Upload
vinod-dhone
View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
1/54
What are the challenges of Organization
behavior?
Improving quality and productivity through the use of quality management, reengineeringand other techniques; improving people skills; managing workforce diversity-a key
challenge since organizations are becoming more heterogeneous in terms of gender, race,and ethnicity; responding to globalisation; empowering people by the reshaping of the
relationship between managers and those they are supposedly responsible for managing;
stimulating innovation and change; coping with temporaries as the workforce becomesmore part time and contingency based; dealing with declining employee loyalty; and
improving ethical behaviour.
Managers and employees must become capable of working with people from different
cultures-
~Multinational corporations are developing operations worldwide.
~Companies are developing joint ventures with foreign partners.
~Workers are pursuing job opportunities across national borders.
Organisational Challenges
Home :Organisational ChallengesEspecially in today's environment, employees are the single mostvaluable asset within an organisation. KBC understands that ourclients are facing Organisational Challenges such as shiftingdemographics, knowledge retention, aligning the organisation forsuccess, and employee development.
We are committed to helping clients leverage the full value of theirpeople to achieve NextGen Performance through OrganisationalServices such as:
Leadership and Management Consulting
Strategic Vision and Operating Philosophy Development
Cultural and Behavioural Assessments
Organisational Design/Redesign
Workforce Optimisation
Development of Local Workforce
http://www.kbcat.com/http://www.kbcat.com/Organisational-Challenges/http://www.kbcat.com/Organisational-Challenges/http://www.kbcat.com/Products-and-Services/Organisational-Services/http://www.kbcat.com/Products-and-Services/Organisational-Services/http://www.kbcat.com/Products-and-Services/Organisational-Services/http://www.kbcat.com/http://www.kbcat.com/Organisational-Challenges/http://www.kbcat.com/Products-and-Services/Organisational-Services/http://www.kbcat.com/Products-and-Services/Organisational-Services/8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
2/54
Organisational Alignment and Culture Change
Work Process Optimisation
Abnormal Situation Management
Human Capital Consulting
Job Profile Development/Job Alignment
Effective Training Organisation Establishment/Improvement
Training System, Programme, and Material Development and Delivery
Performance Management System Development and Implementation
Health and Safety Programme Establishment/Improvement
Employee Support Systems
Procedure/Manual Development
KPI Tree Specification and Implementation
Focused Job Aid Development
New challenges to leadership
New challenges to leadership
This brief text offers some thoughts on what is involved in leading
complicated organisations. There are three sections. The first of theseconsiders the changing nature of the leader's task. We suggest that in
the knowledge economy, this applies hard criteria to defined things,and enables emergent direction-setting in those critical areas where
renewal and the less-than-clear task are dominant. We suggest thatwhat is needed is less personal 'leadership' than the creation of whathas been called the 'leaderful' organisation: a structure which has
learned to talk about the key issues.
We have discussed the two 'arms' of management: the specified andthe less-than-clear. We have shown that whilst the specified
component is heavily, roundly managed, the 'unspecified' componentis not. The knowledge economy flows from handling the unspecified.
The specified will be increasingly commoditised. How is one to manage
for issues which have yet to be' defined? Essentially, through a processof recursion. Senior staff have to set a general area - "over there, not
over here", "we shall be a lead innovator; or we shall be a fastfollower" - and the rest of the organisation have to fill in the blanks.
This suggests two tasks. One of these consists of knowledgemanaging, of idea-crystalising dialog, which is needed for blanks to be
filled and general directions to become increasingly strong. The other
is a toolkit of measures which predispose the organisation to self-
http://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#one%23onehttp://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#one%23one8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
3/54
assemble in one way, rather than in the very many others that areopen to it.
Complex structures operate less through formal direction than from
bottom up examples and exploration that adds up to a recognised
trend. "You can tell where the supertanker has been by looking at thewake." Personal advantage through apposite criteria, reward to risktaking of the right kind, the need to justify project plans in terms of
the 'big picture', personnel selection, corporate heroes are all
examples of such a tool kit. Where the overall use of these is coherent,then the organisation will be predisposed to move in the direction
which this coherence suggests. This does not just happen, however,but has to be organised. What will work depends on the details of the
structure in question: on what kinds of people work within it, on thestate of maturity, of the 'specified' or less than clear sources of added
value within it.
The second section notes how plural organisations are and will remain.No one style or process is enough. The third reviews a major survey of
how both leaders and the led perceive leadership, and the various
categories of leader which appear to exist.
The new tasks of leadership
The new tasks of leadership
Most forms of governance place senior managers in a position in whichthey are responsible for carrying out several parallel, quite distinct and
often superficially contradictory roles. They are tasked with keeping
the show on the road, reconciling shareholder, state, customer,employee, supplier and partner interests, creating future potential and
selecting and overseeing people and the human fabric that theyweave. The paper on strategy suggests the complexities which are
innate to organisations of any scale and reach.
Few of these roles are new. Some of these are chiefly concerned withthe intensification of traditional pressures. Others, such as the
professionalisation of the workforce, are new to many industries. The
de-integration of commerce, the inter-linking of what it does with farmore stakeholders and the frequent lack of clarity as to the boundaries
of the firm all challenge some industrial sectors in novel ways. What isclearly new to all forms of leadership - in politics as much as in
commerce - is the shift away from performance as the sole guarantorof success to the need to "get it right".
http://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#two%23twohttp://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#three%23threehttp://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#two%23twohttp://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#three%23three8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
4/54
Chapter One discussed the distinction between 'specified' - clear,defined - activities, and those critical areas of renewal where the key
consists of finding options and clarifying a way of thinking about theissues. "Specified" tasks can be run on traditional grounds, perhaps
with more complex criteria. The role of outsourcing, virtual teams,
partnership and geographical diffusion is relatively easy to managewhere th eissue under development is clear.
What can be achieved is striking. Boeing designed their new 777
aircraft with 230 teams of around 40 people in each of them. Theyworked with three major customers, 500 suppliers and a network that
deployed 1,700 workstations in 12 countries. According to themanagement consultants McKinsey, Boeing was able to manage the
entire process from concept to metal bending in around two-thirds ofthe time that previous experience with linear management systems
had led them to expect.
This said, it is the less specified, socially-intensive steps that realisecomplex options on which the knowledge economy is increasingly
founded. Less specified tasks require completely different forms of
motivation, time scales, criteria and managerial approach.
Managers of the 'unspecified' need to unify the thoughts of people with
a wide range of skills and outlooks. Senior staff (or their delegates)
create a way of thinking that challenges the organisation to achievemore or less loosely-defined conceptual tasks. Research signposts, for
example, can be used to assert that 'by 2005, our industry will havehad to overcome the following hurdles'. These provide a powerful focus
for debate, however valid the statements themselves may or may not
be. Scenario and strategic planning play similar roles, as doaspirational or horizon-scanning statements and speeches.
These general statements need to state what they exclude: is the firmis to be an innovator, then it is not to be a follower or an integrator.
Often, it is important to indicate what kind of innovation or other issue
is at stake. It may mean that the firm is a research-focusedorganisation, or a fisher for ideas in the commercial milieu. Second,
such statements must have a recognisable business model in them.Worthiness is all very well, but - as with the dot.com failed revolution -
the economics must be there. Third, the statements must lead to
action: to better sceening critieria, to the winnowing of responses fromthe organisation, to better future statements. The aim should be to
refine a shared model of how things work, what the firm will excludeand what it will address; and why it will do this.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
5/54
This said, assessments suggest that only around five percent of teamsare currently capable of outperforming individuals who are managed
from above. So-called 'silo management', in which people aremaintained in relative ignorance of the reason why they perform a
task, but are given highly specified work to do, performs at least as
well as creative teams which are assembled for specific projects. Itdoes not innovate or correct its tendencies to make mistakes,
however, and it is limited in what it can do by what a single individualcan know, particularly when embedded in the demands of line
management. It is, perhaps, a style for an established activity within a
stable industry or within labour-intensive industries, and may beparticularly suited for the industrialising nations. It cannot deliver the
goods where huge amounts of knowledge must be marshalled, orcomplex structures mastered as they change and mutate.
