Archive

Monthly Archives: September 2023

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.

Training For All The Wrong Skills

September 18, 2023
Article, Attendants, Product development, Quintessence, Software development, Systems thinking, Testing, Training
Leave a comment

Training For All The Wrong Skills

Are We Training People For the Wrong Skills?

In business and software development, we’ve got a misalignment. We’re so wrapped up in perfecting the technical, we lose sight of the human. Developers are trained to churn out code more quickly, code that’s faster, cheaper, and more reliable, but are they learning how to solve real-world problems? Testers are trained to find bugs, but not how to prevent them. The result: technically proficient software that either nobody wants or that arrives late and over budget, or both.

Technical Matters?

Yes, quality code is essential. Yet, it’s by no means the end-all and be-all. A developer isn’t just a code-writing machine; they’re attendants. The fixation on coding and computing skills above all else turns them into technicians rather than holistic thinkers capable of understanding and meeting folks’ needs. When developers are pigeonholed into this role, organisations miss out on the broader impact their expensive developers could be making.

What About Bugs?

Finding bugs is a red herring – what if we could prevent them in the first place? Testers are often pigeonholed into merely identifying issues rather than participating in a more proactive approach. This approach costs time, money, and may even reduce the software’s overall quality because the focus is on fixing, not preventing. The need for speed in bug-finding diverts attention from other valuable forms of contribution, like feature development and needs validation (making sure the product meets the real needs of all the Folks That Matter™.

What’s the Cost?

When we narrow our focus to speed, efficiency, and defect detection, we end up inflating costs and extending delivery times. Software development isn’t just about churning out lines of code or ticking off a testing checklist. It’s a more nuanced art that blends technical skills with an understanding of the needs of all the Folks That Matter™.

Where’s the User in All This?

In the chase for technical mastery, it’s easy to forget the end-user. Products, at their core, are intended to make lives easier, to attend to folks needs. When developers and testers are not trained to master these things, we end up with products that are high on features but low on utility.

So What’s the Solution?

If we’re to correct this misalignment, we need a cultural shift. We might choose to reorient our training and development programmes. For developers, this means less emphasis on speed and more on understanding who matters, and then discovering and meeting these folks’ needs. For testers, a shift from just finding bugs to a more holistic approach to quality via defect prevention (Cf. ZeeDee) would be transformative.

Where Do We Go from Here?

The technical aspects of software and product development are, without a doubt, essential. But they aren’t the whole story. By shifting our focus to include all the needs of all the Folks That Matter™, we can create products that not only work but makes a difference. The first step? Acknowledging that we’ve been training for all the wrong skills.

Mary Parker Follett: Overlooked OP Precursor?

September 17, 2023
Article, Culture change, Mary Parker Follett, Organisational effectiveness, Organisational Therapy, Psychology
Leave a comment

Mary Parker Follett: Overlooked OP Precursor?

Who Was Mary Parker Follett?

Mary Parker Follett, a management theorist who lived between 1868 and 1933, made groundbreaking contributions to our understanding of human relations, organisational structure, and conflict resolution. While other luminaries like Frederick Taylor and Max Weber often overshadow her, her work remains an important cornerstone in organisational studies.

What Did Follett Believe?

Follett’s work emphasised the human aspects of management. She promoted concepts like “power-with” rather than “power-over” and touted the significance of “group mind” or collective consciousness. For her, organisations thrived when their members shared power and collectively contributed to solutions. Her ideas laid a strong foundation for understanding the dynamics that occur within a group, a foundation that has influenced the field of organisational psychotherapy.

How Does Follett’s Work Relate to Organisational Psychotherapy?

The core tenets of Follett’s philosophy, such as collective consciousness and the collaborative model of power, overlap significantly with organisational psychotherapy. Both approaches focus on the importance of understanding the deep-seated beliefs, assumptions, and behaviours that form the bedrock of an organisation. Like Follett, organisational psychotherapy also believes in delving into the collective unconscious of an organisation to bring about systemic change.

Why Is the Group Mind Important?

In the language of organisational psychotherapy, Follett’s notion of a “group mind” would translate into the collective unconscious. This is an aggregate of shared assumptions, beliefs, and practices that shape the culture and functioning of an organisation. Recognising and addressing these aspects can significantly influence an organisation’s ability to change, adapt, and grow.

