EYE ON QUALITY
Ideas and Observations
from Leaders in the Quality Movement
Organizing for the Future:
Networking Blurs Hierarchical Boundaries
by Jessica Lipnack
from Total Quality Newsletter
Every major age of civilization has a signature form of
organization. In the stone age it was the small group. In the industrial
era it was bureaucracy. In the information era, the network is coming
of age. Companies are learning they need to work across traditional
boundaries, that sometimes an adversary is an ally. lt's a new way
of doing business.
When people talk about networking they tend to think it's about
phoning business friends. When we talk about "teamnets,"
we're really talking about bringing organizations together in the
pursuit of meaningful work. That can be departments, companies,
even governments. Teamnets are groups that work across traditional
boundaries to accomplish something for the common good. But merely
talking to people outside your immediate realm doesn't necessarily
carry meaningful results. There are five principles for creating
a successful teamnet:
CLARIFY A UNIFIFYING PURPOSE
People may be addressing the same problem, but hoping
for something very different from the solution. Marketing's reason
for speeding up cycle times may be very different from manufacturing's.
The only way to be sure is to make clear what that target is,
and check each action for its value in attaining that purpose.
IDENTIFY INDEPENDENT MEMBERS
Realize that a teamnet is made of individuals, and
that each (if the team is well-chosen) plays a part. Make sure
all voices can be heard, that the teamnet is not managed by a
few while countless others look on.
CREATE VOLUNTARY LINKS
If people want to work together, chances are they'll
do a better job of it. Avoid "ordering" groups or individuals
to work together. Explain the unifying purpose and its benefits
and people will often willingly join in a task that might have
seemed like "someone else's problem" through the usual
organizational lens.
RECOGNIZE THE POWER OF MULTIPLE LEADERS
It is important to get beyond the idea of having one
person "in charge ofî a project. Dividing projects
into parts and letting various people - not necessarily just leaders
in the traditional sense - direct facets of a project make use
of a group's diversity. If the only top executive on a teamnet
happens to be an engineer, it may make sense to put her in charge
of design work, but someone else may be better qualified to head
up a related media campaign.
STAY CONNECTED AT ALL LEVELS
Teamnets depend upon open communication. If it is standard
procedure to circulate updates only among managers, or to announce
teamnet-inspired procedural changes only to assemblers, others
are likely to lose interest. Balancing the five principles is
vital. Too much or too little of any one and your effort will
fail.
Dealing with Hierarchies
A common concern is what to do with existing hierarchies when establishing
a teamnet. You don't need to heave them out the window. The goal
is to redirect decision-making power to the teamnet, but the practical
thing to do right away is just add links. For example, find a line
worker and a marketing person interested in attending the executive
committee meetings, or a vice president to attend production staff
meetings. That's the first step. The existing committees will evolve
into teams that, because of member crossover, interact to solve
problems instead of working in isolation. It has been my experience
that CEOs readily grasp this concept and its value. Hard-core resistance
usually comes from the next level of the hierarchy. You'll see CEOs
accepting it left and right, and operational vice presidents scared
to death. Their fear is legitimate, if they are interested in protecting
their own fiefdoms. But their jobs certainly are not endangered
by the concept. Leadership is as important to teamwork as it is
to hierarchy. But networking the vice presidents is one of the big
challenges of the '90s. Other challenges:
It's easy for people to fall into a "groupthink" pattern,
in which everyone becomes accustomed to approaching problems in
the same way, whether or not that's appropriate.
It's possible to focus too little on purpose - you think it's one
thing, I think it's another, somebody else thinks it's different,
so we don't have a common view. Purpose is the greatest natural
resource a group has. Keep going back to purpose. When things get
fuzzy, look at your purpose and ask if what you're doing fits.
Boundaries are still important. They define the limits of what
you can do. It's a way of maintaining a group identity -"This
is what we do. What we don't do, those people do."
Reprinted by permission of Total Quality Newsletter.
Lakewood Publications,
50 South 9th Street, Minneapolis, MN 55402, 800/328-4329
|