As indicated in the introduction, two leadership information loops are
at play. One, assisted by analysis, lays out general, sensible directions.Opinion is taken and the view of how the operating environment works
gradually shifts and adapts to changing awareness and knowledge.Second, a host of tools are used to predispose the organisation to
behave in appropriate ways. Where it is not possible to give orders
(even given that the subject of those orders is clear to senior staff) theorganisation has to be equipped with criteria, culture, people and
processes such thatthe right 'kinds of thing' go forward and theinnapropriate is blocked. Such criteria will vary between business
divisions and activities with the same leadership envelope. How one is
to treat a group of self-motivated innovators is quite different fromappropriate inducements and checks elsewhere.
Setting direction in a multi-cultural environment.
Setting direction in a multi-cultural environment.
The many forces which we have described suggest that firms needs to
spend more time defining how the operating environment operates,
what options this and prospective change may offer, and what can bedone about this. They need to do this internally, and often with
partners, regulators and others. Achieving this is an iterative processthat demands time, skills, resource and high quality attention. It
diverts attention away from maintaining the status quo.
Small companies and large ones have different and sometimescomplementary skills. Figure 1 suggests, however, that small
companies and large both feel themselves weak in respect of
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
6/54
oversight, human skill development and innovation. Further, smallfirms believe themselves to be worse at almost all activities except
order servicing, which is known objectively to be one of the easiestactivities for large firms to automate and outsource. The knowledge
economy is most certainly not going to consist of a web of small,
entrepreneurial companies, but of agile, oversight-deploying firms thathave generated a sufficient surplus (and level of experience) to allow
them time to steer the engines of change.
Figure 1: Self-assessment by small and large Europeancompanies
The last decade have focused firms upon 'getting themselves right'.
They have stripped themselves down for a highly specific set of tasks,and usually applied a common style to all that they do. More recently,
the idea of the 'balanced scorecard' has suggested that whilst a
homogenous approach is sensible, a uni-dimensional focus is not.Firms need to take account of regulators and customers, shareholders
and interest groups, partners and employees. This said, a commonstandard tends to be imposed.
Projects need different styles at different stages in their life cycle. The
initial stage, of thinking through an idea and finding ways to express itto decision taking structures and potential partners, regulators and
others, tends to be long on creative analysis, synthesis andexperiment and short on both hard data and defined goals. Indeed, it
is inventing the goals and finding the data. There follows a second
stage, in which the vague ideas that emerge from the first are
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
7/54
transformed into an implementation plan and into contractualrelationships, and in which significant amounts of money start to be
spent. This stage, in its turn, becomes an implementation project,overseen against a project plan by hard-eyed scrutineers. Finally, the
completed project passes into routine, where further refinement is
applied and productivity is pursued.
Each of these require a different 'culture': differing ways of interacting
and different criteria. The people who thrive in these situations may be
innately different, and certainly need quite different forms of direction.The knowledge economy is, therefore, concerned with a number of
different things:
Developing an oversight of the
pertinent operating environment, such
that a framework exists in which tovalidate potential forms of renewal. In
particular, noting technological andmarket-based 'systems busters' which
may change the nature of the industry.
The US giant company GE haveinstituted the 'DYB' program: that is, in
a creative way, to Destroy YourBusiness (because if you do not,
someone else, somewhere in the global
economy will certainly be planning to
do so.) Developing machinery to reachout to sources of knowledge and
capability so as to put flesh on the
bones of this potential. This might beas much working with an industry
regulator so as to define paths forwardas with internal or external interests.
Developing systems of management which license but rein in
the styles of operation that are
distinctive to the various stages ofimplementation of new projects.
Developing systems that allow abalanced approach to be taken to the
shifting ground in each part of the
portfolio of activities: allowing gradualinnovation in established parts of the
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
8/54
business as well as driving them forbest practice, taking into account
stakeholder concerns and the like.
Developing the habit of working
in networks and partnerships, taking a
realistic view of what can (and cannot)be achieved in frameworks in which
motives are usually spectacularlymixed.
These skills are plainly necessary in order to cope with a fast-
changing, low barrier world. The capacity to deploy them alreadyproves a major source of competitive advantage in many fields: in
entertainment, in science, in venture capital. Membership of aknowledge network is earned, for others will work with a firm when it
has proved the equivalent of good citizenship and has engendered
trust. Members of a network have to contribute to well as extract valuefrom the network. The skills that are involved are often human-
focused, requiring protracted and personal contact. These are noteasily created across impersonal IT systems alone, and knowledge
networks have tended to remain rooted within a context or even
around a physical location, such as Hollywood or the City of London.Indeed, it may be a major source of strength for the industrial world
that this is so, in the face of billions of educated people withconsiderable access to technology.
Steering what might be called 'multi-cultural' companies can be verydifficult. Reward structures need to differ, people need to be givendistinct and often incompatible tasks. A more fundamental problem
can be illustrated by the following consideration.
Most companies have a set of innate tensions, as between imposingcommon disciplines from central control or allowing diversity. Equally,
the firm can respond to external imperatives (often to thedisadvantage of the internal socio-technical balances that have served
in the past) or can focus upon these, sometimes at the expense of
agility, regulatory compliance or customer satisfaction. Figure 2expresses these dilemmas, and identifies both four healthy outcomes
that arises from accepting any one of these. Inset, however, are thesymptoms of uncritical acceptance of any one of these as the sole
guiding principle.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
9/54
Figure 2: Four cultures that arise from solutions to twokey dilemmas, and four set of symptoms of pathologies
that may arise.
This said, it is far easier to manage for one thing than for many. Asimple imperative - to cut costs and never mind any other
considerations - is easy to propagate and clear for individuals tointerpret. Mixed messages are far harder to handle. The figure shows
some gradients in which managerial signals of increasing intensity arefed to the organisation, seeking faster reaction from it. The gradients
express the equal ease with which single or mixed messages can be
expected to have their affect.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
10/54
Figure 3: Mixed imperatives creates contours of equallyeasy organisational response
A firms that finds itself at location A may wish to move to location B. A
light push 'up' and a strong push to the 'left' would appear appropriateto a perceptive management. Unfortunately, due to the tendency of
the corporate social system to simplify issues and to take them out ofcontext, the locus will tend to follow the contour gradient, ending at,
perhaps, C. Change (often on many more than two dimensions)therefore requires active steering, not a single push.
Worse, an activity in the upper right (an advertising project team,
perhaps) would have a quite different innate 'culture' from any of theother quadrants. The measures that steered from A to B would have a
pathological affect upon it, taking it into the unfortunate areas on
Figure 2!
Management is, therefore, a matter of deploying experience in
diversity, and recipes which have this or that style (enthusiasm, the
hard line, coaching.) is bound to be inadequate in some area or other.The next section shows how idiosyncratic such issues of local 'fit' can
be.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
11/54
Styles of leadership: a UK survey
Styles of leadership: a UK survey
McKinsey have, for many years, worked with chief executive officers. A
survey of American CEOs gave their prescriptions for success. Thesewere remarkably uniform: to set clear domains of activity, to create
personal accountability for equally clear targets within these, tominimise central interference and to drive the firm for low cost and
high share of the market. CEOs seemed to feel that change was best
created bottom-up, that they would know a good thing when they sawit and that if they gave conceptual direction, everyone else would stop
thinking. Many readers will recognise the style. It appears to suit the'silo management' style, described above, but does not seem likely to
create overall managed migration.
CEOs are, like the rest of humanity, susceptible to fashion. McKinsey'sreport documented the fashion of the 1985-95 period. Many business
leaders are wondering what to do now for an encore and how to cope
in a world of knowledge-intensive activity, having already pared costs,often jettisoned the company's higher brain functions and focused
upon doing one thing very well. As a whole, the US appears to besolving the problem, but often by large companies drawing upon small
start-ups for their ideas. This may well be a satisfactory solution: only
time will tell.
