Beyond the Pale

Beyond the Pale

Digital transformations, Agile adoptions, shifts in collective mindset, Marshall Model transitions and the like general proceed slowly, if at all. Why might this be? What slows or blocks the implementation of more effective ways working, more effective ways of meeting folks needs?

I have found that one of the biggest drags on implementing more effective strategies for getting folks’ needs met is the sheer inconceivability of the new strategies. Literally. unthinkable. And not only are these prospective, more effective ways of doing things inconceivable, they’re often also unmentionable, undiscussable and taboo, too.

Some Examples

Here’s a list of some of the kinds of new strategies I’m talking about:

  • Using throughput accounting rather than cost accounting
  • Delivering value as defined by the customer, rather than the supplier
  • Defect prevention as a preferred alternative to testing
  • Favouring slack and flow over utilisation and busywork
  • Recruiting with humanity (conversations) rather than relying on CVs
  • Funding new product initiatives incrementally rather than with a one-off budget allocation
  • Incrementally trialling new product ideas in the market rather than one time “big launch”
  • Attending to folks’ needs rather than acting as if we know what’s best for others
  • Self-managing and self-organising teams
  • Having teams “own” the product they’re working on, rather than a separate Product Owner
  • Reducing or eliminating the command & control aspects of middle management roles
  • Theory Y over theory X
  • Adopting team-wide measures rather than measuring individuals
  • Seeing people as emotional and social rather than logical and rational
  • Eliminating extrinsic motivators in favour of cultivating intrinsic motivations
  • Adopting whole systems measures rather than local measures
  • Managing and optimising the whole business rather than managing and optimising each part
  • Having folks set their own salaries and bonuses, rather than have remuneration decided by others

And so on…

Promise Unrealised

Each of the above strategies promises to contribute to a more effective business, yet each of them is in itself often inconceivable, unacceptable, unthinkable and even undiscussable. In short, such new strategies are, at a given point in time, considered as beyond the pale.

The First Challenge

When considering Digital transformations, Agile adoptions, Marshall Model transitions and the like, our collective challenge, then, is to progressively broaden and deepen our tolerance and enthusiasm for discussing and embracing these new strategies.To move ourselves to a point where one, some or all of these new strategies is conceivable, discussable and acceptable. Only then can we begin to think about build a true consensus on a specific way forward.

And maybe organisational psychotherapy has a role to play in helping the organisation open itself up and start thinking and then talking about these “tough topics”.

– Bob

Further Reading

Discussing the Undiscussable ~ Bill Noonan
Crucial Conversations ~ Kerry Patterson et al.
Six Ways To Open Up and Talk in Therapy ~ John M. Grohol Psy.D. (article)

4 comments
  1. I am beginning to think that there is a ground shift in opinions generally amongst the knowledge-based industries towards the sort of model you have identified. It seemed to me to start with the agile manifesto and the ideas in that have spread outwards into broader socio-political thinking.

    I have a past as a trade union organiser within the UK Civil Service. What has struck me is how many IT testing blogs and conferences now discuss issues which we were addressing as trade union issues ten or even twenty years ago – issues such as diversity, work/life balance and general issues of workplace wellbeing.

    I’ve also heard some people compare the spirit within the wider IT and testing communities as being akin to the nineteenth-century Mechanics’ Institute ideals, where skilled workers came together and self-organised their own education and personal and professional development; it was called “self-sufficiency” then, but it spread into the wider ideals of political self-organisation. I’m working up some ideas along these lines to produce a blog post of my own, though it’s been a fairly long gestation period so far!

  2. You are starting to get to the greater question – not what the future organization needs to become, but what is limiting movement in that direction. I am working with another author on organizational change for improved organization designs and find that the “future state” has been well documented for many years. In doing this research, I have been going back through old files that are now 15-20 years old and I repeatedly find myself amazed on how timely many of them still are today.

  3. There are also some inconsistencies in the list of desired attributes for the future organization. Elimination of command & control is advocated for middle management, but why retained for executive ranks? Further, self-managed work teams do not have to be thought of at the local management level only. Why is an either/or alternative established for team vs. individual measures and holistic vs. local optimization. In laying out this future state, there seems to be some desire to retain many aspects of the industrial age of top-side optimization while ignoring how knowledge era and complexity science thinking can shift to a dynamic fitness landscape versus chasing a static optimization goal.

  4. Ross is right to challenge your assumptions in the way he has; but I’d respond that you have to start somewhere. The saying “Become the change you wish to see” springs to mind here. If you can make eliminating command and control and embracing self-organisation work at one level, it encourages others to explore these things in other areas. Ideas spread, often when the time is right for them. I happen to think that that time is coming very soon.

Leave a comment