How Did Follett Anticipate Systems Thinking?

Before the term “systems thinking” became mainstream, Mary Parker Follett was already sowing its seeds. Her perception of the organisation as an interconnected web of relationships aligns perfectly with the modern understanding of systems thinking. She recognised that an organisation was not merely a collection of disparate parts but a complex system where every action had a ripple effect. Her focus on collaboration and “group mind” naturally extended to a holistic view of organisational dynamics, underscoring the interdependence of individual and collective actions. It’s clear that her work prefigured key aspects of systems thinking, making her an intellectual precursor to this influential modern discipline. Follett’s early insights offer valuable lessons for organisational psychotherapy, which also employs systems thinking to address the underlying issues affecting an organisation.

What Can We Learn from Follett Today?

Mary Parker Follett’s work, despite being a century old, offers a rich vein of ideas that organisations can tap into for modern problem-solving. For instance, her concept of “integrative conflict resolution” aligns with organisational psychotherapy’s goal to solve systemic issues by surfacing and addressing shared assumptions and beliefs.

The Next Step: An Explicit Invitation

Are you interested in exploring your organisation’s collective unconscious? Delving into your shared assumptions and beliefs? Your next step might be to consult an organisational psychotherapist. This is an explicit invitation to leverage Mary Parker Follett’s timeless wisdom for your organisation’s benefit.

Are Results Guaranteed?

While it’s impractical to guarantee outcomes in organisational change, the synergy between Follett’s philosophy and organisational psychotherapy provides a strong framework for effective transformation. By focusing on the collective aspects that shape behaviour and culture, you’re far more likely to achieve meaningful, lasting change.

Your Move

Mary Parker Follett offers us time-tested wisdom that aligns seamlessly with the objectives of organisational psychotherapy. If you’re looking to explore these ideas further, consulting an organisational psychotherapist might be your next best step. The choice is yours, but this is your invitation to take action.

Summary

Mary Parker Follett may not be as famous as some of her contemporaries, but her work remains profoundly relevant. It resonates strongly with the principles of organisational psychotherapy, offering a holistic approach to organisational development focused on collective consciousness and collaboration. The fusion of Follett’s ideas with organisational psychotherapy provides an enriching path for any organisation willing to explore deeper layers of its culture and operation.

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.

The Tough Reality of Making Lives More Wonderful

September 17, 2023
Advice sought, Antimatter principle, Article, Caring, Compassion, Nonviolent Communication, Psychology, Relationships, Therapy, Wonder
Leave a comment

The Tough Reality of Making Lives More Wonderful

Why is Helping People So Hard?

I’ve dedicated three decades to pursuing a vocation of helping people. Although the need for help is often evident, the willingness to accept it is far less common. This dissonance creates a nuanced and sometimes difficult environment in which to operate. The challenge lies not only in the provision of help but also in the varying levels of receptivity I encounter.

Why Don’t People Want Help?

On the surface, the equation should be simple: as a general rule, people have needs, and I support them in finding their own solutions. However, in my years of experience, I’ve found that most individuals aren’t actually seeking help, even when they could benefit from it. There’s a persistent gap between the need for assistance and the willingness to engage with it. This chasm often converts what should be a straightforward transaction into an intricate dance, requiring careful and compassionate relationship building.

What Keeps Them From Asking For Help?

The reluctance to seek help is a convoluted issue involving various emotional and psychological elements. Among these are:

  • Caution: A fundamental wariness often deters people from exposing their vulnerabilities. Opening up to someone else—especially a relative stranger—requires a leap of faith that many find daunting.
  • Pride: The ego can be a significant obstacle. Admitting the need for help can feel like admitting defeat or incompetence, and pride can get in the way of taking that step.
  • Shame: Some people feel that asking for help highlights their inadequacies and failures, making them less worthy in their eyes or the eyes of others.
  • Guilt: There’s often a sense that one should be able to manage on one’s own and that needing help is a sign of weakness or failure. This guilt can suppress the act of reaching out.
  • Fear: The fear of being judged or stigmatised for needing help can be paralysing. It can deter people from seeking assistance even when they genuinely require it.

Additionally, societal norms, which frequently penalise vulnerability and appearing “needy”, serve as another layer of hindrance. This creates an environment where needs go unexpressed, which, in turn, increases the complexity of helping. Helping then requires detective work, identifying hidden needs, and diplomace, navigating sensitive emotional terrains.

