Showing posts with label Social Learning. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Learning. Show all posts

Thursday, February 24, 2011

Management Upside Down - Sparkling Insights!

Rahul, a young Executive Director of a fast growing multi-national company startled by his nightmare broke into a cold sweat as he woke up.

What would happen to his vibrant flourishing business if the top management team who were ready to fly to Dubai for the annual sales conference in two days time died of a violent air crash? His global business would then come crashing like a pack of cards and there would be none to look after the vast wealth that has been created as he narrated his nightmare to me. 

"Why would that be?" I asked. 

"Isn't that obvious? All knowledge of running this company lies with these few chosen ones. Once they were gone wealth vanishes in no time" he replied emphatically. 

"But don't you think that sooner or later all of them would leave the scene anyway? What do you do then?" I quipped in response.

"Frankly I don't know. That has really kept me thinking. There are no Jack Welch or A M Naik who is determined to make his way up from the ranks. Don't know how to make even one?", Rahul voice trailed off pensively.

This story made me sit up and start thinking. Isn't this the same story for all companies all over the world? Aren't people fighting to find an answer to these deep questions on knowledge, leadership and organizations? What can be a possible solution to this business problem that has spread like an epidemic and refuses to let go of its iron grip on our lives?

Such difficult questions possibly can't be answered through a brilliant stroke of imagination. Many have tried without much success. To find an answer we would have to look at something deeper - the evolution of management from the early uncertain days of the industrial revolution to the present day where all time honored rules of management are headed for a grand collapse (Nature's Model). The clue lies there. 

This is how management always worked with minor and insignificant modifications here and there. 

It always started with a grand plan to make a profit. Don't suspect that I am against 'profit' or like to label it as a dirty word. Far from it! Profits are needed. It is blood of an organization. Anyway, to chalk out the grand plan a few old men (only now it is fashionable to include a few women too) sat together in a room called the board room to come up with a 'how to' list of making money from an idea. We called that strategy.

Once that was framed the next question that plagued these old souls was how the hell do we organize ourselves and operate? They then came up with exotic game plans, choc-a-block with funny rules and regulations, making the entire organization 'rigid' (if not frigid) 'air-tight' and 'water-proof' -- nothing can touch them, no secret can ever dream to escape, no employee can ever think of anything else but work, work and work...etc. They called it a 'system'.

With the system in place these grand old people heaved a sigh of relief. Half the job is done. Now we need some 'dedicated', 'loyal', 'trusted' servants (whoops! employees) to work their grand design called the system to their heart's content to churn out money. The model was no different to the 'factory model'. Pop in something and out pops something else from the other side of the machine.

Same was in business. So they carefully selected the 'servants' to work for them and just like selecting good machines they looked hard for the desired attributes for doing the back breaking jobs -- is he/she strong, healthy, good looking, has the right attitude??? (still couldn't figure out how they measure that), background, education blah blah blah... . They would take all pains just the way they would to pick the best variety of apples from the marketplace. It had to be rigorous since the 'chosen ones' like gladiators, would have to sweat it out for them in the next 2 to 3 decades.

But soon they found out that attributes of people change over time. They were not "behaving" like the machines they thought they got with so much rigor and patience. They started asking for things that weren't promised when they got in. That was something to worry about. What made them most worried was when they started thinking and suggesting and voicing their opinions on how to go about their jobs and perhaps how to do them better.

That wasn't good news to their old hardened ears. They have to stop them thinking. They are to be aligned to the goal of the organization. They are to be kept in line and on their toes. And they are to be occasionally whipped when they break rules or ranks to show who is the master and the lord that provides them their humble bread.

In comes the Human Resource Department, a sobriquet for the old fashioned Time Office and Personnel Department, whose only job was to keep employee behavior in check. Keep them in line. Indoctrinate them. Inject them with the lovely tunes of loyalty, feel good factor with a good day's job. Give them some butter if they do too well..... Spend time to correct the behavior of people not to say that a good amount of time, energy and resources went into managing work that consumed a large extent of people's productive time.

