|
|
So you’ve ‘done’ transformation and are now waiting for
things to get better? Better have a good book handy – it’s
going to be a long wait. The problem with transformation is that
we’re still not quite sure what it is, what it’s supposed to
achieve, how it will achieve whatever it’s supposed to achieve,
and how we’ll know when it’s happened.
The
challenge is that there are in fact two, related aspects of
transformation – structural transformation and process
transformation - and the one won’t work without the other. South
African corporations have focused almost exclusively on structural
transformation (downsizing, flattening and so on). Not surprising,
really - it’s the easier to achieve. However, without a
concomitant transformation of the organisation’s behaviour and
processes, structural transformation is rather like re-arranging
the deck chairs on the Titanic. The thing will look better, but it
will still go down.
Structural
transformation has no value in itself. It is something that
becomes necessary when organisations start operating in new, more
dynamic ways. The improved business performance comes from new
ways of behaving, not just having new structures within which to
behave in old ways.
As
can be seen in the model below, transformation is a combination of
structural and behavioural issues. Examine each and decide how
much real transformation your organisation has achieved.
|
THE
OLD
|

|
THE NEW
|
CHECK
YOUR STATUS …
|
|
Structure
|
?
|
|
Hierarchical
|

|
Flattened
|
|
Levels
|
?
|
|
Many
|

|
Few
|
|
Departmental
behaviour
|
?
|
|
Independent
silos
|

|
Co-operating business teams
|
|
Leadership
style
|
?
|
|
Autocratic
|

|
Participative
|
|
Motivation
|
?
|
|
Fear/reward
|

|
Ownership and understanding
|
|
Communication
|
?
|
|
Top-down
|

|
Multi-directional
|
|
Decision
making
|
?
|
|
Top
|

|
Devolved
|
|
Responsibility
|
?
|
|
Top
|

|
Devolved
|
|
Business
understanding
|
?
|
|
Top
|

|
Total
|
Our ability to go the full distance with our transformation is
limited by a number of problems, some a matter of understanding
and others a matter of courage.
Decision-making
and responsibility. We are loath to give up decision-making and responsibility
because, quite simply, we don’t trust those below us not to make
a hash of things. Understandable. Given a history of not training
lower level staff in the logic of business, we can be forgiven for
not having faith in their ability to make sound business
decisions.
Motivation,
leadership style and departmental behaviour.
Put bluntly, most managers don’t believe that their staff can be
intrinsically motivated. So we continue with autocratic leadership
and motivation through the carrot and stick approach, in defiance
of research indicating that the approach is not really
sustainable. In an ethos of fear and confrontation, departments
then act as if they were enemies, rather than internal customers
and suppliers. Pass the buck and duck the blame tends to be the
dominant theme. Our organisations are thus too often characterised
by vertical and horizontal wars.
In
summary, most South African organisations have simply
restructured, without changing the business behaviours and
relationships that are supposed to drive structural change. The
irony, of course, is that the new structures are incompatible with
the old behaviours. We would have done better to stick with the
old structures, if we are not going to go the full distance.
What,
then, is the solution? If we are going to enter the new millennium
anywhere near our trading partners’ new business approaches, we
have to transform properly. This entails doing business
differently – providing staff throughout the organisation with
the understanding of business and its value to them, that will
provide sustainable motivation; forging new relationships between
levels and departments – relationships based on solving business
challenges, rather than settling old scores; leading by being part of an
operational team, rather than a distant despot. At the heart of
all of this is a shared, organisation-wide understanding of the
real stuff of business.
What
is encouraging is that this approach can work – yes, even here.
Research done by Dr Gillian Godsell1 on organisations that have
opted for creating organisation-wide business understanding found
that staff developed:
- Improved understanding of business principles,
and a desire to apply these principles to the their own jobs
- Improved teamwork and willingness to share tasks,
as well as increased productivity
- Improved understanding and appreciation of the
role of management
- A reduction in conflict in the work situation
- Innovative ideas and efforts to implement cost
savings
- A greater sense of ownership of and
responsibility for their own work
- Increased enthusiasm and improved co-operation
- Demonstration of an active, "owning",
understanding of their work
- A greater sense of responsibility, increased
enthusiasm, and improved co-operation
- Greater satisfaction from and a growing sense of
competence in their work
Where an ethos such as that described in the research dominates,
organisations can really transform – creating entirely new
internal business behaviours and relationships. Yes, and then if
necessary, the structures can be productively changed to match the
new behaviours.
1
Research done by Dr Gillian Godsell - Formal Impact Studies: Team Business Longitudinal Impact Study
Andrew
Hofmeyr
(BA,
HDE (PG), BEd. Med, MBA) lectured
in educational theory at the Johannesburg College of Education and
the University of the Witwatersrand
from 1977 to 1992. During that time he studied research
methodology and educational technology on an international
fellowship at the University of Surrey, UK. He is a founder member
of Business Education Design, whose training programmes are
used by leading corporations and business schools in South
Africa
and the
USA. He can be contacted at andrew@bused.co.za
and at the Business Education Design website www.bused.co.za.
Short summary
Transformation in the structures of an organisation without
transformation in corporate culture and behaviour is in vain.
Keywords and relevant phrases
Accountability, autocratic leadership, behaviour, business
understanding, communication, confrontation, co-operation,
corporate culture, decision making, downsizing, enthusiasm, ethos,
fear, flattening structures, focus, internal customers, internal
suppliers, leadership style, motivation, ownership, participation,
process transformation, responsibility, structural transformation,
sustainable development, talent management, teamwork,
transformation, trust.
|