Can We Imagine?
Can We Imagine?
Can we imagine alternatives to conventional management? Different ways of coordinating organisations, large and small?
“Finding deficiencies and getting rid of them is not a way of improving the performance of the system. An improvement program must be directed at what you want, not at what you don’t want. And, determining what you do want requires redesigning the system, not for the future, but for right now, and asking yourself what would you do right now if you could do whatever you wanted to. If you don’t know what you would do if you could do what you wanted to do how could you ever know what you would do under constraints?”
~ Russell L. Ackoff
Of course there are constraints on what we can do right now to improve the fundamentals of how we coordinate and direct our organisations. But if we can’t even imagine other ways, better ways, then what does that say about our imaginations?
As a starter for ten, here’s a comparison of just three alternatives for coordinating our organisations:
Different Forms of Organisational Coordination | ||||
Conventional Management |
Vs. |
Lean Management |
Vs. |
Fellowship |
Authority |
Vs. |
Responsibility |
Vs. |
Mutuality |
Results |
Vs. |
Process |
Vs. |
Relationships |
Give answers |
Vs. |
Ask questions |
Vs. |
Make refusable requests |
Plans |
Vs. |
Experiments |
Vs. |
Conversations |
Formal education |
Vs. |
Gemba learning |
Vs. |
Mutual exploration |
Specialists own improvement |
Vs. |
Line manager and teams own improvement |
Vs. |
Those doing the work own improvement |
Data-based decisions made remotely |
Vs. |
Facts-based decisons made at the gemba |
Vs. |
Decisions made together |
Standardisation by specialists |
Vs. |
Standardisation by manager and team |
Vs. |
Standardisation by team |
Go fast to go slow |
Vs. |
Go slow to go fast |
Vs. |
Play |
Vertical focus |
Vs. |
Horizontal focus |
Vs. |
People-as-individuals focus |
Fixed mindset (cf Dweck) |
Vs. |
Growth mindset |
Vs. |
Mutuality mindset |
Extrinsic motivations |
Vs. |
Intrinsic motivations |
Vs. |
Mutual joyfulness |
Violence |
Vs. |
Respect |
Vs. |
Nonviolence |
Imposed or opaque purpose |
Vs. |
Shared (static) purpose |
Vs. |
Mutually-evolving purpose |
Key decisions made by a few |
Vs. |
Key decisions made by a few |
Vs. |
Key decisions made by consensus of all |
Economics of Cost |
Vs. |
Economics of Flow |
Vs. |
Economics of Joy |
What other forms can you imagine?
– Bob
I find the concepts of heterarchy and responsible autonomy useful. See the work of Gerard Fairtlough at http://www.triarchypress.net/triarchy-theory.html
Pingback: What If We’re Thinking About Organisations All Wrong? | The Discipline of Innovation
Hi Bob, as per your tweet, here are the things that work for me in this post:
1. The Ackoff quote is great. I agree that we need to build what we desire rather than trying to get rid of things we don’t like. It resonates with an idea that I’ve been playing around with for a while, and I will use it going forward.
2. The table is a nice summary of three different approaches to management. Again, the ideas around Fellowship resonate strongly with me. I have not thought of these values as a coherent whole, though, so seeing them pulled together as you have is of great value. It helps me clarify my own thinking, and, again, it gives me some useful ideas to build on.
Pingback: This Is How Bureaucracy Dies – rethinking our organisations | performance~marks
Bob,
Interesting breakdown although I don’t think the three are mutually exclusive. Off the top of my head how about ‘Partnership’ as another form of organisation? Following your structure in the table, the factors would be:
Shared responsibilities
Results & process
Communication
Knowledge sharing
Learning (gemba?)
Teamwork
Decisions made together
Standardisation by team
Paced
Network
Open mindset
Satisfaction
Respect
Shared, understood purpose
Key decisions made by key individuals
Economics of value
regards,
Chris Kelly