Why Can’t People Accept Help?

Even when the stars align and an offer of help coincides with a recognised need, the final hurdle of acceptance remains. The act of accepting help exposes vulnerabilities and can trigger fears of indebtedness or losing autonomy. As such, this step often presents its own unique set of challenges. It necessitates a nuanced understanding of individual psychologies and social dynamics, to ensure that well-intended aid is not just offered but also accepted. Those in the medical professions have long understood the gulf between capability and getting patients to follow treatment regimens (Adherence).

Even when a need is acknowledged and help is readily available, accepting that help is another obstacle entirely. The complexities associated with this final step are multilayered:

  • Exposure of Vulnerability: Accepting help usually necessitates revealing weaknesses or inadequacies, which many find deeply uncomfortable.
  • Fear of Indebtedness: Accepting someone’s assistance often comes with the implicit or explicit expectation of reciprocity, which can create pressure and stress.
  • Loss of Autonomy: Some fear that accepting help means ceding control, undermining their sense of independence or self-sufficiency.
  • Negative past experiences: Many people may have experienced being “helped” in the past, with associated negative experiences.

It’s worth noting that this struggle with acceptance is also common in fields like medicine. There, practitioners have long grappled with the difference between having the ability to treat a condition and getting patients to adhere to the necessary protocols.

Therefore, to ensure that help is both offered and accepted, a deep understanding of individual and group psychology and broader social dynamics is essential. It involves a balanced, nuanced approach that considers both the rational and emotional dimensions of human behaviour.

How Can We Adapt to These Challenges?

Over the years, I’ve realised that adaptability is key. Each person is a unique confluence of needs, fears, and social conditioning, requiring an equally unique approach. Employing a blend of empathy, patience, and non-judgment allows us to better navigate the various obstacles that arise in the helping process. This tailored approach aims to dismantle some of the barriers people erect, making it easier for them to both access and accept the help they need.

To sum up, helping people is far from easy, but the complexities make it all the more important. And the outcomes make it so worthwhile. The disconnect between needing and accepting help isn’t a shortcoming but rather a complex interplay of human factors that we must skillfully navigate. The challenges are significant but so too are the rewards for everyone involved.

Summary

Recently, I’ve found it useful to refine my focus within the broad panorama of “helping people.” After decades of navigating the complexities of human needs and resistance, I’ve refocussed my attention on “making lives more wonderful.” This compelling phrase, originally coined by Marshall Rosenberg in the context of Nonviolent Communication (NVC), succinctly conveys a more targeted, positive approach. It not only gels with my longstanding vocation but also addresses the crux of what most people truly desire, even if they can’t articulate it. By focusing on making lives more wonderful, I’m better prepared to handle the challenges that come with helping people. That makes my life more wonderful, too. And I could really use your help in that. 🙂

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 Blame Game

September 16, 2023
Antimatter principle, Article, Organisational Therapy
Leave a comment

The Blame Game

What’s Easier: Pointing Fingers?

It’s human nature to look for an easy route, and blaming others for our emotions seems just that: simple and straightforward. Instead of scrutinising our inner selves, we often find it more convenient to direct the spotlight elsewhere.

Why Do We Blame?

In the quest to protect our ego, and discharge our discomfort and pain, we externalise responsibility. It’s a defence mechanism. Instead of saying, “I feel hurt because of my expectations,” we opt for, “You hurt me.” It’s a subtle shift but a significant one. Here, psychotherapy comes into play, offering a framework to explore and understand this dynamic.

What’s Nonviolent Communication Got to Do With It?

In 1964, Marshall Rosenberg developed Nonviolent Communication (NVC), a process aimed at fostering compassionate connection and action. The core idea of NVC is that our actions are motivated by an attempt to meet fundamental human needs. When we blame, we obscure these needs and hamper effective communication.

How Can NVC Help?

Instead of blaming, NVC asks us to identify the unmet needs triggering our emotions. By doing so, we switch from a fault-finding mode to a needs-identification mode. This reframing paves the way for better understanding and constructive conversation.

Is Owning Emotions Really that Hard?

Taking ownership of your feelings requires courage and introspection. It means setting aside the ego for a more nuanced understanding of your emotional state. This isn’t a straightforward process, and that’s why many opt for the simpler path of blaming others.

