable team member, adhering to standard work, and actively participating . This goes beyond your immediate team, extending to all the Folks That Matter™. After all, a robust and reliable product directly impacts folks’ satisfaction.

Courage: Risk for Reward?

Courage isn’t merely about overcoming fear; it’s a calculated action despite fear. The Hagakure praises the courage to make difficult but crucial decisions. In business, this courage manifests when facing hard choices. Maybe the current path for the product isn’t viable, or perhaps a much-loved feature doesn’t fit the broader objectives. Making these tough decisions serves the long-term interests of The Folks That Matter™, who, as Henry Ford pointed out, are the actual wage payers.

Honour: More Than a Virtue?

The notion of honour is deeply ingrained in the Hagakure’s teachings. This isn’t about an abstract moral high ground but about tangible actions that uphold your integrity and reputation. What does it look like in practice? Treating teammates with respect, attending to their needs, ensuring ethical working practices, and being transparent in all interactions. These actions don’t just impact internal team dynamics; they resonate with the needs of all the Folks That Matter™, thus fostering a level of trust and respect that builds long-term relationships.

Presence: A Cornerstone for Satisfaction?

Being present in every undertaking is a key lesson from the Hagakure. This principle isn’t just philosophical; it has practical implications. In a world filled with distractions, giving your complete attention to the task at hand might be more challenging but it’s also more rewarding. This focus allows you to tackle issues more effectively, craft better features, and ultimately provide a product that better serves the needs of the Folks That Matter™.

In summary, combining the ancient wisdom of the Hagakure with Henry Ford’s insights results in a fresh, yet rooted, approach to work. Embodying commitment, loyalty, courage, honour, and presence ensures a strong alignment with the needs and values of The Folks That Matter™, effectively reminding us who really pays the wages.

Could You Use A Bill Deming Today?

September 17, 2023
Article, Business, Deming, Organisational effectiveness, Organisational Therapy
Leave a comment

Could You Use A Bill Deming Today?

If Bill Deming’s principles still resonate in business corridors, it’s because they address something timeless: the heart of organisational culture. This post unpacks the synergy between Deming’s teachings and organisational psychotherapy, both of which take aim at the bedrock of any company—the shared assumptions and beliefs that drive behaviour and decision-making.

What Connects Deming’s Wisdom With Organisational Psychotherapy?

The linchpin connecting Bill Deming’s philosophy and organisational psychotherapy lies in the emphasis on shared assumptions and beliefs. Deming believed that culture isn’t just a tagline, an ethos, or even a set of corporate values displayed in an office. It’s the bedrock that influences how employees behave, make decisions, and interact with each other and with customers. It shapes the organisation’s approach to problem-solving, innovation, and its overall performance.

Similarly, organisational psychotherapy doesn’t just scratch the surface by focusing on overt behaviours or explicit rules. It digs deeper into the collective unconscious of an organisation to surface the shared assumptions and beliefs that are often invisible yet powerful drivers of actions and decisions.

Is Culture More Than Just a Buzzword?

When Deming or an organisational psychotherapist talk about culture, they’re referring to the unspoken rules and shared understandings that guide behaviour within an organisation. Think of culture as a complex algorithm that’s constantly being written and rewritten by every member of your organisation based on their beliefs and assumptions.

What Are The Nuts and Bolts of Shared Assumptions and Beliefs?

What do we mean by “shared assumptions and beliefs”? These are the fundamental convictions that all members of the organisation hold in common about how the world works, how they should interact with it, and how they expect others to behave. These convictions are often so deeply embedded that they’re taken for granted and operate below the level of conscious awareness. Yet, they’re the gears that turn the wheels of everyday operations.

Why Does This Matter?

Understanding and addressing the shared assumptions and beliefs within an organisation can break the cycle of counterproductive behaviours and practices. These underpin everything from employee engagement and team collaboration to quality control and customer satisfaction. And so, of course, to revenue growth, market share and profit margins.

How Does This Translate to Action?

When your organisation aligns its strategies and processes with its actual culture—that is, its shared assumptions and beliefs—you have a much better shot at achieving your goals. The reverse is also true: if there’s a disconnect between these foundational elements and your operational activities, you’re likely setting yourself up for challenges, inefficiencies, or outright failures.

How Does Organisational Psychotherapy Address This?

An organisational psychotherapist invites you to surface and reflect on these shared assumptions, making them explicit and examining their impact on organisational behaviour. The aim is to have the organisation align its beliefs with its goals and strategies, just as Deming sought to do.

Once shared assumptions and beliefs are surfaced and available for reflection, the organisation can tailor action plans to align these core components with its goals. Whether you’re making slight adjustments or looking for a major overhaul, an organisational psychotherapist facilitates the process.

The Next Step: An Explicit Invitation

Now that you understand the pivotal role of shared assumptions and beliefs in organisational success, the actionable next step is to consult an organisational psychotherapist. Take this as your explicit invitation to dive deep into the heart of your organisation’s culture and continue Deming’s legacy.

Are Results Guaranteed?

