Getting Ready to Be Ready

 

   This topic is immediately relevant for me and I will be writing a longer article about this (which you will find at HR.com when finished). I use this blog entry—and perhaps others—to get started and organize my thoughts. (Ain’t blogging great? Public forums for private Post-It™ notes!)

 

   The immediate relevance is this: I have just become President of a chapter of a national professional association. While becoming president was expected (as I was to be President-Elect this year beginning June 1), becoming president immediately was not. Due to a wonderful, unexpected career opportunity made available to our incoming President, he had to resign his newly-elected and hard-earned position as our chapter president. Two weeks passed between “I might have to resign my position; are you ready?” and “With this letter I submit my resignation”. In those two weeks, while out of town part of the time, I had some major thinking, planning, and communicating to do both within the organization I was about to lead and with my family whose time and attention would be negatively impacted.

 

   The short of it is that the transition goes well so far. This is, in no small part, due to the entire Board of Directors working together over the past few years, contributing to and owning a stake in the vision, goals, and objectives of the organization. Each of us has held leadership positions outside this particular organization. Each of us either runs our own business or is in a management decision-making position in a company or government agency. Each of us has been preparing to assume greater responsibilities in this organization over the years. More importantly, we encourage our members to get actively involved in committee and leadership roles across the organization, creating a pipeline of leaders ready to assume board positions when their times arise.

 

   What does all this mean to Organizational Development? Succession planning! We are practicing the succession planning that is necessary in most organizations today. Typically, succession planning involves the top-level management team—who will succeed the outgoing CEO or President of a company? As generational changes occur over the next few years with Baby Boomer top management retiring, a resource drain takes place if the knowledge and experiences of those leaving is not passed on to those rising to leadership positions. Succession plans must involve all levels of the organization to maintain a continual resource pool for leadership across all areas.

 

   Organizations must establish the plans, obtain the resources, and create the experiences for their people to help them get ready to be ready for leadership opportunities when they present themselves.

 

   Even this blogging forum allows me to get ready to be ready to write the longer article I intend to write on this topic. But don’t look for the article in the next week or two. I’m digging out of the pile of “stuff” involved in my sudden ascendancy to President. I am now putting into action the “be ready” part of the equation. And look at this experience from now until next June 1 as getting ready to be ready for future challenges and opportunities that await me in life.

Pearls of Organizational Culture (Continued)

 

Three Cultural Levels of Organizations

   Edgar Schein's model of organizational culture defines three levels of culture that exist in organizations.

 

1-Organizational attributes that are seen, felt and heard to the uninitiated observer, including

·         Facilities, offices, and furnishings.

·         Visible awards and recognition

·         The way members dress

·         How people visibly interact with each other and with organizational "outsiders".

 

2-Professed culture of the organization's members themselves, typically identified through interviews and questionnaires that gather attitudes of the members, including:

·         Company slogans, mission statements and other expressed operational creed

·         Local and personal values widely expressed within the organizatio

 

3-Tacit (deep; subliminal; "unspoken rules") assumptions are the cultural elements that are unseen and not consciously identified in everyday interactions between organizational members. They are, at times, cultural elements that are taboo to discuss inside the organization. Experienced members understand this deep level of organizational culture and acclimate themselves to it over time, thus adding to its invisibility and staying power. OD practitioners use more in-depth studies and techniques to identify and examine culture at this level. It is the cultural level most challenging to diagnose and change.

 

Cultural Paradox

   What one sees is not always what one gets when it comes to organizational culture. The paradox that plays in identifying an organization's culture is that what is communicated about the culture consciously and openly may not be what is truly represented by the organization's practices and leadership.

 

   An organization can profess that it respects individuals and honors creativity at one level, yet discourage said individualism and creativity at a deeper level through its rewards systems and uniform dress code. An organization may note at its website, in commercials, and in distributed documentation that its focus on the customer is its first priority. Yet, the decision-making and reporting processes practiced daily emphasize the importance of the bottom line over customer service. An organization may have in place a detailed diversity and inclusiveness initiative, yet allow (through inattention and avoiding enforcement) exclusive and unfair practices to persist in a specific department or region of the country.

 

   On the surface, organizational rewards can imply one organizational norm while at its deepest level imply something completely different. Such paradoxes highlight why it takes time for individuals new to or outside the organization to acclimate themselves to, and assimilate, organizational cultures and norms. It also explains why organizational change agents must discover and understand both explicit and implicit cultural norms before initiating change. Yet one more aspect of organizational culture needs understanding before effecting change-the dynamics of interpersonal relationships. Should such relationships threaten an environment conducive to change, these relationships must be addressed as part of the change process.