And what might happen when strategy, systems and behavior of people are all lined up? It would create work that produced goods and services of some value to thousands of customers. So a classic division was formed -- a small group of producers and an ever increasing group of consumers. More the consumers merrier the game became. All that  management had to do was to ensnare more and more consumers in their net and keep looking for more. The word was 'marketing'. 

This way of operating could be done for a pretty long time. All that was needed to keep this well structured machinery running was a pot of gold. Deeper the pockets better was the show which people thought would be perpetual in nature. At last management was able to create a perpetual machine that defied all known natural laws.

Did they? No. By 2008 everything that was so sacrosanct and held in high esteem started to disintegrate with the coming of the great recession. Big and seemingly invincible companies folded up. Unemployment kept rising. No new jobs could be created. Businesses faltered. And those that existed counted their days to doom.

The old way of functioning was definitely clumsy, complex, rigid and unmanageable that not only provided very little value to customers but also wasted a lot of energy in managing and keeping the system in order.

What traditional businesses failed to notice were the slow changes happening all around them in other spheres of human activities (Post Offices to #SM). Things were changing. And so did the nature of work. The fundamental change was consumers became producers and were blurring the line between producers and consumers. It happened to Post Offices, Schools, Publishing business, Consulting, Telephones, and was quickly spreading to all human activities in ways people would  have never imagined even a few years back.

The consumers created their own value independently and interacted and shared it with their network to create more value and consume it themselves at a price much less than the prevailing market price. The days of grand old institutions, middle men, dealers, publishers, advertisers were all but over.

In comes a new thinking and a new way to create and manage businesses and a lot of value  -- the answer to Rahul's nightmare.

The earlier model, basically static in nature and greatly determined by financial capital, was Strategy -- Systems -- Behavior -- Work -- Value.

In this model, Strategy informed the nature of work and the value that was created for the customer.

The new model is just the reverse of what we knew for so long. What happens when we reverse it? It becomes Value -- Work -- Behavior -- Systems -- Strategy. 

In this new model, 'Value' and 'Work' inform Strategy not the other way around. Therefore, it is more dependent on people including customers to participate, share and contribute their learning and knowledge in the economic process than being exclusively dependent on the strength of financial capital.

So, what might be the challenges for organizations to embrace the new way of working?

Some of these are:

1. How do we involve and engage customers and employees to participate in the 'value' creation process to create 'multiple values' instead of only focusing on the goal of generating profits (single value)?

2. How do we make 'work' observable and tractable from which everything else emerges?

3. How do we create a platform of emergent learning that spontaneously creates 'leaders' who co-produce wealth not spawn 'servants', 'managers' and 'bosses' who run the systems like mere cogs in the wheel?

Now that we have found the answer to Rahul's nightmare answers to these challenges would help him create simple yet intelligently superior and greatly adaptable organization that creates multiple values for the collective.

For Rahul his ghastly nightmares would be over. But he would now have more things to challenge his mind, which would surely be fun since he may now keep thinking while doing the new thing, learning and improvising as he goes along in his new journey.

He is well on his way creating history.

Wish him well!

But do ask me how history is being created.

 

Posted via email from dibyendu's posterous

Thursday, January 13, 2011

Igniting the Spark through Social Media.

We can ignite the necessary spark of an welding electrode in two ways:

a) Scratch and lift -- go along for a short time and let go
b) Touch and lift - just touch for a fraction of a second and let go

We do the same thing while developing people.

For some, we would have to go along with them for sometime and then let go.

For others, one interaction would be enough to create the spark to a fire that keeps burning for life.

However, creating that vital spark is important.

With traditional education we neither 'scratch and lift' nor 'touch and lift'. We go drumming year after year till the person would have had enough of it and is bored to death. That is why after some years we remember only a few teachers and professors who have made an impact in our lives. The majority goes into oblivion.

Undeniably, the traditional approach has its use in the initial years of making of a person. The mistake is that we extend the thought and the process right into the professional period of a person's life. People don't like it. More than 80% of the people I meet want to quit their jobs even in this time of recession. Why? They simply feel that they are no longer learning anything new or exciting in their jobs to keep their vital spirit alive. At the end of the day they go home with a heavy heart and an empty mind. It sucks; killing the spirit to be curious, to be innovative, to discover, to search for mentors, to take responsibility to be awake and learn and fend for life.