While there’s always a level of risk when pursuing organisational change, focusing on shared assumptions and beliefs minimises this risk by targeting the root cause of your issues. Deming’s philosophy and organisational psychotherapy together provide a framework for mitigating risk by addressing the underlying cultural factors.

It’s Up To You

The methods and philosophies of Bill Deming remain a valuable resource for any organisation looking to effect meaningful, lasting change. If this aligns with your aspirations, the logical next step is to consult an organisational psychotherapist. It’s up to you what you decide to do, but consider this an invitation to explore how organisational psychotherapy can continue Deming’s wisdom in your organisation.

Summary

Though Bill Deming is no longer with us, his principles remain highly relevant, and they find a natural ally in organisational psychotherapy. By focusing on shared assumptions and beliefs, you can tackle the systemic issues that hamper productivity and efficiency.

Bill Deming: The First Organisational Psychotherapist?

September 16, 2023
Article, Business, Deming, Organisational effectiveness, Organisational Therapy
Leave a comment

Bill Deming: The First Organisational Psychotherapist?

Who Was Bill Deming?

W. Edwards Deming, commonly known as Bill Deming, was an American statistician, professor, author, and management consultant. Though most recognised for his contributions to quality management and the development of statistical process control, Deming’s work encompassed much more than equations and charts. He deeply cared about organisational culture and improving human aspects of work.

Did Deming Focus on Mental Models?

Deming was keen on changing the way people think about work and management. His System of Profound Knowledge, a cornerstone of his management philosophy, includes “understanding psychology” as one of its four elements. This shows Deming’s emphasis on the psychological aspects of organisational behaviour, closely aligning with what is now understood as organisational psychotherapy. He believed that for any change to be effective, the underlying beliefs, mindsets, and shared assumptions of people within the organisation must transform.

How Did Deming Approach Consultancy?

Deming wasn’t the typical consultant who’d hand over a report and call it a day. He committed to his client companies. Through ongoing interactions, he helped people inside organisations identify their systemic problems and internal challenges. Often, this required him to deal with strong resistance to change, which necessitated a keen understanding of human psychology. Here, Deming acted more like an organisational psychotherapist than a traditional consultant. He facilitated self-awareness and helped organisations improve from within, by addressing shared assumptions and beliefs that often acted as barriers to change.

What About Client Transformation?

Those organisations willing to listen often found themselves fundamentally transformed. For example, Ford Motor Company, one of Deming’s famous clients, shifted its corporate culture from one that blamed individuals for mistakes to one that looked at the system as a whole. This transformational approach, which also involved altering shared beliefs and assumptions, is what you’d expect from organisational psychotherapy. It aims to shift core paradigms, rather than just treating superficial symptoms.

Is Labelling Deming as an Organisational Psychotherapist Justifiable?

While the term “organisational psychotherapist” wasn’t in existance during Deming’s era, his principles, methods, and intentions align well with the practice. Through his focus on human psychology, sustained client interactions, and emphasis on systemic transformation, including the tackling of shared assumptions and beliefs, Deming could easily be viewed as an organisational psychotherapist, even if he never used that title himself.

The Secret to Hiring Top Talent

September 15, 2023
Article, Business, Deming, Recruiting, Teambuilding
Leave a comment

The Secret to Hiring Top Talent

What’s Wrong with Talent Hunting?

The corporate landscape reverberates with calls to hire “top talent.” Recruitment agencies, HR departments, and LinkedIn profiles are full of phrases that pay homage to this elusive concept. Yet, what if the notion of “talent” is a red herring – diverting attention from what really matters, especially in collaborative knowledge work?

What Does Talent Even Mean?

Talent – when I use the word, I mean it as the rate at which you get better with effort. The rate at which you get better at soccer is your soccer talent. The rate at which you get better at math is your math talent. You know, given that you are putting forth a certain amount of effort. And I absolutely believe – and not everyone does, but I think most people do – that there are differences in talent among us: that we are not all equally talented.

~ Angela Duckworth, 2016

The term “talent” implies that some people possess an innate ability to evolve to excellence in specific tasks or roles, while others are doomed to mediocrity. Businesses adopt this mindset and spend enormous resources searching for that magical person who will solve all their problems. However, this search often leads to disappointment or worse, a mismatch between employee and organisational needs.

Is Talent Overrated?

It’s not that talented individuals don’t exist or that they can’t contribute to an organisation. The issue is that focusing on talent obscures a crucial aspect of productivity: the system within which people work.

Why Focus on Systems?

It turns out, research and real-world case studies suggest that systems account for about 95% of an organisation’s productivity. A well-designed system provides clear guidelines, minimises bottlenecks, and promotes efficient workflows. It creates an environment where people can excel, with or without what society typically labels as ‘talent.’

How to Build Effective Systems?

If you’re looking to enhance productivity, start by scrutinising your existing systems and processes. Ask hard questions. Is your communication streamlined? Do your workflows allow for creativity and innovation? Are roles and responsibilities clearly defined? These aspects significantly influence the productivity of your entire team, not just your star players.

Does Hiring Change When Systems Are Prioritised?