There are, of course, other styles of leadership, many of themcurrently out of fashion, although widely practised. The IndustrialSociety is Europe's largest training group. It has completed a study on
the concomitants of leadership, drawing on a sample of around a
thousand UK managers and those managed. Such studies may becriticised in two ways: they measure what people believe is effective,
not what yields whatever results one deems to measure efficacy; andthey tend to notice whatever the experimenters set them up to note.
The book has another weakness, which is that it discounts 'implicit'
leadership, in which the goals of the organisation are embedded incriteria, targets and procedures. The focus is placed firmly upon
personal, rather than impersonal, interaction.
The Industrial Society's study does, however, contain an illuminatingreview of the literature on leaders and followers, who are not always
the same thing as junior and senior staff. Indeed, around four-fifths ofthe examples of leadership that were cited involved people who were
not in positions of authority. A large portion of those who were in
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
12/54
positions of formal authority indicated that their chief frustration wastheir inability to induce people to do what they wanted, leading to
friction and HR problems. The literature review points up a significantdisparity between the emotional drivers which take many people to
power and the human skills required of the job, notably in today's
environment. Previous samples of managers - both from the US andthe UK - have been assessed in ways which isolate the chief emotional
components that drive their career goals. An overwhelming elementwithin an equally large fraction of these shows a strong desire for
personal dominance. Unless skilfully masked, however, this desire is
the exact antithesis of what is needed for efficacy.
We have already noted that management may be thought to exist
along an axis which has two extremes, neither of which is incorrect butboth of which are fitted to circumstance. At one end of this axis,
managers encourage people to pool what they know in order to clarify
issues and create as yet unknown possibilities. At the other end,managers define the problem and the tasks needed to solve it, and
allocate these tasks as they see fit. The first style is suited to thosetasks in which virtually everything is unclear: the terrain of knowledge
management. Its products require analysis and clarity. It requires
team play, spontaneity, recursive clarification; it places great stressupon an overarching sense of direction, of process, of passing the
baton. The second style is best suited to line management or projectmanagement, in which virtually everything is clear and where the
problems are essentially operations. This requires compliance,
oversight, accountability, formal targets, formal criteria, formalassessment; it needs diligence and application from a compliant
workforce who are prepared to take orders and to operate in 'silos'.
The 'liberating leader' is, perhaps, a title for the style which isappropriate to the synthesising, knowledge-managing end of the
managerial axis. Analysis of the elements of this showed up ninecontributory sub-styles.
Protector: promotes individual self-
esteem, stands up for others' interests,minimises friction.
Tutor: encourages forward-lookinghuman development, treats mistakes as
opportunities to learn.
Mentor: defines a role for theindividual, but shows consistency and
integrity in a personal role.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
13/54
Teamplayer: makes explicitstatements about targets, progress,
performance.
Director: decision-taking order-giver,
who inspires fear but who enforces
performance. Listener: notes, works around
individual capacities and weaknesses.
Innovator: encourages new
approaches, communicates oversight and
general purpose.
Delegator: creates an environment in
which sensible, local risk-taking appearspossible.
Networker: keeps in touch with the
wider world, maintains the context of ateam.
Of these, the "Protector" was by far the most powerful explanatoryvariable characteristic of leadership. The others are organised in
descending order. "Director" and those below it explained only around
3% of the variance in the sample: they were essentially - perhapsworryingly - trivial components.
The upper part of this continuum is chiefly focused upon sorting out
people, while the lower part is, perhaps, more concerned with sorting
ideas. The explanations that accompanied this investigation are, forthe most part, highly people-oriented: no interviewee seems to haveset much store by management as the custodians of financial probity
or safety. External influences - customers, the environment, regulators
- are allocated to the least powerful component, that of the"Networker". Readers can make up their own minds as to whether this
reflects perceived sources of weakness in management rather than ananalysis of the overall sources of excellent management.
An attempt to carry out such an analysis produced the following as the
key concomitants of leadership:
Communicating an inspirational
view of the future.
Supporting other people.
Promoting understanding.
Understanding before makingjudgments.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
14/54
Valuing individual differences.
Promoting a sense of direction.
Promoting the self-esteem ofothers.
The views of the sample were assessed by age, gender, industry andjob level. There was no obvious age-related trend, except that theyoung valued "Director" and "Tutor" while older people tended to
prefer the styles concerned with networks, knowledge and inclusivity.
Gender differences were stark: 93% of the variance was explained bywomen preferring a participative style (Protector, Innovator,
Networker, Listener) while men rejected this approach.
Industrial differences were revealing. Manufacturing and utilities
sectors preferred the order-giving "Director" style, although utilities
supplemented this with affection for "Teamplayer". Technologists, bycontrast, disliked "Director", but liked "Mentor": evidence of preference
for a closed little world, set apart from the rest? Public-sector andgovernment sources focused on "Delegator", which retailing, by
contrast, found unacceptable, but without having much of an
alternative to offer. Professionals hated both "Director" and"Teamplayer", but vaguely enjoyed "Delegator". Those in training and
education, surprisingly, were negative about "Listener" but the mostpositive of all about "Director" and "Mentor". The finance industry did
not like any managerial style at all.
Job roles showed similar differences. Nobody admitted to liking the"Director" style. Senior managers disliked "Mentor", but saw
"Innovator" and "Networker" as their preferred style. Lesser managers
showed the same, but less pronounced, pattern. Project managerswere also unhappy with "Mentor", but team leaders, by contrast, were
highly positive about it, as were administrators. These last alsoadvocated "Innovator" and "Delegator". Technical staff hated all styles,
but hated "Mentor" the most (which fits unhappily with this as thepreferred style of the technology-based industries!) Sales people very
much approved of "Innovator" and very much disliked "Delegator", the
strongest measures in the survey. Personnel were equivocal about allstyles, and professionals, as indicated earlier, chiefly negative.
Conclusions
What does this tell us? Chiefly, that if human society is the most
complex grouping in the known universe, then the management of
parts of this must be about many solutions and many syndromes, not
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
15/54
one. We have tended to bend people to fit the limits of our owncapacities, as re-engineering tended to bend companies to fit into the
limitations of information technology. Knowledge-managing companieswill, however, need to find their innate skills and capabilities,
deploying these in ways which cannot be predicted and which cannot
be constrained by belt-and-braces limits. The military, confronted withthe need to liberate local choice while avoiding rogue operators, have
tended to adopt a series of concentric domains. In the subsidiarycentre, the infantryman can make his own choices. He knows exactly
when to delegate upwards, however, and has been trained to do so.
New command structures drop into place as new conditions aredetected and new issues raised. We suspect that this 'fractal'
management may be the style of the future. It is very far from the 'setthe criteria and push for the results' model of the past decade.
The figure states the obvious. The two most important axes that define
demands on leadership are, first, the scale of the activity and second,
the degree to which the work undertaken is safely specified orworryingly unspecified. Small businesses addressing an unchanging
world have a very different set of needs from large activities for whichthe world is constantly changing, and within which success stems from
the implementation adaptive responses the the knowledge economy.
Grand prescriptions (Excellence! Seven Great Secrets!) from theAirport Bookshelf School of Management miss this essential point.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
16/54
New challenges to leadership
New challenges to leadership
This brief text offers some thoughts on what is involved in leading
complicated organisations. There are three sections. The first of theseconsiders the changing nature of the leader's task. We suggest that in
the knowledge economy, this applies hard criteria to defined things,and enables emergent direction-setting in those critical areas where
renewal and the less-than-clear task are dominant. We suggest thatwhat is needed is less personal 'leadership' than the creation of what
has been called the 'leaderful' organisation: a structure which has
learned to talk about the key issues.