What’s the Role of Psychotherapy?

Psychotherapy, including organisational psychotherapy, offers tools for this emotional ownership. The practice can help pinpoint the underlying beliefs or attitudes that contribute to our emotional states, thus encouraging emotional responsibility.

So, What’s the Payoff?

When you stop blaming others and take ownership of your emotions, you make room for real change. The power shifts from the external to the internal, offering you control over your emotional well-being.

How Can This Change Your Life?

Emotional ownership is empowering. It offers a clearer path to resolving conflicts, whether they’re in the workplace or personal relationships. Additionally, it strengthens emotional intelligence, a trait highly valued in today’s world.

Conclusion: Which Path Will You Choose?

We’ve got two roads ahead: the easy path of blame or the challenging but rewarding journey of emotional ownership. With the help of psychotherapy and tools like Nonviolent Communication, choosing the latter becomes not only feasible but deeply enriching. So, what’ll it be?

Further Reading

The RSA. (2013, April 4). Brené Brown on Blame [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZWf2_2L2v8

Does Advice Change You or Just Interest You?

September 16, 2023
Advice sought, Antimatter principle, Article, Social media
Leave a comment

Does Advice Change You or Just Interest You?

What’s Really Behind ‘Interesting’?

Why do we often find ourselves engrossed in ‘interesting’ content? It grabs our attention, taps into our emotions, and perhaps even stokes our ego. But what actionable change does it actually bring about in our behaviour? How many folks even seek actionable change in behaviour?

What Makes Something ‘Useful’?

Useful is a powerful term. It denotes something that brings about or strengthens a change in behaviour. Is that our goal when we seek advice, especially in the digital sphere crowded with unsolicited suggestions?

Why Do We Confuse the Two?

How is it that ‘interesting’ content often tricks us into believing it’s ‘useful’? Could it be the algorithms designed to keep us scrolling, or perhaps it’s our own failure to critically evaluate what and how we consume?

How to Differentiate Between ‘Interesting’ and ‘Useful’?

When scrolling through a sea of advice, what are the questions you should ask yourself to separate what’s genuinely useful from what’s merely interesting?

  1. Is This Actionable?: Will the advice lead to new behaviours or strengthen existing ones?
  2. Who’s Behind This?: Are the sources credible enough to trust for behavioural changes?
  3. Does It Apply to Me?: Is the advice relevant to your life and circumstances?
  4. Is It Concrete?: Does the advice offer specific steps for change?
  5. Is the Impact Long-Term?: Will this advice deliver enduring benefits or is it a short-lived trend?

What’s the Real Cost of Opting for ‘Interesting’?

When you spend your valuable time on ‘interesting’ content, what opportunities for meaningful change are you missing out on? Is the real cost just time, or is it a loss of potential growth?

Why Should You Care?

In a world where your attention is a coveted asset, what is the benefit of choosing ‘useful’ over ‘interesting’? Could the key to meaningful life changes lie in this simple choice?

Agile or Ag-ile?

September 15, 2023
Agile, Article
Leave a comment

Agile or Ag-ile?

Why is Agile Aggravating?

The aggravation in Agile, cheekily coined as “Ag-ile,” isn’t solely a byproduct of poor implementation or misunderstanding the philosophy. Even when executed effectively, Agile can bring about its own set of aggravations. One significant reason? Local optimisation.

What is Local Optimisation?

In Agile, teams work in silos—small, focused units aimed at achieving specific tasks. These teams, however, often optimise their performance without considering the bigger picture. They excel in their micro-universe, but that doesn’t necessarily translate to overall organisational efficiency. It’s a classic case of not seeing the forest for the trees, but it’s not the teams’ fault. The structure and guidelines of Agile itself nudge teams toward this myopic view.

Does Local Optimisation Undermine Overall Goals?

Absolutely. The isolated victories of individual Agile teams can create an illusion of progress and success. This mirage not only masks the inefficiencies at the organisational level but also, paradoxically, can worsen them.

Is the Problem Fixable?

Yes, but it’s not easy. Addressing the challenge requires an organisation-wide shift in mindset. Your teams need to align their goals not just with their immediate objectives but also with the organisation’s broader aims. Unfortunately, this is easier said than done, especially when the frameworks you’re using are predisposed to local optimisation.

So, What’s the Solution?