Absolutely. Instead of seeking candidates who seem to sparkle in interviews, you’d focus on those who fit well into your system. Soft skills like collaboration and adaptability take precedence, as they help people excel within established systems.

What’s the Real Secret Then?

So, should you entirely ignore talent? No, not entirely. But, remember, it’s the system that will determine how well anyone can perform, especially in collaborative knowledge work. By shifting your focus to creating effective systems, you set the stage for everyone to excel. And maybe, just maybe, you’ll find that the people you already have are the top talent you’ve been seeking all along.

Further Reading

Scholtes, P.R. (1997). The Leader’s Handbook. McGraw Hill Professional.
Duckworth, A. (2016, July 25). Angela Duckworth on Grit. EconTalk [Audio Podcast]. Retrieved from http://www.econtalk.org/angela-duckworth-on-grit/

Hierarchy Kills People: A Health Warning

September 15, 2023
Article, Business, Organisational effectiveness, Toxic behaviours
Leave a comment

Hierarchy Kills People: A Health Warning

What Does UK Civil Service Research Reveal?

The Whitehall Studies, conducted on British civil servants, provide compelling evidence on the negative health effects of hierarchical structures. The lower an individual’s rank, the higher the risk of cardiovascular diseases and other adverse health outcomes. This UK-based study serves as a poignant backdrop for discussing how hierarchy impacts more than just workflow; it affects life itself.

Does Hierarchy Harm Health Globally?

The detrimental health impact of hierarchy isn’t unique to British civil servants. Research around the world concurs that rigid hierarchical structures can lead to stress, worsened mental health, and even shortened life expectancy.

How Does Hierarchy Create Stress?

A power imbalance is inherent in hierarchical systems. Employees lower in the pecking order often feel powerless, anxious, and undervalued. The stress isn’t merely mental; it triggers the production of cortisol, a hormone linked to various health risks, including heart disease.

Does Hierarchy Impede Communication?

The Whitehall Studies not only highlighted the health implications but also revealed that communication becomes strained in hierarchical setups. Lower-ranked employees are often left without avenues for constructive feedback, causing further stress and poor job satisfaction.

What about Innovation?

Rigid hierarchical systems often stifle creativity. Employees, anxious about repercussions, refrain from proposing innovative ideas. This leads to organisational stagnation, with limited room for development or adaptation.

Is Productivity a Victim?

Hierarchy might initially appear to promote efficiency, but it often backfires. Inhibited communication means employees hesitate to share vital feedback, leading to poor strategies and, ultimately, failure.

Would It Be Better to Rethink Hierarchy?

The Whitehall Studies have spurred some organisations to experiment with flatter structures, which often result in reduced stress levels and increased employee satisfaction. It appears that a shift towards a more democratic decision-making process can yield positive outcomes.

Final Thoughts: Is Hierarchy a Necessary Evil?

While hierarchy may offer some vague and unsubstantiated organisational advantages, the costs to health and well-being are way too significant to overlook. The concept of fellowship, where organisations prioritise collective collaboration and mutual support, offers a compelling alternative. By embracing a culture of fellowship  in place of traditional hierarchical models, organisations could not only boost productivity but also enhance the overall well-being of their workforce.

 

Does Your Job Really Matter?

September 15, 2023
Antimatter principle, Article, Business, Productivity
1 Comment

Does Your Job Really Matter?

Are Jobs Truly Productive?

Recent studies and conversations around workplace productivity often provoke a crucial question: how many people genuinely have jobs that accomplish something significant? Conversely, how many find themselves in roles where they devote most of their time to giving the appearance of necessity?

What Defines a Productive Job?

Defining a “productive” job isn’t a simple task. Various lenses—financial, social, personal—can be applied to this evaluation. However, one litmus test stands out: Does the job attend to people’s actual needs?

The Litmus Test: Meeting People’s Needs

This is a direct yet profound way to gauge a job’s meaningfulness. A job that meets the needs of individuals or communities not only benefits society but also engenders a sense of personal accomplishment. This focus on human needs generally involves:

  • Promoting well-being and improving quality of life
  • Generating measurable, positive outcomes
  • Using employee skills in a fulfilling way

Other productive roles might:

  • Generate significant revenue or growth for a business (attending to the needs of owners, investors and shareholders)
  • Contribute to important research or technological advancements (attending to employess sence of self-worth, and society’s need for progress)
  • Create or enhance products or services that fill a genuine gap (attending to the needs of the organisation and its customers)

Who’s Just Putting On a Show?

Some jobs may look necessary but contribute little of substance. These “bullshit jobs,” as coined by economist David Graeber, are often part of bureaucratic systems. Employees in these roles might spend time:

  • Producing unread reports
  • Attending meetings with no real outcomes
  • Engaging in activities that don’t impact the real world
  • Launching and running initiatives purely for the optics (amking themselves look needed).

What Does the Data Say?

Quantifying meaningful versus meaningless jobs is difficult. Yet, data from sources like Gallup’s State of the American Workplace indicate that less than one-third of employees are engaged at work—a potential indicator of job meaningfulness. This suggests that a large portion might be disengaged, possibly because they find their roles unproductive or unnecessary.