We have discussed the two 'arms' of management: the specified and
the less-than-clear. We have shown that whilst the specifiedcomponent is heavily, roundly managed, the 'unspecified' component
is not. The knowledge economy flows from handling the unspecified.
The specified will be increasingly commoditised. How is one to managefor issues which have yet to be' defined? Essentially, through a process
of recursion. Senior staff have to set a general area - "over there, notover here", "we shall be a lead innovator; or we shall be a fast
follower" - and the rest of the organisation have to fill in the blanks.
This suggests two tasks. One of these consists of knowledgemanaging, of idea-crystalising dialog, which is needed for blanks to be
filled and general directions to become increasingly strong. The other
is a toolkit of measures which predispose the organisation to self-assemble in one way, rather than in the very many others that are
open to it.
Complex structures operate less through formal direction than from
bottom up examples and exploration that adds up to a recognised
trend. "You can tell where the supertanker has been by looking at thewake." Personal advantage through apposite criteria, reward to risk
taking of the right kind, the need to justify project plans in terms ofthe 'big picture', personnel selection, corporate heroes are all
examples of such a tool kit. Where the overall use of these is coherent,then the organisation will be predisposed to move in the direction
which this coherence suggests. This does not just happen, however,
but has to be organised. What will work depends on the details of thestructure in question: on what kinds of people work within it, on the
state of maturity, of the 'specified' or less than clear sources of addedvalue within it.
http://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#one%23onehttp://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#one%23one8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
17/54
The second section notes how plural organisations are and will remain.No one style or process is enough. The third reviews a major survey of
how both leaders and the led perceive leadership, and the variouscategories of leader which appear to exist.
The new tasks of leadership
The new tasks of leadership
Most forms of governance place senior managers in a position in whichthey are responsible for carrying out several parallel, quite distinct and
often superficially contradictory roles. They are tasked with keepingthe show on the road, reconciling shareholder, state, customer,
employee, supplier and partner interests, creating future potential and
selecting and overseeing people and the human fabric that theyweave. The paper on strategy suggests the complexities which are
innate to organisations of any scale and reach.
Few of these roles are new. Some of these are chiefly concerned withthe intensification of traditional pressures. Others, such as the
professionalisation of the workforce, are new to many industries. Thede-integration of commerce, the inter-linking of what it does with far
more stakeholders and the frequent lack of clarity as to the boundaries
of the firm all challenge some industrial sectors in novel ways. What isclearly new to all forms of leadership - in politics as much as in
commerce - is the shift away from performance as the sole guarantor
of success to the need to "get it right".
Chapter One discussed the distinction between 'specified' - clear,
defined - activities, and those critical areas of renewal where the keyconsists of finding options and clarifying a way of thinking about the
issues. "Specified" tasks can be run on traditional grounds, perhapswith more complex criteria. The role of outsourcing, virtual teams,
partnership and geographical diffusion is relatively easy to manage
where th eissue under development is clear.
What can be achieved is striking. Boeing designed their new 777
aircraft with 230 teams of around 40 people in each of them. They
worked with three major customers, 500 suppliers and a network thatdeployed 1,700 workstations in 12 countries. According to the
management consultants McKinsey, Boeing was able to manage theentire process from concept to metal bending in around two-thirds of
the time that previous experience with linear management systemshad led them to expect.
http://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#two%23twohttp://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#three%23threehttp://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#two%23twohttp://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#three%23three8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
18/54
This said, it is the less specified, socially-intensive steps that realisecomplex options on which the knowledge economy is increasingly
founded. Less specified tasks require completely different forms ofmotivation, time scales, criteria and managerial approach.
Managers of the 'unspecified' need to unify the thoughts of people witha wide range of skills and outlooks. Senior staff (or their delegates)create a way of thinking that challenges the organisation to achieve
more or less loosely-defined conceptual tasks. Research signposts, for
example, can be used to assert that 'by 2005, our industry will havehad to overcome the following hurdles'. These provide a powerful focus
for debate, however valid the statements themselves may or may notbe. Scenario and strategic planning play similar roles, as do
aspirational or horizon-scanning statements and speeches.
These general statements need to state what they exclude: is the firmis to be an innovator, then it is not to be a follower or an integrator.
Often, it is important to indicate what kind of innovation or other issueis at stake. It may mean that the firm is a research-focused
organisation, or a fisher for ideas in the commercial milieu. Second,
such statements must have a recognisable business model in them.Worthiness is all very well, but - as with the dot.com failed revolution -
the economics must be there. Third, the statements must lead toaction: to better sceening critieria, to the winnowing of responses from
the organisation, to better future statements. The aim should be to
refine a shared model of how things work, what the firm will exclude
and what it will address; and why it will do this.
This said, assessments suggest that only around five percent of teams
are currently capable of outperforming individuals who are managedfrom above. So-called 'silo management', in which people are
maintained in relative ignorance of the reason why they perform atask, but are given highly specified work to do, performs at least as
well as creative teams which are assembled for specific projects. Itdoes not innovate or correct its tendencies to make mistakes,
however, and it is limited in what it can do by what a single individual
can know, particularly when embedded in the demands of linemanagement. It is, perhaps, a style for an established activity within a
stable industry or within labour-intensive industries, and may beparticularly suited for the industrialising nations. It cannot deliver the
goods where huge amounts of knowledge must be marshalled, or
complex structures mastered as they change and mutate.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
19/54
As indicated in the introduction, two leadership information loops areat play. One, assisted by analysis, lays out general, sensible directions.
Opinion is taken and the view of how the operating environment worksgradually shifts and adapts to changing awareness and knowledge.
Second, a host of tools are used to predispose the organisation to
behave in appropriate ways. Where it is not possible to give orders(even given that the subject of those orders is clear to senior staff) the
organisation has to be equipped with criteria, culture, people andprocesses such thatthe right 'kinds of thing' go forward and th
einnapropriate is blocked. Such criteria will vary between business
divisions and activities with the same leadership envelope. How one isto treat a group of self-motivated innovators is quite different from
appropriate inducements and checks elsewhere.
Setting direction in a multi-cultural environment.
Setting direction in a multi-cultural environment.
The many forces which we have described suggest that firms needs to
spend more time defining how the operating environment operates,what options this and prospective change may offer, and what can be
done about this. They need to do this internally, and often withpartners, regulators and others. Achieving this is an iterative process
that demands time, skills, resource and high quality attention. It
diverts attention away from maintaining the status quo.
Small companies and large ones have different and sometimescomplementary skills. Figure 1 suggests, however, that smallcompanies and large both feel themselves weak in respect of
oversight, human skill development and innovation. Further, small
firms believe themselves to be worse at almost all activities exceptorder servicing, which is known objectively to be one of the easiest
activities for large firms to automate and outsource. The knowledgeeconomy is most certainly not going to consist of a web of small,
entrepreneurial companies, but of agile, oversight-deploying firms that
have generated a sufficient surplus (and level of experience) to allowthem time to steer the engines of change.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
20/54
Figure 1: Self-assessment by small and large Europeancompanies
The last decade have focused firms upon 'getting themselves right'.
They have stripped themselves down for a highly specific set of tasks,and usually applied a common style to all that they do. More recently,
the idea of the 'balanced scorecard' has suggested that whilst a
homogenous approach is sensible, a uni-dimensional focus is not.Firms need to take account of regulators and customers, shareholders
and interest groups, partners and employees. This said, a commonstandard tends to be imposed.
Projects need different styles at different stages in their life cycle. The
initial stage, of thinking through an idea and finding ways to express itto decision taking structures and potential partners, regulators and
others, tends to be long on creative analysis, synthesis and
experiment and short on both hard data and defined goals. Indeed, itis inventing the goals and finding the data. There follows a second
stage, in which the vague ideas that emerge from the first aretransformed into an implementation plan and into contractual
relationships, and in which significant amounts of money start to bespent. This stage, in its turn, becomes an implementation project,
overseen against a project plan by hard-eyed scrutineers. Finally, the
completed project passes into routine, where further refinement isapplied and productivity is pursued.
