Small teams and big change. Is centralised co-ordination killing creativity and change and are there benefits to de-centralised change management?
THE THEORY
There are two schools of thought. The first is that to centralise is to better co-ordinate and manage resources efficiently and effectively avoiding error, omission and sub-optimal allocation of time, people and budget. The second is that the inefficient approach of decentralising is more than recompensed by engaging people and providing an agile environment for getting things done and maintaining momentum, passion and engagement.
There is no doubting the success of FW Taylor’s scientific approach to management or, for example, Henry Ford’s success in its application. Those industrialised times were based on top-down education and management and the needs of large scale mechanised production and seamless orchestration of the workforce. However the “central Moscow” approach has failed in the East because it became monolithic, dis-engaged with the community and the populous felt that they can do better. The western economy is increasingly service-based rather than manufacturing centred, and we are now connected and on-line. We need to be co-ordinated, but do we need to be centralised?
http://www.12manage.com/images/picture_centralization_decentralization.gif
REAL LIFE
Scenario: ABC Ltd (a real business, but fake name) have offices all over the country. They realised that being a service-based business success is dependent upon highly motivated and engaged staff and undertook an employee survey and plans to encourage talent and remove barriers.
Situation: Some staff were comfortable in their silo and uncertain of their role and remit to make changes at a local level. They’d happily complain that Head Office (HO) won’t listen but seamed paralysed to effect many of the changes that they could do locally. HO were cast as villains who seldom visited, rarely communicated and simply didn’t understand. Interestingly the local offices saw themselves as victims rather than heroes, they were followers rather than leaders. The problems were in their mind. It was always open to them to visit HO, or read the emails or reports that were circulated, attend the open-days that were arranged, but it’s easier to whinge that “them” over there. Some managers confused being militant as a type of leadership and would rally their staff against “them” rather than motivate, coach and inspire change.
Steps: In a meeting I closed the door and suggested that the problems and solutions were in the room. Nobody was going to rescue them. It was up to them as a team to decide their fate. They then suggested ideas to restore profitability, morale and communication. But it’s easy to offer a list of ideas or advice, but they faltered when agreed, and asked “whose name should I put against this, and when will it be done”. Ideas without an implementation plan are simply dreams. Dreams inspire, but we must not confuse talking with doing and ideas with implementation.
REFLECTION AND LESSONS
Big change is scary, but arguably only big change is meaningful. Playing on the fringes and trimming the margins can consume disproportionate effort for the benefits yielded. The most important aspect of project management is knowing what is most important!
In the service-based and connected on-line environment I suspect the most important thing is entrepreneurial, agile and engaged staff. It might be better for central functions (Sales, Finance HR and Marketing) to be physically de-centralised and electronically centralised so that data can flow down the wires, but knowledge and ideas can be shared over a coffee.
A few “hot desks” occupied by Sales, Finance HR and Marketing a few days per week in each local office may be inefficient in terms of their time travelling, but I suspect may be more effective in terms of engaging a work-force and there is no point in being super-efficient at failing if the alternative is marginally less efficient with success.
This appears to be consistent with one of the #IslandInnovator fail tales, when one delegate explained that he had a great product, but things started to go wrong when he realised that a new location isolated him from his network of contacts and at each stage we was ready to move forward he found himself waiting on someone outside his team who didn’t understand his priorities.
The idea of small teams doesn’t mean small organisations. At TEDxStHelier Richard Noble OBE outlined a project of 4000 participants, broadly grouped into teams of 12 people. Richard suggested: It’s great empowering lots of people, but it mustn’t get out of control, and the solution is smaller teams rather than bigger bureaucracy.
The challenge is not of project management, nor of communication. There are plenty of books, courses and templates for getting things done and we are bombarded with emails, reports, radio TV, facebook, YouTube. It isn’t really about understanding: All the people that I spoke with are highly articulate about the problems.
It’s a bit like being given a set of trainers and a week-by-week programme to run a marathon. Whilst the trainers and programme are welcome they are no substitute for going running! What is needed is drive, passion, confidence and organisation: to be able to wear the trainers and follow the programme (use the templates and do the tasks). This is neither a Management nor Leadership role, but one of coach/mentor/ trainer.
YOUR FEEDBACK AND SUGGESTIONS
ciChange is a not-for-profit forum for ideas and discussion, about all aspects of Change Management, including people, processes, teams and leadership. It is a place to share and exchange models, papers, ideas and information about change. We welcome participation from a broad audience, including business and change leaders as well as project & change providers.
If you have feedback or suggestions, case studies, references or experience which you are prepared to contribute please email me timhjrogers@cichange.org or use the form below to offer anonymous comment.
RELATED READING
The above blog is part of an emerging theme about small teams and big change and the reader may also be interested in the following blogs
Lessons from # IslandInnovators
http://islandinnovators.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/lessons-no1-from-islandinnovators.html
http://islandinnovators.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/millennials-lesson-no2-from.html
Dysfunctional Teams
http://projectspeoplechange.blogspot.com/2014/03/its-not-my-problem-problem-is-them.html
http://projectspeoplechange.blogspot.com/2013/06/this-is-story-about-four-people.html
Lessons from # TEDxStHelier
http://projectspeoplechange.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/5-weeks-5-events-may-be-seen-as-arab.html
Whilst researching this blog I also found this. It’s an interesting view and worth a read.
https://coto2.wordpress.com/2010/08/10/on-the-racism-and-pathology-of-left-progressive-first-world-activism/#more-9758
THE AUTHOR
Tim Rogers is an experienced Project and Change Leader. He is founder of www.ciChange.org and curator for www.TEDxStHelier.Com. He is Programme Manager for the commercialization of a major public sector organisation. He is also Commonwealth Triathlete and World Championships Rower, as well as Athletes’ Representative for Jersey’s Commonwealth Games Team. He has a passion for teaching and learning and is a former tutor/mentor on the Chartered Management Institute courses, and a coach / trainer.
Email: TimHJRogers@AdaptConsultingGroup.com
Mob: 07797762051 | Twitter @timhjrogers | Skype timhjrogers
No comments:
Post a Comment