How to Shift the Balance?

Creating a more genuinely productive work environment is no small feat. Steps include:

  • Aligning roles with both business and societal goals (the needs of all the Folks That Matter™)
  • Encouraging the development and use of relevant skills (the needs of employees)
  • Shifting focus from input to measurable outcomes (the needs of those resourcing the work)

Summary: Is Change Coming?

While it remains a tricky issue to determine how many people are in genuinely productive jobs as opposed to those that are just speding the timeon looking necessary, there is undoubtedly room for change. A shift towards more meaningful work benefits both individuals and society at large. As our understanding of work evolves, might we choose to evolve the the way we measure job value too?

The Counter-Cultural Guide to Business Management

September 14, 2023
Alien tech, Article, Business, Culture change, Leadership, Management, Memeology, Organisational effectiveness, Quintessence
Leave a comment

The Counter-Cultural Guide to Business Management

Are you stuck in the rut of conventional business practices and stale boardroom jargon? Is it time to shake things up? Discover why embracing your inner rebel could be the game-changer your business desperately needs.

Why Be Counter-Cultural in Business?

If you’re reading this, chances are you’re tired of the status quo in business management. I get it. I’m tired too. The well-trodden paths often lead to stale results. So, let’s talk about why being counter-cultural isn’t just a lifestyle choice but a business imperative.

What’s Wrong with the Status Quo?

We’ve all been there, sitting in a board meeting, listening to the same jargon. Synergy. Leverage. Scalability. Blah. Blah. Blah. These buzzwords are often bandied about without much thought. They’re safe. They’re conventional. But does following the crowd actually add value? I’d suggest, not really.

How Can Counter-Culture Help?

Being counter-cultural in a business setting doesn’t mean you should throw all caution to the wind. It’s not about being reckless but rather about thinking differently. Challenging the status quo can lead to innovation. For example, rejecting the standard 9-to-5 workday could lead you to explore more flexible work arrangements that can, in turn, increase productivity and employee satisfaction.

What Are the Risks?

Now, taking a counter-cultural stance isn’t without its risks. You’ll face resistance, both internal and external. People are comfortable with what they know, and change is hard. But remember, nothing ventured, nothing gained. The risks are often outweighed by the potential for revolutionary change.

How to Make the Leap?

If you’re convinced that counter-culture is the way forward, start small. Test out a new idea on a small scale before fully implementing it. Gather data, listen to feedback, and then iterate. The aim isn’t to shock the system but to introduce new ways of thinking that can, over time, bring about meaningful change.

So, Is It Worth It?

In my experience, the answer is a resounding yes. Being counter-cultural has pushed me to explore uncharted territories in business and tech management. While not all ventures have been a roaring success, each one has been a learning experience. At the end of the day, it’s not just about profit margins or growth graphs. It’s about building a culture that fosters creativity, innovation, and, yes, a bit of rebellion.

So, the next time you’re in that board meeting, and someone starts talking about “synergising core competencies,” maybe it’s time to go against the grain. Be counter-cultural. You never know, it might just be the best business decision you’ve ever made.

Why You’re Stuck

September 13, 2023
Article, Business, Systems thinking
Leave a comment

Why You’re Stuck

Feel Like You’re Running in Place? Surface And Reflect On The System Conditions You Didn’t Know Were Holding You Back

What Are System Conditions?

“System conditions” is a term frequently tossed around in management and business literature. The term borrows from systems theory, a branch of interdisciplinary study that seeks to understand complex systems in various domains. The word “system” itself is derived from the Latin ‘systēma’, from the Greek ‘sustēma’, both of which mean ‘a whole compounded of several parts or members’. The term “condition” traces its roots to the Latin ‘condicere’, meaning ‘to speak with, talk together’. Put these together and you’ve got “system conditions”, signifying the various factors that communicate and interact to make a system what it is.

In simpler terms, think of a system condition as a rule or setup within an organisation that dictates how things operate. It could be an unwritten policy, a piece of software, or even the physical layout of your office.

Why Aren’t We Progressing?

The issue often is not that people don’t want to advance or grow; it’s that the system conditions they’re embedded in won’t allow it. Employees might find that despite their best efforts, there’s a cap on what they can achieve. This could be due to outdated software, a bureaucratic hierarchy that stifles innovation, or a corporate culture that doesn’t value collaboration.

Who’s Responsible?

There’s no easy answer to this. While management tends to have the most influence over system conditions, it’s a shared responsibility that goes up and down the organisational ladder. For real change to occur, everyone needs to be engaged in identifying and altering the problematic conditions.

What Can We Do About It?