One approach is to adopt systems thinking. This mindset focuses on the relationships between various parts of an organisation. When applied, it can help identify how local optimisation impacts the bigger picture and pinpoint areas that need reevaluation. Additionally, transparency between teams and management can help recalibrate goals and expectations.

Is Agile at All Compatible with Systems Thinking?

No, not at all. Agile and systems thinking operate on fundamentally different paradigms. While Agile focuses on quick iterations and local optimisation, systems thinking aims for a holistic view of the organisation. These approaches aren’t just disparate; they’re almost antithetical. Systems thinking demands a focus on how individual parts interact with and affect the whole, something Agile isn’t designed to address.

When you apply Agile, you’re encouraged to break down complex problems into manageable parts, which individual teams can tackle. On the surface, this seems like a logical way to address challenges. However, this approach inherently limits the scope to localised areas without considering the larger organisational ecosystem. Systems thinking would look at these issues quite differently, asking how solving one part of the problem might create challenges elsewhere.

Given this inherent misalignment, if your organisation is committed to systems thinking, forcing an Agile framework onto it can create a clash of methodologies that’s not just unproductive, but potentially damaging.

Summary

Agile methodologies, even when implemented well, come with their share of aggravations, the most prominent being local optimisation. This focus on localised success can distort the perception of overall organisational performance. Systems thinking offers a solution, but it’s not an easy fix. Importantly, the core principles of Agile are fundamentally at odds with systems thinking, making the two largely incompatible. So, while Agile might promise quick wins, it’s worth questioning whether those wins contribute to or detract from your organisation’s broader objectives.

Deming Uncovered: Beyond the Red Beads

September 15, 2023
Article, Deming, Systems thinking
Leave a comment

Deming Uncovered: Beyond the Red Beads

Forget about blaming employees for every hiccup in the workplace; chances are, it’s not them—it’s the system (the way the work works). Enter Bill Deming, the overlooked genius who showed us where the real problem lies.

Who Was Bill Deming?

Bill Deming, formally known as W. Edwards Deming, was a statistician, professor, author, lecturer, and consultant. He’s particularly famous in Japan for teaching the country’s top management how to improve product quality. While highly influential in certain professional circles, he remains relatively unknown to the world of business, let alone to the general public.

What’s Deming’s 95/5 Rule?

The 95/5 rule proposes that 95% of the problems in an organisation are a consequence of the system, while only 5% are a consequence of the people within it. This revolutionary thought refocuses attention from blaming individual workers to considering the system they operate within.

The Red Bead Experiment?

The Red Bead Experiment was a powerful illustration of the 95/5 rule. In this experiment, workers would scoop beads from a bowl filled with a mix of white and red beads. Despite their best efforts, they couldn’t avoid scooping up red beads, which were considered ‘defects’. The point? The workers had no control over the system, represented by the bowl and the mix of beads. The defects were a consequence of the system, not the people.

Why Isn’t Deming More Famous?

Deming’s lack of mainstream recognition can be attributed to a few factors:

  1. Cultural Differences: Deming’s principles took root in Japan, not his home country of the United States.
  2. Complex Ideas: His theories aren’t beginner-friendly and demand a paradigm shift in managerial thinking.
  3. Crowded Thought Space: Newer methods and more contemporary “thought leaders” often take the limelight.
  4. Systemic Focus: His emphasis on systems over individuals is somewhat at odds with endemic Western management assumptions and beliefs.

Why Take Notice?

Understanding Deming’s 95/5 rule can significantly alter how you approach problem-solving in your organisation. It places importance on changing systems, not just people, to solve persistent issues.

How to Implement the 95/5 Rule?

  1. Examine Systems, Not People: Before jumping to blame individuals, look at the systems in which they operate.
  2. Prioritise Systemic Solutions: Focus on fixing the system rather than tackling individual performance issues.
  3. Educate the Workforce: Ensure your team understands their role within the broader system and the shared responsibility for improvement.
  4. Assess and Refine: After systemic changes, evaluate their effectiveness to ensure they resolve the problems you identified.

In Summary

Bill Deming and his 95/5 rule, illuminated through the Red Bead Experiment, offer a critical lens for assessing organisational issues. It’s not merely about identifying what’s wrong but understanding where the root cause lies—usually in the system rather than individual actions. Isn’t it time we acknowledged the value of this overlooked genius?

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.