 

Conclusion

   In summary, note that organizational culture is as multi-tiered and complex as individual and societal culture. The organization's leaders set a cultural tone for the organization that pervades throughout the organization. Rewards and operational procedures; structure and reporting processes; open and "unspoken" norms and interpersonal relationships play important roles in defining, communicating, and encouraging organizational cultures.

 

   However an organization's culture is defined and evaluated, one must understand the breadth and depth encompassed by the culture before faciliting organizational change.

 

More Resources

·      Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values.
     Hofstede, G. Sage Publications. ISBN #080391444X.

·      Gung Ho! Turn On the People in Any Organization Ken Blanchard.
     William Morrow. ISBN #068815428X.

·      Who Moved My Cheese? Spencer Johnson & Kenneth Blanchard.
Putnam Adult. ISBN #0399144463.

·      Organizational Culture and Leadership. Schein, E.H. Jossey-Bass. ISBN #0787975974.

Pearls Aren’t the Only Things Cultured 

 

   As I define “organizational culture” for a course I am writing, this seems equally appropriate for a blog.  So here goes.

 

What is organizational culture?

   In defining "culture" as it refers to an organization, we first define the word as it pertains to individuals.

 

Culture: Individual and Societal

   According to the definition and description of "culture" at the online encyclopedia Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/), culture "refers to patterns of human activity and the symbolic structures that give such activity significance". Varying theories for understanding and criteria for evaluating, human activity result in different definitions of culture. One suggested definition of culture from the 19th century is that culture (civilization) "is a complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by [man] as a member of society". (Sir Edward Burnett Tylor, 1832–1917. English anthropologist.) This definition seems focused on individuals as cultural entities.

 

   A more-recent 21st century definition of culture suggests that culture is the "set of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features of society or a social group, and that it encompasses, in addition to art and literature, lifestyles, ways of living together, value systems, traditions and beliefs". (UNESCO-United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural  organization's Declaration of Cultural Diversity http://www.unesco.org/education/imld_2002/unversal_decla.shtml.) This definition seems focused on groups as cultural disseminators.

 

   The Dictionary of Modern Sociology (Thomas Ford Hoult. Littlefield Adams.) notes that culture consists of three elements-values, norms, and artifacts. Values consist of ideas about what in life seems important, and guide other aspects of culture.  Norms are expectations of people's behaviors, based on values, communicated and enforced by laws, sanctions, or rules. Artifacts are material things that represent, in some manner, the culture's values and norms.

 

Organizational Culture

   Take from the previous definitions and apply them to organizational or corporate culture, we define said culture as the attitudes, values, beliefs, norms and customs of an organization. Organizational culture differs from an organization's structure in that structure is the hierarchy of how people organize within and relate to the organization. (Too many "organizations", yet?) Organizational culture is more esoteric in that it is less tangible. Yet, it can be identified and measured through appropriate instrumentation and evaluation techniques.

 

Cultural Levels

   Individual and societal cultures encompass as many levels as there are identities to own. On some broad, encompassing levels, societal culture defines the individual. (Ex: culture of the human race; culture of being female or male.) On another level, regional culture defines the individual. (Ex: nationalities; ethnicities; regions of a country.) Yet another level of culture lends itself more to how individuals identify themselves. (Ex: beliefs; professions; socio-economics; races; abilities; orientations; interests.)

 

   Serious students and practitioners of sociology, anthropology, psychology, and the like can debate and dissect my above statements as much as they / you deem necessary. Remember that I am a businessperson with an organizational, humanistic, behavioral focus rather than a specialist in scientific fields. I netted-out what are, in reality, complex, detailed, continually researched definitions and concepts.

 

   I like Edgar Schein's description of three cultural levels within an organization. (Edgar Schein. Professor, MIT Sloan School of Management, author of "Organizational Culture and Leadership". Jossey-Bass.) Schein notes that culture is an organizational attribute posing the greatest challenge to organizational change. Culture overrides and outlasts the products, services, people, processes, and other physical attributes of an organization.

 

[NOTE: Next blog entry will continue with the second of culture in his model of organizational culture.]

 

Resources:

- Google “organizational culture”. Prepare to spend a day reading the results!

- Book: Corporate Cultures: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life. Deal T. E. and Kennedy, A. A.  Penguin Books.

- Book: Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap... and Others Don't. Collins, Jim. Collins.