If you find yourself stuck in a limiting environment, it’s not a hopeless situation. Here are some actionable steps:

  1. Identify the Problem: The first step in solving any problem is recognising that it exists. Hold workshops or meetings to discuss the system conditions that are holding you back. IOW Identify the system conditions that are preventing you from effectively attending to folks’ needs.
  2. Consult the Teams: Gather insights from team members who interact with these conditions on a day-to-day basis.
  3. Develop a Plan: Once you’ve identified the system conditions and gained team insights, it’s time to strategise. Consider altering workflows, updating technology, or changing team dynamics. Consider the Toyota Kata approach here.
  4. Test and Tweak: Implement your plan on a small scale first. Observe the results and tweak as necessary before a full-scale implementation.
  5. Review: Once changes have been made, it’s vital to review their impact. If things have improved, great. If not, it might be time to revisit your approach.

So What’s Next?

We’ve established that system conditions significantly influence an organisation’s efficacy and the well-being of its employees. While they’re often overlooked or taken for granted, addressing these conditions is essential for real progress. So if you find your team is stuck in a rut, maybe it’s not the people that are the problem. Perhaps it’s time to look at the system conditions and make the necessary changes.

Further Reading

If you’re interested in diving deeper into the topic of system conditions and their impact on businesses, the following resources might be of interest:

Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. Currency Doubleday.

This book explores the concept of systems thinking and how it can transform organizations.

Morgan, G. (2006). Images of organization. Sage Publications.

Morgan discusses various metaphors to understand organizations, which include system conditions as a framework.

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method, and practice. Addison-Wesley.

This book discusses the limitations of single-loop learning in organisations and the need for changing system conditions to achieve double-loop learning.

Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in systems: A primer. Chelsea Green Publishing.

Meadows presents an introduction to systems theory and its applications, including a discussion on system conditions.

Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (Vol. 2). John Wiley & Sons.

This book explores how organisational culture can act as a system condition, affecting all other aspects of a business.

Kim, D. H. (1999). Introduction to systems thinking. Pegasus Communications.

Daniel Kim provides an accessible guide to systems thinking, making it relevant for those interested in understanding system conditions in a business context.

Goldratt, E. M., & Cox, J. (1984). The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement. North River Press.

This book, set as a business novel, discusses constraints and system conditions within the context of production and operations management.

Rother, M. (2009). Toyota Kata: Managing People for Improvement, Adaptiveness and Superior Results. McGraw-Hill.

This book delves into the management techniques used by Toyota to adapt to changing system conditions, focusing on continuous improvement and adaptability.

These resources provide a well-rounded understanding of system conditions and their role in business management and organisational behaviour.

The Manager’s Blinders

September 12, 2023
Article, Business, Management, Needs
Leave a comment

The Manager’s Blinders

What Shapes a Manager’s Limited Perspective?

When managers step into their offices, they see things differently—and sometimes that means they don’t see things at all. The necessity to focus on specific factors like team responsibilities, personal targets, and their own wellbeing can often render them blind to matters in plain sight.

Why the Equine Comparison?

Horses have eyes positioned on the sides of their heads, giving them a wide field of vision but also creating blind spots directly in front and behind them. Similarly, managers often concentrate so intently on particular areas that they overlook what may be obvious to others.

Are Managers Bound by Hierarchy?

Hierarchical dynamics often narrow a manager’s field of view. Busy aligning their decisions with the goals of upper management, they may neglect input from subordinates or peers. Just as a horse may miss what’s right under its nose or behind its tail, managers can overlook what’s happening at other levels of the organisation.

Does Resource Management Limit Sight?

When focused on allocating resources like staffing and budgets, managers may fail to spot emerging needs, interpersonal issues or unexplored opportunities. These blind spots can have repercussions, delaying problem-solving and hampering innovation.

Is Accountability a Double-Edged Sword?

While being accountable adds a layer of caution to managerial decision-making, it can also instil a sort of tunnel vision. Concerns for their own wellbeing may overshadow the broader needs of the team or the organisation, obscuring potential pathways for collective growth.

What Soft Skills Are Overlooked?

Even if they value soft skills like empathy and emotional intelligence, managers can still miss the human element in their daily operations. Wrapped up in tasks and targets, they may neglect the well-being of their team members, failing to notice signs of burnout or disengagement.

How Does Adaptability Affect Perception?

While adaptability is crucial, constantly shifting focus can make managers prone to missing consistent patterns or long-term issues. In their bid to adapt and survive, they may not notice that they are perpetuating systemic problems or missing out on stable solutions.

In Summary

Just as a horse’s unique vision serves it well but also leaves it vulnerable, managers too have their own blind spots. Despite—or perhaps because of—their focus on hierarchy, resources, and accountability, they may miss things that are glaringly obvious to others. Recognising these limitations isn’t just beneficial; it’s essential for the growth and cohesion of the team and the organisation.

Electric Flow in Business

September 12, 2023
Article, Business, Flow
Leave a comment

Electric Flow in Business

What is Electrical Continuity Testing?

Electrical continuity testing measures the flow of electric current through a circuit, checking for resistance or blockages. In electrical systems, an uninterrupted flow ensures that everything works as it should.

How Do Business Silos Work?

Business silos are isolated teams or departments within an organisation, where information rarely crosses the silo’s boundary. These divisions can cause hiccups in communication, stifle collaboration, and hinder overall performance. If a business must have silos (at least, for the present) might it not be useful to understand and regularly monitor the flow between different silos?