Our Obsession With Perfect Hiring

September 14, 2023
Alien tech, Article, Deming, Recruiting
Leave a comment

Our Obsession With Perfect Hiring

Obsessing Over Perfect Hires?

The hiring process has become a ritual that many businesses follow without ever questioning its efficacy. Organisations pour resources into finding the ideal candidate, aiming for perfection at every step. But what if the quest for the ‘perfect hire’ is actually detrimental?

Why Fear Imperfect Hires?

Hiring ‘bad’ or ‘questionable’ candidates often gets bad press. Prevailing wisdom urges caution to avoid the pitfalls of a bad hire. However, this overlooks the potential benefits of what organisatiosn fear as ‘bad hires‘. Focusing solely on the downside carries its own set of costs, such as stagnation and aversion to taking calculated risks.

What Can We Learn from ‘Bad’ Hires?

The belief that we can predict an individual’s future performance is an illusion. Cognitive biases affect how we evaluate candidates, and even someone who initially appears to be a bad fit can grow, learn, and contribute meaningfully to the organisation. In fact, sticking with a questionable hire can build loyalty and encourage a culture of growth and adaptability.

Is Quick Hiring Really That Bad?

If we accept making imperfect hires as part of the process, this can enable a more streamlined hiring procedure. By iterating quickly — hiring and adjusting as needed — organisations can adapt faster and reduce the stigma associated with riskier decisions. It’s a similar approach to agile methodologies: release early, get feedback, and improve.

Who Owns the Hiring Decisions?

The traditional approach puts the responsibility of hiring squarely on managers’ shoulders. But if the organisation can adapt to the idea of making imperfect hires, then others in the team can also take part in the decision-making process. This democratises hiring and may lead to more diverse and robust teams.

Does System Matter More Than Individuals?

If you consider W. Edwards Deming’s proposition that 95% of an employee’s performance is due to the system they work in, then the difference between a good hire and a bad hire minimises to insignificant. Therefore, focusing on improving the system within which new hires will work yields better results than fixating on individuals and their abilities, character, etc.

His provocative statement poses a direct challenge to traditional hiring philosophies. In most organisations, an enormous amount of energy is expended on selecting the ‘right’ candidates based on qualifications, skills, and personality traits. Yet, if Deming’s assertion holds true, this focus is hugely misplaced.

How Systems Influence Behaviour

Firstly, what do we mean by ‘system’? In an organisational context, the term refers to the set of policies, procedures, and culture that guide employee behaviour. This encompasses everything from the company’s values and mission to its performance review procedures and internal communications. Employees are part of this intricate web and their behaviour—good or bad—is often a byproduct of the system in which they operate.

For example, consider an organisation that has a poor culture around deadlines. Projects often run over time, and there’s no real accountability. In such a system, even the most punctual and responsible new hire is likely to struggle with deadlines, not because they lack the skill or will, but because the system doesn’t support or reward timeliness.

Rethinking Hiring Criteria

If the system carries such weight in determining performance, the focus during the hiring process might better shift from scrutinising individuals to evaluating how well they would adapt and contribute to the existing system. In fact, this takes the pressure off finding the ‘perfect’ candidate. Instead, organisations might choose to find individuals who are most likely to interact beneficially with the existing system, or even better, improve it.

System Improvement Over Individual Perfection

Given the outsized impact of systems, organisations would do well to invest in improving these structures rather than in the endless quest for the ideal candidate. The irony is that by creating a better system, businesses can make it easier to find ‘better’ candidates. That’s because in a well-designed system, people have a clearer understanding of expectations, greater access to resources, and more opportunities for professional growth—all factors that contribute to improved performance.

The Ripple Effect

The emphasis on systems over individuals has a ripple effect across the organisation. It shifts the accountability from the employee to the leadership, placing the onus on management to create a system that fosters excellence. When issues arise, instead of questioning the individual’s capability, the first point of inspection becomes the system. This perspective fosters a healthier work environment, encouraging continuous improvement rather than blame allocation.

A Paradigm Shift is Due

The argument is not that individual skills and characteristics are irrelevant, but rather that they are hugely secondary to the system in which a person works. Adopting this viewpoint demands a shift in focus: from hiring the ‘perfect’ candidate to optimising the system for all employees, existing and new. This approach not only aligns better with Deming’s insights but also paves the way for a more adaptive and resilient organisation.