Each of these require a different 'culture': differing ways of interacting
and different criteria. The people who thrive in these situations may be
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
21/54
innately different, and certainly need quite different forms of direction.The knowledge economy is, therefore, concerned with a number of
different things:
Developing an oversight of the
pertinent operating environment, suchthat a framework exists in which tovalidate potential forms of renewal. In
particular, noting technological and
market-based 'systems busters' whichmay change the nature of the industry.
The US giant company GE haveinstituted the 'DYB' program: that is, in
a creative way, to Destroy YourBusiness (because if you do not,
someone else, somewhere in the global
economy will certainly be planning todo so.)
Developing machinery to reachout to sources of knowledge and
capability so as to put flesh on the
bones of this potential. This might beas much working with an industry
regulator so as to define paths forwardas with internal or external interests.
Developing systems of
management which license but rein inthe styles of operation that are
distinctive to the various stages ofimplementation of new projects.
Developing systems that allow a
balanced approach to be taken to theshifting ground in each part of the
portfolio of activities: allowing gradualinnovation in established parts of the
business as well as driving them for
best practice, taking into accountstakeholder concerns and the like.
Developing the habit of workingin networks and partnerships, taking a
realistic view of what can (and cannot)be achieved in frameworks in which
motives are usually spectacularly
mixed.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
22/54
These skills are plainly necessary in order to cope with a fast-changing, low barrier world. The capacity to deploy them already
proves a major source of competitive advantage in many fields: inentertainment, in science, in venture capital. Membership of a
knowledge network is earned, for others will work with a firm when it
has proved the equivalent of good citizenship and has engenderedtrust. Members of a network have to contribute to well as extract value
from the network. The skills that are involved are often human-focused, requiring protracted and personal contact. These are not
easily created across impersonal IT systems alone, and knowledge
networks have tended to remain rooted within a context or evenaround a physical location, such as Hollywood or the City of London.
Indeed, it may be a major source of strength for the industrial worldthat this is so, in the face of billions of educated people with
considerable access to technology.
Steering what might be called 'multi-cultural' companies can be verydifficult. Reward structures need to differ, people need to be given
distinct and often incompatible tasks. A more fundamental problemcan be illustrated by the following consideration.
Most companies have a set of innate tensions, as between imposing
common disciplines from central control or allowing diversity. Equally,the firm can respond to external imperatives (often to the
disadvantage of the internal socio-technical balances that have served
in the past) or can focus upon these, sometimes at the expense of
agility, regulatory compliance or customer satisfaction. Figure 2expresses these dilemmas, and identifies both four healthy outcomesthat arises from accepting any one of these. Inset, however, are the
symptoms of uncritical acceptance of any one of these as the sole
guiding principle.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
23/54
Figure 2: Four cultures that arise from solutions to twokey dilemmas, and four set of symptoms of pathologies
that may arise.
This said, it is far easier to manage for one thing than for many. Asimple imperative - to cut costs and never mind any other
considerations - is easy to propagate and clear for individuals tointerpret. Mixed messages are far harder to handle. The figure shows
some gradients in which managerial signals of increasing intensity arefed to the organisation, seeking faster reaction from it. The gradients
express the equal ease with which single or mixed messages can be
expected to have their affect.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
24/54
Figure 3: Mixed imperatives creates contours of equallyeasy organisational response
A firms that finds itself at location A may wish to move to location B. A
light push 'up' and a strong push to the 'left' would appear appropriateto a perceptive management. Unfortunately, due to the tendency of
the corporate social system to simplify issues and to take them out ofcontext, the locus will tend to follow the contour gradient, ending at,
perhaps, C. Change (often on many more than two dimensions)therefore requires active steering, not a single push.
Worse, an activity in the upper right (an advertising project team,
perhaps) would have a quite different innate 'culture' from any of theother quadrants. The measures that steered from A to B would have a
pathological affect upon it, taking it into the unfortunate areas on
Figure 2!
Management is, therefore, a matter of deploying experience in
diversity, and recipes which have this or that style (enthusiasm, the
hard line, coaching.) is bound to be inadequate in some area or other.The next section shows how idiosyncratic such issues of local 'fit' can
be.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
25/54
Styles of leadership: a UK survey
Styles of leadership: a UK survey
McKinsey have, for many years, worked with chief executive officers. A
survey of American CEOs gave their prescriptions for success. Thesewere remarkably uniform: to set clear domains of activity, to create
personal accountability for equally clear targets within these, tominimise central interference and to drive the firm for low cost and
high share of the market. CEOs seemed to feel that change was best
created bottom-up, that they would know a good thing when they sawit and that if they gave conceptual direction, everyone else would stop
thinking. Many readers will recognise the style. It appears to suit the'silo management' style, described above, but does not seem likely to
create overall managed migration.
CEOs are, like the rest of humanity, susceptible to fashion. McKinsey'sreport documented the fashion of the 1985-95 period. Many business
leaders are wondering what to do now for an encore and how to cope
in a world of knowledge-intensive activity, having already pared costs,often jettisoned the company's higher brain functions and focused
upon doing one thing very well. As a whole, the US appears to besolving the problem, but often by large companies drawing upon small
start-ups for their ideas. This may well be a satisfactory solution: only
time will tell.
There are, of course, other styles of leadership, many of themcurrently out of fashion, although widely practised. The IndustrialSociety is Europe's largest training group. It has completed a study on
the concomitants of leadership, drawing on a sample of around a
thousand UK managers and those managed. Such studies may becriticised in two ways: they measure what people believe is effective,
not what yields whatever results one deems to measure efficacy; andthey tend to notice whatever the experimenters set them up to note.
The book has another weakness, which is that it discounts 'implicit'
leadership, in which the goals of the organisation are embedded incriteria, targets and procedures. The focus is placed firmly upon
personal, rather than impersonal, interaction.
The Industrial Society's study does, however, contain an illuminatingreview of the literature on leaders and followers, who are not always
the same thing as junior and senior staff. Indeed, around four-fifths ofthe examples of leadership that were cited involved people who were
not in positions of authority. A large portion of those who were in
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
26/54
positions of formal authority indicated that their chief frustration wastheir inability to induce people to do what they wanted, leading to
friction and HR problems. The literature review points up a significantdisparity between the emotional drivers which take many people to
power and the human skills required of the job, notably in today's
environment. Previous samples of managers - both from the US andthe UK - have been assessed in ways which isolate the chief emotional
components that drive their career goals. An overwhelming elementwithin an equally large fraction of these shows a strong desire for
personal dominance. Unless skilfully masked, however, this desire is
the exact antithesis of what is needed for efficacy.
We have already noted that management may be thought to exist
along an axis which has two extremes, neither of which is incorrect butboth of which are fitted to circumstance. At one end of this axis,
managers encourage people to pool what they know in order to clarify
issues and create as yet unknown possibilities. At the other end,managers define the problem and the tasks needed to solve it, and
allocate these tasks as they see fit. The first style is suited to thosetasks in which virtually everything is unclear: the terrain of knowledge
management. Its products require analysis and clarity. It requires
team play, spontaneity, recursive clarification; it places great stressupon an overarching sense of direction, of process, of passing the
baton. The second style is best suited to line management or projectmanagement, in which virtually everything is clear and where the
problems are essentially operations. This requires compliance,
oversight, accountability, formal targets, formal criteria, formalassessment; it needs diligence and application from a compliant
workforce who are prepared to take orders and to operate in 'silos'.
The 'liberating leader' is, perhaps, a title for the style which isappropriate to the synthesising, knowledge-managing end of the
managerial axis. Analysis of the elements of this showed up ninecontributory sub-styles.
Protector: promotes individual self-
esteem, stands up for others' interests,minimises friction.
Tutor: encourages forward-lookinghuman development, treats mistakes as
opportunities to learn.