Can Electrical Continuity Testing Apply to Business Silos?

Applying the principles of electrical continuity testing to business silos can offer unique insights. Just as you’d test for impedance or resistance in an electrical circuit, you could evaluate the flow of information, resources, or processes between silos. This involves looking for ‘resistance’—such as lack of communication or structural barriers—that might impede this flow.

How to Test for ‘Continuity’?

  1. Identify Key Metrics: Before you start, establish what constitutes good ‘flow’ within your organisation. Is it speed of information sharing, quality of cross-departmental projects, or perhaps employee satisfaction?
  2. Conduct Audits: Regularly examine how well different departments interact. Surveys, interviews, and process mapping can all serve as diagnostic tools.
  3. Implement a Reporting System: Create a real-time dashboard that displays these key metrics. This will help you monitor the flow continuously, just as you would in an electrical system.
  4. Action Plans: Upon discovering a ‘short-circuit’ or ‘resistance’, develop a plan to restore optimal flow. This could mean reorganising teams, offering training, or implementing new communication tools.

What Benefits Can You Expect?

  1. Enhanced Collaboration: Better flow of information fosters a collaborative atmosphere.
  2. Operational Efficiency: With barriers removed, processes become streamlined and agile.
  3. Increased Innovation: Free flow of ideas can spur innovation as teams from diverse backgrounds contribute to a collective goal.

Is This Approach Worth It?

While applying a technical concept like electrical continuity testing to organisational dynamics might seem unconventional, it offers a structured way to diagnose and resolve issues around siloed working. By focusing on flow and reducing resistance, you set the stage for a more efficient, collaborative, and innovative work environment.

Needs Matter

September 12, 2023
Antimatter principle, Article, Business, Culture change, Needs, Organisational effectiveness, Organisational Therapy, Quintessence
Leave a comment

Needs Matter

What is the Antimatter Principle?

Let’s cut to the chase. The Antimatter Principle encourages us to “attend to folks’ needs.” This tenet, often discussed in the realm of organisational change and agile methodologies, has stirred debate. Is it a means to achieving a successful business? Or is it an end in itself? We’ll dissect both perspectives.

A Means to Success?

Many argue that focusing on needs is instrumental for business success. In essence, happy employees are productive employees. When needs get attention, job satisfaction improves. This, in turn, has tangible effects on the bottom line. Customer satisfaction often follows suit; when staff feels valued, they’re more likely to extend that value to clients.

Higher productivity and increased customer loyalty often translate to business growth. In this light, the Antimatter Principle serves as a powerful tool for achieving strategic objectives.

Or an End in Itself?

Contrastingly, some argue that the principle isn’t merely a stepping stone to success—it’s a noble end in its own right. After all, isn’t the pursuit of a humane, empathetic workplace an objective worth striving for, regardless of economic outcomes?

Fulfilling human needs can be seen as the ultimate goal of any organisation. That’s because an organisation, stripped to its core, is a community of people. If this community thrives, doesn’t that mark a triumph irrespective of financial gains or losses?

What’s the Verdict?

It’s not a black-and-white matter. The Antimatter Principle can serve both as a means and an end, depending on one’s perspective. Yet, most would agree that it holds intrinsic value, irrespective of its impact on a business’ financials.

The question then isn’t whether the Antimatter Principle is a means to success or an end in itself. It’s how you choose to employ it within your organisation that truly counts.

Everybody Loves Prudence

September 12, 2023
Article, Business, Risk
Leave a comment

Everybody Loves Prudence

Why Does Prudence Rule the Roost?

The business landscape is littered with companies that have adopted prudence as their north star. It’s often assumed that prudence is synonymous with wisdom, making it the go-to strategy for decision-makers. But is playing it safe genuinely wise, or is it a shortcut to mediocrity?

How Does Prudence Stifle Innovation?

A prudent approach to business actively impedes innovation. Companies overly committed to caution lose sight of the risk-reward equation, which states that higher risk comes with the potential for greater rewards. By avoiding risk, you are essentially capping your potential returns. In this way, prudence can act as a ceiling on your business aspirations.

What Opportunities Are You Missing Out On?

The risk-reward equation serves as a guidepost for what you could achieve if you step outside your comfort zone. Your competitors, unafraid of taking calculated risks, are exploiting new markets, adopting new technologies, and reaping the benefits. Every time you choose the cautious route, you’re not just maintaining stability; you’re missing out on these growth opportunities.

Is Your Talent Pool Shallowing?

Top-tier talent thrives in environments where their creativity can shine and where they can have a significant impact. An excessive focus on prudence can make your organisation less attractive to these dynamic individuals. When they sense a lack of ambition rooted in an overly cautious approach, they’re likely to look elsewhere, undermining your access to a high-calibre workforce.

What’s the Real Cost of Perceived Safety?

