Find a company which reflects Morning Star and St Luke’s image of a Complex Adaptive System (CAS) and reflect in your blog what the implications are for you and your present organization (or any organization you are familiar with). Identify what you believe are appropriate actions to move your organization forward.
Watch this Martin-Reeves Video and discuss the implications of strategy on your organization. Why strategy, why now, and how could this discussion positively impact your organization?
Morning Star and St. Luke’s operate very similarly in the way both organizations are managed. Or shall I say not managed? Let me explain. Traditional companies are structured based on specialty (function) and hierarchy (rank). However, we have seen an evolution from functional silos or departments within a hierarchical organization functioning independently of each other to a cross-functional matrix (Obolensky, 2014). Yet, the matrix organization struggles as “new opportunities and needs are ‘force fitted’ into an old matrix structure” (Obolensky, 2014, p. 25) due to increasing complex environments. As a result, we are now seeing more of a shift towards a CAS (Complex Adaptive System) organization with more of a focus on clarity, flexibility, and transparency. A CAS organization operates in a more fluid and organic manner when compared to the traditional and matrix organizations.
The thought of no bosses, managers, or hierarchy was a difficult concept for me to process. However, I realized that a company where all employees are equals can actually be successful after researching both companies. Not just successful, but leaders in their markets. St. Luke's is an advertising agency with no bosses and completely owned by its employees. It made sense that St. Luke’s could be a market leader, even though it was difficult for me to break my traditional mindset of what an organizational structure should be. I say this because of the specific market St. Luke’s operated within; a market based on creativity in providing ads to companies. But would this structure work within a manufacturing environment? I was skeptical since I have experience in large-scale manufacturing plant operations. However, Morning Star proved me wrong and revealed how they are also highly successful at running a self-managed company. Morning Star operates multiple tomato processing facilities where “no one has a boss, employees, negotiate responsibilities with their peers, everyone can spend the company’s money, and each individual is responsible for procuring the tools needed to do his or her work” (Hamel, 2011, p. 51).
One of the major similarities within a CAS is the effect on empowerment. This really rattled my way of thinking because I have always held the belief that people can truly be empowered when given the opportunity. Andy Law, cofounder and chairman of St. Luke’s, provided his thought on empowerment and it really changed my perspective. Law (2000) mentions how empowerment means someone has to have the power to give power to another which creates a flaw in the purpose of being empowered. Additionally, empowering still does not necessarily equate full ownership. For example, “in an organization built on the principles of self-management, individuals aren’t given power by higher-ups; they simply have it” (Hamel, 2011, p. 54) at Morning Star. These companies demonstrate Obolensky’s view of strategy development within a CAS. Obolensky (2014) states, “ the level of ownership of the strategy will be dictated by the amount of involvement” (p. 30). Therefore, employees in these organizations are taking responsibility through full ownership whilst having the ability to strategize and adapt more rapidly to their respective environments. This will give them a major advantage in the long run.
Zappos is another company that reflects Morning Star and St. Luke’s image of a CAS. Zappos recently changed its structure to a self-organized, self-managed company and instituted an emerging practice called Holacracy. According to Holacracy.org, “Holacracy is a comprehensive practice for structuring, governing, and running an organization. It replaces today’s top-down predict-and-control paradigm with a new way of achieving control by distributing power. It is a new “operating system” that instills rapid evolution in the core processes of an organization” (Zappos Insights, n.d.). Tony Hsieh, chief executive, sees this move as a strategy to eliminate internal bureaucracy. Hsieh “sees bureaucratic structure as the big hurdle to any company's ability to transform itself and stay relevant as the market shifts” (Cunningham, 2015) similar to Morning Star and St. Luke’s. Having an adaptable strategy is vital to an organization’s success. Martin Reeves (2014) discusses how companies need to have great strategies now more than ever before when considering the rapidly changing and complex markets. He describes strategy as getting a job done and winning competitively in a particular situation (TED, 2014). Reeves goes on to say there is no such thing as the best strategy but strategy needs to match the situation. Rather than wasting time planning, it is more effective to experiment, select, scale up, and iterate when trying to adapt to a rapidly changing market. This approach can be and should be applied to most organizations, including my own.
Looking at the intricacies of a CAS has given me another perspective on how an organization can function. The majority of companies today are still operating within a traditional hierarchy and matrix structure. I have learned there is not always one way of accomplishing something and it is better to have a Tao approach with an ‘and/or’ mindset instead of an ‘either/or’ when looking for a solution. Traditional or matrix type structures may work for some organizations, whereas a CAS may just be the answer an organization is looking for. It may be difficult to flip an incredibly large organization upside down and transform it into a CAS. Take most government organizations for example. I have experienced the traditional structure in the military where it is extremely hierarchical and I think it is necessary for that application. I now work within another large government organization; the Veterans Health Administration. The biggest problem I see with remodeling any government agency to being self-organized is that the employees can never have full ownership. A government agency simply cannot be privately owned and operated. This creates a big issue with instituting a CAS.
References
Coutu, D. L. (2000). Creating the Most Frightening Company on Earth. Harvard Business Review, 78(5), 142-150.
Cunningham, L. (2015). Tony hsieh got rid of bosses at zappos -- and that's not even his biggest idea. Washington: WP Company LLC d/b/a The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/docview/1738324527?accountid=27203
Hamel, G. (2011). First, Let's Fire all the Managers. Harvard Business Review, 89(12), 48-60.
Obolensky, N. (2014). Complex adaptive leadership: embracing paradox and uncertainty (2nd ed.). Farnham, Surrey, UK: Gower.
TED Institute. (2014, December 22). Martin Reeves: Your strategy needs a strategy. Retrieved January 28, 2017, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YE_ETgaFVo8&feature=youtu.be
No comments:
Post a Comment