Mentor: defines a role for theindividual, but shows consistency and
integrity in a personal role.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
27/54
Teamplayer: makes explicitstatements about targets, progress,
performance.
Director: decision-taking order-giver,
who inspires fear but who enforces
performance. Listener: notes, works around
individual capacities and weaknesses.
Innovator: encourages new
approaches, communicates oversight and
general purpose.
Delegator: creates an environment in
which sensible, local risk-taking appearspossible.
Networker: keeps in touch with the
wider world, maintains the context of ateam.
Of these, the "Protector" was by far the most powerful explanatoryvariable characteristic of leadership. The others are organised in
descending order. "Director" and those below it explained only around
3% of the variance in the sample: they were essentially - perhapsworryingly - trivial components.
The upper part of this continuum is chiefly focused upon sorting out
people, while the lower part is, perhaps, more concerned with sorting
ideas. The explanations that accompanied this investigation are, forthe most part, highly people-oriented: no interviewee seems to haveset much store by management as the custodians of financial probity
or safety. External influences - customers, the environment, regulators
- are allocated to the least powerful component, that of the"Networker". Readers can make up their own minds as to whether this
reflects perceived sources of weakness in management rather than ananalysis of the overall sources of excellent management.
An attempt to carry out such an analysis produced the following as the
key concomitants of leadership:
Communicating an inspirational
view of the future.
Supporting other people.
Promoting understanding.
Understanding before makingjudgments.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
28/54
Valuing individual differences.
Promoting a sense of direction.
Promoting the self-esteem ofothers.
The views of the sample were assessed by age, gender, industry andjob level. There was no obvious age-related trend, except that theyoung valued "Director" and "Tutor" while older people tended to
prefer the styles concerned with networks, knowledge and inclusivity.
Gender differences were stark: 93% of the variance was explained bywomen preferring a participative style (Protector, Innovator,
Networker, Listener) while men rejected this approach.
Industrial differences were revealing. Manufacturing and utilities
sectors preferred the order-giving "Director" style, although utilities
supplemented this with affection for "Teamplayer". Technologists, bycontrast, disliked "Director", but liked "Mentor": evidence of preference
for a closed little world, set apart from the rest? Public-sector andgovernment sources focused on "Delegator", which retailing, by
contrast, found unacceptable, but without having much of an
alternative to offer. Professionals hated both "Director" and"Teamplayer", but vaguely enjoyed "Delegator". Those in training and
education, surprisingly, were negative about "Listener" but the mostpositive of all about "Director" and "Mentor". The finance industry did
not like any managerial style at all.
Job roles showed similar differences. Nobody admitted to liking the"Director" style. Senior managers disliked "Mentor", but saw
"Innovator" and "Networker" as their preferred style. Lesser managers
showed the same, but less pronounced, pattern. Project managerswere also unhappy with "Mentor", but team leaders, by contrast, were
highly positive about it, as were administrators. These last alsoadvocated "Innovator" and "Delegator". Technical staff hated all styles,
but hated "Mentor" the most (which fits unhappily with this as thepreferred style of the technology-based industries!) Sales people very
much approved of "Innovator" and very much disliked "Delegator", the
strongest measures in the survey. Personnel were equivocal about allstyles, and professionals, as indicated earlier, chiefly negative.
Conclusions
What does this tell us? Chiefly, that if human society is the most
complex grouping in the known universe, then the management of
parts of this must be about many solutions and many syndromes, not
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
29/54
one. We have tended to bend people to fit the limits of our owncapacities, as re-engineering tended to bend companies to fit into the
limitations of information technology. Knowledge-managing companieswill, however, need to find their innate skills and capabilities,
deploying these in ways which cannot be predicted and which cannot
be constrained by belt-and-braces limits. The military, confronted withthe need to liberate local choice while avoiding rogue operators, have
tended to adopt a series of concentric domains. In the subsidiarycentre, the infantryman can make his own choices. He knows exactly
when to delegate upwards, however, and has been trained to do so.
New command structures drop into place as new conditions aredetected and new issues raised. We suspect that this 'fractal'
management may be the style of the future. It is very far from the 'setthe criteria and push for the results' model of the past decade.
The figure states the obvious. The two most important axes that define
demands on leadership are, first, the scale of the activity and second,
the degree to which the work undertaken is safely specified orworryingly unspecified. Small businesses addressing an unchanging
world have a very different set of needs from large activities for whichthe world is constantly changing, and within which success stems from
the implementation adaptive responses the the knowledge economy.
Grand prescriptions (Excellence! Seven Great Secrets!) from theAirport Bookshelf School of Management miss this essential point.
New challenges to leadership
This brief text offers some thoughts on what is involved in leading
complicated organisations. There are three sections. The first of these
http://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#one%23onehttp://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#one%23one8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
30/54
considers the changing nature of the leader's task. We suggest that inthe knowledge economy, this applies hard criteria to defined things,
and enables emergent direction-setting in those critical areas whererenewal and the less-than-clear task are dominant. We suggest that
what is needed is less personal 'leadership' than the creation of what
has been called the 'leaderful' organisation: a structure which haslearned to talk about the key issues.
We have discussed the two 'arms' of management: the specified and
the less-than-clear. We have shown that whilst the specifiedcomponent is heavily, roundly managed, the 'unspecified' component
is not. The knowledge economy flows from handling the unspecified.The specified will be increasingly commoditised. How is one to manage
for issues which have yet to be' defined? Essentially, through a processof recursion. Senior staff have to set a general area - "over there, not
over here", "we shall be a lead innovator; or we shall be a fast
follower" - and the rest of the organisation have to fill in the blanks.This suggests two tasks. One of these consists of knowledge
managing, of idea-crystalising dialog, which is needed for blanks to befilled and general directions to become increasingly strong. The other
is a toolkit of measures which predispose the organisation to self-
assemble in one way, rather than in the very many others that areopen to it.
Complex structures operate less through formal direction than from
bottom up examples and exploration that adds up to a recognised
trend. "You can tell where the supertanker has been by looking at thewake." Personal advantage through apposite criteria, reward to risktaking of the right kind, the need to justify project plans in terms of
the 'big picture', personnel selection, corporate heroes are all
examples of such a tool kit. Where the overall use of these is coherent,then the organisation will be predisposed to move in the direction
which this coherence suggests. This does not just happen, however,but has to be organised. What will work depends on the details of the
structure in question: on what kinds of people work within it, on thestate of maturity, of the 'specified' or less than clear sources of added
value within it.
The second section notes how plural organisations are and will remain.No one style or process is enough. The third reviews a major survey of
how both leaders and the led perceive leadership, and the various
categories of leader which appear to exist.
http://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#two%23twohttp://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#three%23threehttp://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#two%23twohttp://www.chforum.org/methods/xc415.shtml#three%23three8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
31/54
The new tasks of leadership
Most forms of governance place senior managers in a position in which
they are responsible for carrying out several parallel, quite distinct andoften superficially contradictory roles. They are tasked with keeping
the show on the road, reconciling shareholder, state, customer,employee, supplier and partner interests, creating future potential andselecting and overseeing people and the human fabric that they
weave. The paper on strategy suggests the complexities which areinnate to organisations of any scale and reach.
Few of these roles are new. Some of these are chiefly concerned with
the intensification of traditional pressures. Others, such as theprofessionalisation of the workforce, are new to many industries. The
de-integration of commerce, the inter-linking of what it does with far
more stakeholders and the frequent lack of clarity as to the boundariesof the firm all challenge some industrial sectors in novel ways. What is
clearly new to all forms of leadership - in politics as much as incommerce - is the shift away from performance as the sole guarantor
of success to the need to "get it right".
Chapter One discussed the distinction between 'specified' - clear,defined - activities, and those critical areas of renewal where the key
consists of finding options and clarifying a way of thinking about theissues. "Specified" tasks can be run on traditional grounds, perhaps
with more complex criteria. The role of outsourcing, virtual teams,
partnership and geographical diffusion is relatively easy to managewhere th eissue under development is clear.