You might feel that prudence keeps you safe from the pitfalls that come with high-risk ventures. But what you’re not accounting for is the risk of becoming irrelevant or obsolete. The risk-reward equation suggests that the more you invest in terms of taking calculated risks, the higher your potential returns. When you opt for the illusion of safety, you actually expose yourself to a different kind of risk, one with long-term consequences: the risk of stagnation.

Is It Time to Reevaluate?

Overreliance on caution and prudence contradicts the principles of the risk-reward equation. You may think you’re avoiding pitfalls, but you’re also sealing off pathways to potentially greater successes. The question now is, are you willing to reassess your approach to risk and break free from the self-imposed limitations that come with excessive prudence?

Delegating to Teams

September 10, 2023
Advice Process, Antimatter principle, Article, Business, Collaboration, Culture change, Delegation, Organisational effectiveness, Quintessence, Teambuilding, Trust
Leave a comment

Delegating to Teams

Who’s in Charge?

Traditionally, delegation was a top-down process. Managers assigned tasks to individuals and monitored their performance. However, with the emergence of self-organising teams, the rules of the game have changed. Senior managers now face the unique challenge of delegating to a collective rather than individuals.

What’s Different Now?

The Shift in Authority

The conventional hierarchical model of a company places a single person, or a few individuals, in a position of authority. They are the go-to people for making decisions and ostensibly bear the brunt of accountability. In stark contrast, a self-organising team operates on a distributed model of authority. This means that every team member has a say in how things are run, and decisions are usually reached through consensus, a democratic process or the Advice Process. The power dynamics are less vertical and more horizontal.

Collaborative Decision-Making

When authority is distributed, the decision-making process also becomes a collective endeavour. It’s not about one person dictating the course of action but a dialogue that brings in multiple perspectives. Senior managers who are used to making unilateral decisions might find this unsettling. The challenge lies in learning how to navigate this collective process without undermining the team’s autonomy.

Absence of a Single Accountability Point

In a hierarchical setting, if a task fails, you know whom to hold accountable—the person to whom you delegated the task. In a self-organising team, there’s often no single point of accountability. Everyone is responsible, which means no one person can be singled out for a failure. This lack of a straightforward accountability trail can complicate how senior managers assess performance and enforce consequences. It can help to have the team nominate a single person to the role of “contact person”. This can be a rotating role. This person serves as the single point of contact between the team and external parties, including senior management.

  • Spreading the Load, Maximising Learning: When there’s no single point of accountability, responsibility is shared among team members. This means the burden of a setback is felt less acutely by one individual, creating a psychologically safer space for team members. They are more likely to view failures as opportunities for collective learning, rather than as points for individual criticism.
  • Enhanced Problem-Solving: Because everyone is responsible for the outcomes, all team members have a vested interest in solving problems. Rather than leaving it to one individual to fix things, the entire team rallies to identify solutions. This collaborative approach often yields more innovative solutions by drawing from a diversity of perspectives and skill sets.
  • Fosters Ownership and Engagement: Shared accountability nurtures a strong sense of ownership among team members. When everyone’s accountable, everyone cares. This tends to boost engagement and motivation, as team members feel they have a real stake in the project’s success or failure.
  • Risk Mitigation: In a hierarchical structure, the failure of a task often leads to an exhaustive search for where things went wrong, usually zeroing in on an individual. In a self-organising team, since accountability is collective, the emphasis shifts from blame to understanding the systemic issues that contributed to the failure. This provides a more comprehensive view of risks and how to mitigate them in the future.
  • Reinforces Team Cohesion: Shared responsibility often leads to stronger bonds among team members. They sink or swim together, which fosters a sense of unity and mutual support. This is particularly beneficial for tasks that require high levels of collaboration and interdependence.
  • Easier Talent Allocation: Without a single point of accountability, senior managers can more flexibly allocate talent based on the task’s evolving needs. If one person’s skills are better suited for another project, they can be moved without disrupting the accountability structure, making resource management more efficient.
  • Senior Management’s Role: For senior managers, this means a shift in focus from micromanagement to coaching and mentoring. The upside is that this often yields higher job satisfaction for the manager, as they can concentrate on strategic oversight rather than getting bogged down in the nitty-gritty of task-level management.

In sum, while the lack of a single point of accountability in self-organising teams may initially seem like a drawback, it brings a range of benefits. These include a more engaged and cohesive team, better problem-solving, and a healthier approach to managing both success and failure.

Reimagining Delegation

Given these differences, the act of delegating to a self-organising team isn’t merely about passing down tasks. It’s about empowering the team to function within a set framework, giving them the freedom to decide how best to achieve objectives. This demands a different set of management skills, focused more on guidance and less on control. See also: Auftragstaktik

Handling Uncertainty and Risk

For a senior manager used to hierarchical structures, this new terrain comes with its share of uncertainties. You may be uncertain about how decisions will be made or how to enforce accountability. This requires a level of comfort with ambiguity and a willingness to adapt one’s management style.

The challenge lies in adapting delegation strategies to suit a work environment that’s fundamentally different from the traditional hierarchy. It’s about learning to delegate not to an individual but to a collective, and trusting that collective to manage itself effectively.