However, Learning through Social media is quite different. It can ignite the fire in the belly in both ways - 'scratch' and 'touch'. Since it is more dependent on what we search and want in life. We take what we need and not what is thrust upon us. It gives us time to reflect and create meaning. It creates a democratic, egalitarian and perhaps more prosperous societies.

Therefore, it is important to ignite the spark that keeps the fire burning for life.

So, it does not surprise me a bit as to why fire is so respected and revered amongst all civilizations across the globe.

It occupies a special place in our lives.

That is the energy when harnessed helps us to achieve anything worthwhile and lasting and build better societies. 

Social Media is the right means to achieve the end.

Posted via email from dibyendu's posterous

Thursday, January 6, 2011

Well, this is not a problem...

'Well, this is not a problem at all. Just do this. And follow these 9 steps. I have already worked out the 79 different factors that are to be measured and analyzed to come to a meaningful solution. In Japan they just do like this'

Does it sound familiar? How many times have you heard something like this?

Though this comes from well-intentioned and seemingly knowledgeable bosses (after all they are supposed to know more than their subordinates) it is a sure killer and a show stopper for creating innovative and learning organizational climate, empowering people, team work, allowing people to fail and learn and design think of new and unique context oriented solutions that competitors can't even figure out.

Implemening powerful social learning solutions to transform such organizations and boost morale of the people are difficult if not totally impossible.

Posted via email from dibyendu's posterous

Saturday, November 27, 2010

Social Learning from Toyota to E2.0

Toyota engineers emphasize that learning how to use the know how database does not make a good engineer. This is not to say that engineering database is not useful for learning. Databases are primarily born out of experience of other engineers who found that exceeding certain limits might cause a problem.

Databases are tools to provide guidelines and ensure that the engineer or the designer does not forget the key points. It certainly helps training young engineers and designers but fails to create a great engineer. A database can only provide the limits on possible design solutions. It helps an engineer to know when not to exceed a limit or keep something at some minimum. It certainly does not make him creative.

At times, there is a need to exceed limits or change the structure to make the system as a whole function better. This obviously calls for better design thinking that would involve learning by doing through prototyping, extra testing and field studies. If this proves OK then the previous level of social or organizational learning jumps to a new level. This is something like a quantum jump that is reflected through changed fractals within the entire organization. 

If the organization stagnates at any particular level of learning, say by sticking to the database, then everyone learns the same thing and we would see the corresponding fractals of that learning in everything the organization does or produces. With a quantum leap in learning the fractals within the organization change immediately reflecting new learning. 

But how would that possibly happen?Possibly we may learn about this from Toyota.

Real engineering would remain a creative activity that would involve innovative thinking to solve problems or provide the desired functions to the customer while treating database constraints as standards.

Toyota places great emphasis on developing know-how over time by doing the work under the guidance of a mentor because it is the only way to develop the real creative power of the engineer. Over the years Toyota has developed such mentors within the rank and file of their organization.

But this poses a problem.

Most organizations are filled up with doers and thinkers but not mentors or the wise ones as I call them. And with performance review systems in place (one of the 5 deadly organizational sins of Dr. Deming) it becomes still harder to develop mentors, teamwork and retain people who would be willing to learn over time.

So, what might be a new path of learning for most organizations since it is vital to developing and sustaining competitive edge?

To my mind E 2.0 has the potential to provide the new framework for social learning in organizations under natural work conditions. People would learn from each other. People would learn from the mistakes made by others. People would become aware of the customer problems and take steps to correct their thinking. The organization as a whole becomes aware, active and thinking.

E2.0 offers other advantages as well. It can seamlessly connect customers, outside experts, suppliers, trainers, mentors and every department of the organization into a cohesive whole all working towards a common purpose.

How to do that would be a creative design process in its own right.

Posted via email from dibyendu's posterous