What can be achieved is striking. Boeing designed their new 777
aircraft with 230 teams of around 40 people in each of them. Theyworked with three major customers, 500 suppliers and a network that
deployed 1,700 workstations in 12 countries. According to themanagement consultants McKinsey, Boeing was able to manage the
entire process from concept to metal bending in around two-thirds ofthe time that previous experience with linear management systems
had led them to expect.
This said, it is the less specified, socially-intensive steps that realisecomplex options on which the knowledge economy is increasingly
founded. Less specified tasks require completely different forms of
motivation, time scales, criteria and managerial approach.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
32/54
Managers of the 'unspecified' need to unify the thoughts of people witha wide range of skills and outlooks. Senior staff (or their delegates)
create a way of thinking that challenges the organisation to achievemore or less loosely-defined conceptual tasks. Research signposts, for
example, can be used to assert that 'by 2005, our industry will have
had to overcome the following hurdles'. These provide a powerful focusfor debate, however valid the statements themselves may or may not
be. Scenario and strategic planning play similar roles, as doaspirational or horizon-scanning statements and speeches.
These general statements need to state what they exclude: is the firm
is to be an innovator, then it is not to be a follower or an integrator.Often, it is important to indicate what kind of innovation or other issue
is at stake. It may mean that the firm is a research-focusedorganisation, or a fisher for ideas in the commercial milieu. Second,
such statements must have a recognisable business model in them.
Worthiness is all very well, but - as with the dot.com failed revolution -the economics must be there. Third, the statements must lead to
action: to better sceening critieria, to the winnowing of responses fromthe organisation, to better future statements. The aim should be to
refine a shared model of how things work, what the firm will exclude
and what it will address; and why it will do this.
This said, assessments suggest that only around five percent of teams
are currently capable of outperforming individuals who are managed
from above. So-called 'silo management', in which people are
maintained in relative ignorance of the reason why they perform atask, but are given highly specified work to do, performs at least aswell as creative teams which are assembled for specific projects. It
does not innovate or correct its tendencies to make mistakes,
however, and it is limited in what it can do by what a single individualcan know, particularly when embedded in the demands of line
management. It is, perhaps, a style for an established activity within astable industry or within labour-intensive industries, and may be
particularly suited for the industrialising nations. It cannot deliver thegoods where huge amounts of knowledge must be marshalled, or
complex structures mastered as they change and mutate.
As indicated in the introduction, two leadership information loops areat play. One, assisted by analysis, lays out general, sensible directions.
Opinion is taken and the view of how the operating environment works
gradually shifts and adapts to changing awareness and knowledge.Second, a host of tools are used to predispose the organisation to
behave in appropriate ways. Where it is not possible to give orders
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
33/54
(even given that the subject of those orders is clear to senior staff) theorganisation has to be equipped with criteria, culture, people and
processes such thatthe right 'kinds of thing' go forward and theinnapropriate is blocked. Such criteria will vary between business
divisions and activities with the same leadership envelope. How one is
to treat a group of self-motivated innovators is quite different fromappropriate inducements and checks elsewhere.
Setting direction in a multi-cultural environment.
The many forces which we have described suggest that firms needs tospend more time defining how the operating environment operates,
what options this and prospective change may offer, and what can bedone about this. They need to do this internally, and often with
partners, regulators and others. Achieving this is an iterative process
that demands time, skills, resource and high quality attention. Itdiverts attention away from maintaining the status quo.
Small companies and large ones have different and sometimescomplementary skills. Figure 1 suggests, however, that small
companies and large both feel themselves weak in respect of
oversight, human skill development and innovation. Further, smallfirms believe themselves to be worse at almost all activities except
order servicing, which is known objectively to be one of the easiestactivities for large firms to automate and outsource. The knowledge
economy is most certainly not going to consist of a web of small,
entrepreneurial companies, but of agile, oversight-deploying firms thathave generated a sufficient surplus (and level of experience) to allow
them time to steer the engines of change.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
34/54
Figure 1: Self-assessment by small and large Europeancompanies
The last decade have focused firms upon 'getting themselves right'.
They have stripped themselves down for a highly specific set of tasks,and usually applied a common style to all that they do. More recently,
the idea of the 'balanced scorecard' has suggested that whilst a
homogenous approach is sensible, a uni-dimensional focus is not.Firms need to take account of regulators and customers, shareholders
and interest groups, partners and employees. This said, a commonstandard tends to be imposed.
Projects need different styles at different stages in their life cycle. The
initial stage, of thinking through an idea and finding ways to express itto decision taking structures and potential partners, regulators and
others, tends to be long on creative analysis, synthesis and
experiment and short on both hard data and defined goals. Indeed, itis inventing the goals and finding the data. There follows a second
stage, in which the vague ideas that emerge from the first aretransformed into an implementation plan and into contractual
relationships, and in which significant amounts of money start to bespent. This stage, in its turn, becomes an implementation project,
overseen against a project plan by hard-eyed scrutineers. Finally, the
completed project passes into routine, where further refinement isapplied and productivity is pursued.
Each of these require a different 'culture': differing ways of interacting
and different criteria. The people who thrive in these situations may be
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
35/54
innately different, and certainly need quite different forms of direction.The knowledge economy is, therefore, concerned with a number of
different things:
Developing an oversight of the
pertinent operating environment, suchthat a framework exists in which tovalidate potential forms of renewal. In
particular, noting technological and
market-based 'systems busters' whichmay change the nature of the industry.
The US giant company GE haveinstituted the 'DYB' program: that is, in
a creative way, to Destroy YourBusiness (because if you do not,
someone else, somewhere in the global
economy will certainly be planning todo so.)
Developing machinery to reachout to sources of knowledge and
capability so as to put flesh on the
bones of this potential. This might beas much working with an industry
regulator so as to define paths forwardas with internal or external interests.
Developing systems of
management which license but rein inthe styles of operation that are
distinctive to the various stages ofimplementation of new projects.
Developing systems that allow a
balanced approach to be taken to theshifting ground in each part of the
portfolio of activities: allowing gradualinnovation in established parts of the
business as well as driving them for
best practice, taking into accountstakeholder concerns and the like.
Developing the habit of workingin networks and partnerships, taking a
realistic view of what can (and cannot)be achieved in frameworks in which
motives are usually spectacularly
mixed.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
36/54
These skills are plainly necessary in order to cope with a fast-changing, low barrier world. The capacity to deploy them already
proves a major source of competitive advantage in many fields: inentertainment, in science, in venture capital. Membership of a
knowledge network is earned, for others will work with a firm when it
has proved the equivalent of good citizenship and has engenderedtrust. Members of a network have to contribute to well as extract value
from the network. The skills that are involved are often human-focused, requiring protracted and personal contact. These are not
easily created across impersonal IT systems alone, and knowledge
networks have tended to remain rooted within a context or evenaround a physical location, such as Hollywood or the City of London.
Indeed, it may be a major source of strength for the industrial worldthat this is so, in the face of billions of educated people with
considerable access to technology.
Steering what might be called 'multi-cultural' companies can be verydifficult. Reward structures need to differ, people need to be given
distinct and often incompatible tasks. A more fundamental problemcan be illustrated by the following consideration.
Most companies have a set of innate tensions, as between imposing
common disciplines from central control or allowing diversity. Equally,the firm can respond to external imperatives (often to the
disadvantage of the internal socio-technical balances that have served
in the past) or can focus upon these, sometimes at the expense of
agility, regulatory compliance or customer satisfaction. Figure 2expresses these dilemmas, and identifies both four healthy outcomesthat arises from accepting any one of these. Inset, however, are the
symptoms of uncritical acceptance of any one of these as the sole
guiding principle.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
37/54
Figure 2: Four cultures that arise from solutions to twokey dilemmas, and four set of symptoms of pathologies
that may arise.