Delegating Responsibility

To effectively delegate to a self-organising team, clearly outline what needs to be done without prescribing how to do it. This allows the team to take ownership of the task and leverage its collective skills and knowledge.

Setting Boundaries

While a self-organising team relishes autonomy, it’s crucial to establish parameters. These could be deadlines, budgets, or quality standards. Providing these constraints equips the team to manage itself effectively within an agreed-upon framework. The Antimatter Principle as policy affords benefits, here.

How to Communicate?

Clear communication is vital when delegating to any team, more so with a self-organising one. Since there may not be a single point person, communication flows to the entire team. Modern tech makes this child’s play.

Written Guidelines

Document what you’re delegating. This ensures everyone is on the same page and minimises misunderstandings later.

Regular Check-ins

Have periodic touchpoints with the team to assess progress. These meetings shouldn’t be about micromanagement but an opportunity for the team to seek support, guidance and clarification.

What If Things Go Wrong?

Let’s face it; not every delegation attempt will be successful. With self-organising teams, it can be difficult to pinpoint where things went awry…

Troubleshoot as a Team

Instead of assigning blame, involve the team in identifying the root cause of any setbacks. This fosters a culture of collective responsibility.

Adapt and Learn

The aim isn’t to avoid mistakes altogether but to learn from them. Revise your delegation approach based on the insights you’ve gathered.

Are You Ready?

Delegating to a self-organising team demands a shift in mindset. As a senior manager, it’s a challenge that tests your ability to relinquish control while still ensuring accountability. Are you ready to take it on?

Why Not Managers?

September 10, 2023
Agility at Scale, Article, Business, Culture change, Fellowship, Management, Psychology, Quintessence, Toxic behaviours
1 Comment

Why Not Managers?

The Managerial Role: Obsolete

Traditionally, managers serve as overseers, ensuring work flows smoothly and deadlines meet their marks. But in today’s business environments, we’re seeing a seismic shift. Teams are self-organising and making decisions independently. Why do we still need managers?

Do Teams Manage Themselves?

The answer seems to lean towards ‘yes’, teams can and do “manage” themselves. In settings where productivity is of the essence, the emphasis is on empowering teams to solve problems and innovate without having a managerial figure present, breathing down their necks. Collective ownership becomes the mantra, and everyone takes responsibility for the product’s success or failure.

What Happens to Accountability?

Contrary to popular belief, the absence of a traditional managerial role doesn’t mean accountability vanishes. In fact, team members often feel more accountable to each other than they might to a distant or toxic boss. Review processes become more meaningful, as peers understand the challenges and intricacies of the tasks at hand.

Is Decision-Making More Efficient?

The chain of command usually slows down decision-making. In a manager-less environment, teams arrive at decisions more quickly and can adapt to changes or unexpected challenges without having to wait for managerial approval. This can be especially vital in the fast-paced world of software development. See also: Auftragstaktik.

Does Quality Suffer?

One concern is that without a managerial figure to enforce standards, quality might slip. However, evidence suggests that the opposite happens. A sense of ownership and peer review often leads to a higher standard of work. Team members become each other’s quality control, leading to a more cohesive and well-executed end product. See also: Ensemble development.

What’s the Role of Leadership?

Leadership doesn’t evaporate in the absence of managers; it merely takes a different form. Leaders emerge naturally, guided by their expertise, communication skills, context, and the team’s respect. These leaders are often more in tune with the needs and dynamics of the team, making for a more harmonious and productive work environment.

Is This Model for Every Business?

The manager-less model isn’t just a passing fad in the software development world; it raises legitimate questions about the universal need for managers across all business types. While some argue that industries with stringent regulatory compliance or high-volume customer interactions need a managerial structure, this reasoning often serves as a convenient crutch rather than a real justification.

Firstly, regulatory compliance doesn’t inherently require a managerial role. Businesses can still adhere to laws and regulations through well-documented processes and collective responsibility. Teams can be educated and empowered to include regulators in the set of Folks That Matter™ and comply with rules without a manager acting as the gatekeeper.

Secondly, the idea that customer service businesses benefit from managerial roles is also questionable. Frontline employees are more likely to understand the intricacies and nuances of customer interactions than a removed managerial figure. Empowered teams often show better problem-solving capabilities, which is beneficial in handling complex customer concerns.

So, are managers necessary? The evidence increasingly points to ‘no’. Even outside the tech sector, rethinking the need for managers can lead to more agile, responsive, and accountable businesses.

So, Are Managers Redundant?

In the context of modern software development and certain types of businesses, managers are increasingly looking like relics of a past era. For businesses willing to take the leap, a manager-less structure offers more than just cost savings; it paves the way for innovation, efficiency, and a far more engaged workforce.

Further Reading

Zanini, M. (2021). Can we manage without managers? Retrieved on 9 September 2023 from https://www.michelezanini.com/can-we-manage-without-managers/
Zanini, M. (2014). Companies without managers better every metric. Retrieved on 9 September 2023 from https://www.cobrt-archive.com/archived-blog/2014/08/companies-without-managers-better-every-metric/