Both Sides of the Coin

 

   An interesting exchange ensued among OD consultants with whom I associate. If we are shareholders of a company (not the company with whom we are consulting, of course), when we advocate change, can we live with the manner in which the change is implemented?

 

   My caveat about not being a shareholder in the company with whom we consult is an “of course” because such a relationship is fraught with the potential to be perceived as a conflict of interest or an ethics violation. Notice I said potential and perceived.  Neither term means “is” or “reality”, yet we, as Organizational Development consultants entrusted with an organization’s proprietary information, must avoid even the perception of impropriety.

 

   That said, I go back to considering whether we can live with the manner in which the very change we recommend is implemented. As OD consultants, we may advocate change that management implements by eliminating departments, distributing business elsewhere, and getting rid of people. Our training in theories and processes enable us to view people as resources to be managed—one way or another. By the way, our same training—plus our humanness—also causes us to consider the human impact of the change we recommend and temper management actions accordingly. Yet, the ultimate change implementation is carried out because of, or in spite of, our recommendations.

 

   The economic irony of change that includes losing people is that when more people are employed, there is more “production”. I place this word in quotes today because production means far more than goods (which was its limited definition during the industrial period in

the USA). Production today may include goods, services, knowledge tools, and any other value-based “products”. 

 

   Anyway, with more production, people are more efficient. Profits are greater. Employers are better off. Higher profits may lead to more investment. More investment leads to more production.  (Simplified, from:

http://william-king.www.drexel.edu/top/eco/EPE/coord/Chapter30.pdf ? among other Economics 101 sources.) As stakeholders, we care about profits. (Again, an over-simplification.)

 

   The exchange among consultants resulted in more “Mmmm, something to think about”s than answers. For each individual, the answer is unique and personal. The question gives one pause for thought and introspection.  It also makes us examine our values and intent when we engage in the consultation process. Examining values and intent is a good thing for anyone to do.

Project Manager: Work With or Serve As?

 

   My OD discussion list, as well as an article in Computerworld  ("The New Project Manager" http://www.computerworld.com/managementtopics/management/story/0,10801,110268,00.html)

currently addresses the roles of the Organizational Development Consultant and Project Manager. Primarily, does the OD consultant work with an organization’s project manager, or does the consultant serve as the project manager?

 

   The short answer is “both, depending on the situation”. Don’t you just love answers like that? Seems that is the answer in so many OD cases. Solutions within an organization are not cut-and-dry; either-or; yes-no very often. Let us look at project management and how an OD consultant fits into the picture.

 

   Ideally, organizations should grow project management talent and skills internally. There are formal project management programs at colleges and universities that yield PM certifications, as well as consultant groups that offer classes that result in a PM certification. However, the best way to grow a strong, effective project manager is through on-the-job experience and guidance. Can you say “mentor”? With the mass exodus of experienced, seasoned leaders and managers in the next few years as the baby boomer generation retires, it serves an organization well to establish a mentoring program that matches newer leaders and managers with experienced ones. The resulting knowledge and skills transfer develops effective project managers along the longevity continuum in the organization.

 

    An OD consultant should play a part in growing strong internal project management skills. Rather than doing the job for someone, the OD consultant can use his or her expertise and “outside view” to make recommendations and provide guidance that develops the internal manager.

 

   However (there’s that caveat again), should the OD consultant be needed to serve as a project manager, said consultant should have the PM skills necessary to do so. And just what are these skills? The Computerworld article referenced above does a nice job of outlining these skills. Briefly, the skills include:

• Having a broad viewpoint – seeing beyond a narrow, focused view of the organization and its issues to appreciate the dynamics of a broader community of interest and practice.
• Becoming “world-wise” – learning to do business within an international culture.
• Communicating on many levels – using technology to communicate effectively and through multiple channels.
• Being politically savvy – understanding what motivates people to do what they do, how to change behaviors, and with whom to ally to convince others to implement suggested changes.
• Selling ideas and suggestions assertively – communicating with strong-minded business people.
• Flexibility – being able to compromise and bend where needed in order to achieve the desired end results.
• Strengthening social skills – becoming a strong people-person rather than a technical specialist.

Read the full article to fill-in the details for the listed project management skills.

 

   Overall, the OD consultant needs to have project management skills in order to lead a client through the changes for which said consultant is hired. So much the better when internal leaders learn the PM skills.

 

   To find formal project management certification programs, use your favorite Internet search tool and search for “project management certification”. You may need to narrow the search to your city or state because of the long list resulting from this search argument.