This said, it is far easier to manage for one thing than for many. Asimple imperative - to cut costs and never mind any other
considerations - is easy to propagate and clear for individuals tointerpret. Mixed messages are far harder to handle. The figure shows
some gradients in which managerial signals of increasing intensity arefed to the organisation, seeking faster reaction from it. The gradients
express the equal ease with which single or mixed messages can be
expected to have their affect.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
38/54
Figure 3: Mixed imperatives creates contours of equallyeasy organisational response
A firms that finds itself at location A may wish to move to location B. A
light push 'up' and a strong push to the 'left' would appear appropriateto a perceptive management. Unfortunately, due to the tendency of
the corporate social system to simplify issues and to take them out ofcontext, the locus will tend to follow the contour gradient, ending at,
perhaps, C. Change (often on many more than two dimensions)therefore requires active steering, not a single push.
Worse, an activity in the upper right (an advertising project team,
perhaps) would have a quite different innate 'culture' from any of theother quadrants. The measures that steered from A to B would have a
pathological affect upon it, taking it into the unfortunate areas on
Figure 2!
Management is, therefore, a matter of deploying experience in
diversity, and recipes which have this or that style (enthusiasm, the
hard line, coaching.) is bound to be inadequate in some area or other.The next section shows how idiosyncratic such issues of local 'fit' can
be.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
39/54
Styles of leadership: a UK survey
McKinsey have, for many years, worked with chief executive officers. A
survey of American CEOs gave their prescriptions for success. Thesewere remarkably uniform: to set clear domains of activity, to create
personal accountability for equally clear targets within these, tominimise central interference and to drive the firm for low cost andhigh share of the market. CEOs seemed to feel that change was best
created bottom-up, that they would know a good thing when they sawit and that if they gave conceptual direction, everyone else would stop
thinking. Many readers will recognise the style. It appears to suit the
'silo management' style, described above, but does not seem likely tocreate overall managed migration.
CEOs are, like the rest of humanity, susceptible to fashion. McKinsey's
report documented the fashion of the 1985-95 period. Many businessleaders are wondering what to do now for an encore and how to cope
in a world of knowledge-intensive activity, having already pared costs,often jettisoned the company's higher brain functions and focused
upon doing one thing very well. As a whole, the US appears to besolving the problem, but often by large companies drawing upon small
start-ups for their ideas. This may well be a satisfactory solution: only
time will tell.
There are, of course, other styles of leadership, many of them
currently out of fashion, although widely practised. The Industrial
Society is Europe's largest training group. It has completed a study onthe concomitants of leadership, drawing on a sample of around a
thousand UK managers and those managed. Such studies may becriticised in two ways: they measure what people believe is effective,
not what yields whatever results one deems to measure efficacy; and
they tend to notice whatever the experimenters set them up to note.The book has another weakness, which is that it discounts 'implicit'
leadership, in which the goals of the organisation are embedded incriteria, targets and procedures. The focus is placed firmly upon
personal, rather than impersonal, interaction.
The Industrial Society's study does, however, contain an illuminatingreview of the literature on leaders and followers, who are not always
the same thing as junior and senior staff. Indeed, around four-fifths ofthe examples of leadership that were cited involved people who were
not in positions of authority. A large portion of those who were in
positions of formal authority indicated that their chief frustration wastheir inability to induce people to do what they wanted, leading to
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
40/54
friction and HR problems. The literature review points up a significantdisparity between the emotional drivers which take many people to
power and the human skills required of the job, notably in today'senvironment. Previous samples of managers - both from the US and
the UK - have been assessed in ways which isolate the chief emotional
components that drive their career goals. An overwhelming elementwithin an equally large fraction of these shows a strong desire for
personal dominance. Unless skilfully masked, however, this desire isthe exact antithesis of what is needed for efficacy.
We have already noted that management may be thought to exist
along an axis which has two extremes, neither of which is incorrect butboth of which are fitted to circumstance. At one end of this axis,
managers encourage people to pool what they know in order to clarifyissues and create as yet unknown possibilities. At the other end,
managers define the problem and the tasks needed to solve it, and
allocate these tasks as they see fit. The first style is suited to thosetasks in which virtually everything is unclear: the terrain of knowledge
management. Its products require analysis and clarity. It requiresteam play, spontaneity, recursive clarification; it places great stress
upon an overarching sense of direction, of process, of passing the
baton. The second style is best suited to line management or projectmanagement, in which virtually everything is clear and where the
problems are essentially operations. This requires compliance,oversight, accountability, formal targets, formal criteria, formal
assessment; it needs diligence and application from a compliant
workforce who are prepared to take orders and to operate in 'silos'.
The 'liberating leader' is, perhaps, a title for the style which is
appropriate to the synthesising, knowledge-managing end of the
managerial axis. Analysis of the elements of this showed up ninecontributory sub-styles.
Protector: promotes individual self-esteem, stands up for others' interests,
minimises friction.
Tutor: encourages forward-lookinghuman development, treats mistakes as
opportunities to learn.
Mentor: defines a role for the
individual, but shows consistency and
integrity in a personal role.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
41/54
Teamplayer: makes explicitstatements about targets, progress,
performance.
Director: decision-taking order-giver,
who inspires fear but who enforces
performance. Listener: notes, works around
individual capacities and weaknesses.
Innovator: encourages new
approaches, communicates oversight and
general purpose.
Delegator: creates an environment in
which sensible, local risk-taking appearspossible.
Networker: keeps in touch with the
wider world, maintains the context of ateam.
Of these, the "Protector" was by far the most powerful explanatoryvariable characteristic of leadership. The others are organised in
descending order. "Director" and those below it explained only around
3% of the variance in the sample: they were essentially - perhapsworryingly - trivial components.
The upper part of this continuum is chiefly focused upon sorting out
people, while the lower part is, perhaps, more concerned with sorting
ideas. The explanations that accompanied this investigation are, forthe most part, highly people-oriented: no interviewee seems to haveset much store by management as the custodians of financial probity
or safety. External influences - customers, the environment, regulators
- are allocated to the least powerful component, that of the"Networker". Readers can make up their own minds as to whether this
reflects perceived sources of weakness in management rather than ananalysis of the overall sources of excellent management.
An attempt to carry out such an analysis produced the following as the
key concomitants of leadership:
Communicating an inspirational
view of the future.
Supporting other people.
Promoting understanding.
Understanding before makingjudgments.
8/8/2019 What Are the Challenges of ion Behavior
42/54
Valuing individual differences.
Promoting a sense of direction.
Promoting the self-esteem ofothers.
The views of the sample were assessed by age, gender, industry andjob level. There was no obvious age-related trend, except that theyoung valued "Director" and "Tutor" while older people tended to
prefer the styles concerned with networks, knowledge and inclusivity.
Gender differences were stark: 93% of the variance was explained bywomen preferring a participative style (Protector, Innovator,
Networker, Listener) while men rejected this approach.
Industrial differences were revealing. Manufacturing and utilities
sectors preferred the order-giving "Director" style, although utilities
supplemented this with affection for "Teamplayer". Technologists, bycontrast, disliked "Director", but liked "Mentor": evidence of preference
for a closed little world, set apart from the rest? Public-sector andgovernment sources focused on "Delegator", which retailing, by
contrast, found unacceptable, but without having much of an
alternative to offer. Professionals hated both "Director" and"Teamplayer", but vaguely enjoyed "Delegator". Those in training and
education, surprisingly, were negative about "Listener" but the mostpositive of all about "Director" and "Mentor". The finance industry did
not like any managerial style at all.
Job roles showed similar differences. Nobody admitted to liking the"Director" style. Senior managers disliked "Mentor", but saw
"Innovator" and "Networker" as their preferred style. Lesser managers
showed the same, but less pronounced, pattern. Project managerswere also unhappy with "Mentor", but team leaders, by contrast, were
highly positive about it, as were administrators. These last alsoadvocated "Innovator" and "Delegator". Technical st