Wait. What? Are We Hiring For The RIght Positions In Any Case?

In the midst of dissecting the pros and cons of current hiring practices, an even more fundamental question arises: are we even hiring for the right positions? Organisations often default to traditional job titles and roles without deeply questioning what they actually need.

For instance, companies clamour to hire testers when the underlying aim is to improve quality. Yet, quality is an organisational issue, not just a testing problem. Instead of hiring more testers, it might be more useful to look at systemic issues affecting quality and address those directly.

Similarly, organisations seek to hire software developers when what they might really need are ‘attendants’: individuals who can understand and cater to users’ needs, ensuring the product or service genuinely solves a problem. A coder can write endless lines of impeccable code, but if they’re not attending to what people need, all that coding effort is futile.

In a nutshell, the dilemma is not merely about hiring the right people for existing roles but re-evaluating what those roles should even be. Reimagining positions to better align with actual organisational needs could well be the first step toward a more effective and meaningful hiring process.

Conclusion: Time for a New Perspective?

The traditional approach to hiring, with its emphasis on avoiding ‘bad’ hires, is increasingly questionable. Opting for a more fluid, pragmatic and less judgmental approach not only encourages a more inclusive culture but also speeds up organisational learning. It might be time to re-examine what we’ve long considered the ‘correct’ way to hire and be more open to the advantages of imperfection.

Further Reading

Cappelli, P. (2012). Why Good People Can’t Get Jobs. Online article.
Freedman, J. (2011). Everyone sucks at Interviewing. Blog post.
Grant, A. (2013). What’s Wrong with Job Interviews, and How to Fix Them. Online article.
Hsieh, T. (2010). Bad Hires Have Cost Zappos Over $100 Million. Video.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
PurposeFairy. (n.d.). 7 Reasons Why Not Making Mistakes Is The Biggest Mistake. Blog post.

Agile: A Comedy of Errors?

September 13, 2023
Agile, Article, Organisational effectiveness, Organisational Therapy
Leave a comment

Agile: A Comedy of Errors?

Agile for Agile’s Sake: A Joke or Reality?

So, we’ve got Agile practices sprouting up in companies like mushrooms after a rainstorm. But let’s get real, is “Agile for Agile’s sake” the business equivalent of a dad joke—seems funny but doesn’t quite hit the mark?

What Drives the Agile FOMO?

Ah, the Fear Of Missing Out—a condition as contagious as yawning in a meeting. Is FOMO the reason companies are jumping onto the Agile bandwagon like it’s the last train out of 1999? Are we just afraid that not doing Agile is like missing the season finale of a hit show?

Are We Just “Playing House”?

You know, pretending to be grown-ups who’ve got it all together. Standing in a circle every morning, talking about “what’s on the agenda”, but forgetting the bigger picture. Are we just mimicking Agile practices without grasping their essence, like kids who think doing taxes is as easy as playing Monopoly?

Time for a Reality Check?

So, you’ve realised you’re stuck in this Agile comedy sketch. What now? Do you laugh it off, or do you call for a script rewrite? Is there a way to steer the Agile ship back on course without feeling like you’ve flunked your driving test?

What’s the Punchline?

Alright, let’s assume you’ve managed to salvage the Agile situation. Do you pat yourselves on the back and call it a wrap, or is this the start of a sequel? How do you keep your Agile practices from turning into a running gag that’s lost its charm?

Is Agile a Box Office Flop?

If we’re honest with ourselves, the Agile experiment is more akin to a box office flop than a blockbuster. Despite all the bells and whistles, it often doesn’t deliver what it promises. Yes, some projects excel, but far too many end up in a muddle, creating more confusion and less productivity.

There ARE Alternatives

If Agile’s not the hero it’s been hyped up to be, what’s the Plan B? Have we considered options like Lean, Design Thinking, or Organisational Psychotherapy? How about bespoke methods tailored to a company’s unique challenges, or no method at all—just an alignment on core values and principles?

Perhaps it’s time to shelve Agile as the latest in a long line of failed management fads. Just like Betamax, laser discs, and 3D TVs, Agile has had its moment in the sun. But is it time to find another star to guide us?

So there you have it—questions, chuckles, and a splash of cold water on the Agile fervour. It might be worth pondering whether Agile is the punchline we’ve been waiting for, or just a dad joke that’s overstayed its welcome.

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.