“Ignoring everything that is known about Change in Companies and Organizations within the behavioral sciences, turns out to be one of the most effective ways to start the Terminal process of your own company” - EGB
At the Congress, a series of very interesting and provocative questions arose from various participants regarding some topics that we have shared regarding the importance of organizations for the growth of communities.
The Organization Development Institute International, Latinamerica is a leader in organizational improvement, change and development processes and one of the hypotheses - perhaps implicit in this discipline - has to do with the relationship that is assumed to exist between organizations (and their development) and the growth and development of people and also of communities.
Economists seem to be dazzled in "discovering" what are the indicators that have to do with the economic growth of peoples, nations, countries.
Most of them are economic, and the indicators that are linked to the economy and finance seem to have more and more weight. Surely we have to be more and more exposed every day to "finances" which, supported by many economists, turns out to be the main variable or driving force.
Now is this true? It is paradoxical that a country like Argentina that is characterized by having enormous resources within the primary sector, does not have a newspaper that directly links with people on a daily basis in relation to the development of this sector. And on the contrary, we find the existence of a financial newspaper that has a strong disclosure.
A review of the wealth of Argentina during the last century shows that the country was among the 10 richest countries in the world around the 1940s. And today we see that this position has not been sustained; rather, on the contrary, it has deteriorated sharply.
We also know because there is evidence of this, that the importance of money, the issuance of money, the largest currency, has gained prominence since the 1940s. It is a fact that inflation levels have risen dramatically during the period of the 1950s and until the end of the last century, reaching unprecedented levels. Also the number of entities and financial systems have grown since the 1940s.
We do not want to venture to forecast that what we gain from a lot of work in companies may later be lost at the hands of others, but it seems that the forecast may be very close to the truth. What we want to make clear at this point is that it is very likely that the vision we have regarding our companies may have to be expanded - and also modified - if we want to continue having that same company and with the same indexes of performance, within the next 10 or fifteen years. But for now we have to leave this topic for later and we will introduce ourselves to the topic of “Organizations” and their role in the communities.
In the first place, the facts, that is, the empirical evidence clearly shows that there is not a single developed country that does not have developed organizations. Mercedes Benz for Germany, Rolls Royce for England, FIAT for Italy, Peugeot for France, Microsoft for USA, are a few examples of this but surely you as participants have observed many more. And now we can go to another question: What is needed to create and grow Organizations?
It is obvious that people are indispensable and necessary, but we all have plenty of evidence that high performance people do not represent the only necessary condition to achieve success. We may have some people who dazzle with their qualities and attributes but who cannot necessarily be linked according to what the circumstances require. Take tennis as an example, which is a fairly competitive sport today. We have some tennis players who excel and reach the number 1 position in the world… but if we look at these who occupy the first position we see surprisingly that they are not the first when they act in doubles instead of singles.Even in situations where both tennis players are at the top in the facts and when they act in "doubles" their performance is extremely low in relation to their performance as "singles".
For more than 100 years, behavioral sciences have been studying this type of phenomenon where some independent variables are taken into account (ability, motivation, knowledge, teamwork) and how they impact on dependent variables (effectiveness, performance, profitability)., efficiency).
We see how within many spheres - including the best universities - some knowledge and findings supported by empirical evidence are openly criticized, due to the mere fact that they are “outdated”. And, on the other hand, other positions are defended that have not found sustenance within the behavioral sciences.
We have to do a very short review of the typical organizational arrangements that we usually come across "over time." Despite much criticism, pyramid organizations have prevailed more than any other type for a long time; for many centuries.
In an attempt to increase their efficiency at the beginning of the last century, an attempt was made to improve it as a consequence of what has been known as the scientific administration that has made an effort to make available equipment and tools compatible with people. A further step has been taken with the support of time and movement studies. The following sequence regarding the type of organizational arrangement has had to do with “empowerment” as a way of recognizing - on the part of company management - that people are the ones who are closest to finding the best solution to problems. they confront at work. And so a second type of organizational arrangement is born that takes the form of an "inverted pyramid."Do you think that a point - the vertex - can be sustained for a long time? They are right, this is not possible.
Leaders have so far experimented with the typical pyramid supported by its wide base and then a pyramid supported by a vertex and wonder what they can do from now on. If we take the trouble to join these two pyramids we will find a new type of organizational arrangement that received the name of matrix organization (Robert Blake & Jane Mouton - 1959). People from now on would have to respond on the one hand to the hierarchical superior "of the pyramid organization", but since organizations sometimes do not find solutions when they have the perspective from a single department, function or business unit, then they must have an additional perspective that is the horizontal one where the problem or situation of negative conflict is observed “through” as a horizontal process.
But what happens from now on with each one of the people having implemented the matrix organization?
Henceforth all people have to answer two. They no longer have "one chief", which contradicts even the biblical passage, which is even more complex for us. And of course each of the bosses doesn't have the same goals, or the same preferences, or the same needs, or the same resources, and he doesn't have a reward system similar to the other. This is not easy and people then find themselves in dire need of developing new skills that have nothing to do with the traditional "technical skills" that they learned in the best universities or within a profession.
Now to progress in the company they have to - in addition - develop new skills such as "relating". And he must do it not only to relate to "others" but also has to improve the ability to relate "to himself. It is not easy to overcome this stage.
When more or less the organizational participants (who have survived) have overcome these difficulties, it turns out that they have to develop competencies to operate “in circles”, which has often been implemented as a consequence of the Quality Programs (ISO`s 9000).
And when the circle relationship has been reasonably successful, the innovations in computer technology make the need to carry out a "re-engineering" that differs from the traditional work of Organization and Methods that was mainly oriented to "simplify processes and tasks "; Now that is no longer enough: we must eliminate all possible processes and at the same time add value to the company. His friends and colleagues from "quality circles" are no longer in the company. And as Dr. Donald W. Cole recalls, the skeletons of those who are not still remain in the head of those who still belong to the company.
All of these changes are what organizational members in companies within the United States of America have experienced anyway. And we must not forget that the vast majority of them are used to having to move their place of residence (along with their entire family) around every three years. And this is true under the two most likely conditions: whether or not you have been successful in your job. And moves to positions closer to the top sometimes involve crossing the border with another country, and with some frequency with another continent.
How common is this within companies in Latin America? Please do not try to think from an ethical or philosophical point of view; Let us think for now exclusively about the creation, development and growth of organizations. That is, let us not engage in debating whether this is good or bad; The question that we can ask is close to the following: Can we in Latin America create organizations that go beyond our cultures and continue to be successful outside our country? Do you think our executives, professionals and managers are equally prepared as the executives, professionals and managers of these other organizations? And one more question:
What capacity do we have to deal with change? Do we like to get out of our "comfort zone"?
¿Por qué creen ustedes que dentro de las ciencias del comportamiento la “Motivación” es un tema central? ¿Pueden compartir abiertamente qué es realmente una fuerza motivadora? Pues una fuerza motivadora está íntimamente ligada a una “necesidad insatisfecha” (Taller de Motivación a cargo de Eric Gaynor Butterfield – Julio 1991). Se tienen que dar las condiciones de manera conjunta: por un lado las personas necesitan tener una necesidad y por otro lado dicha necesidad no tiene que estar satisfecha. ¿Les dice algo esto respecto de si el progreso y el cambio tiene que ver con las tres palabras que hemos mencionado anteriormente, es decir, la “zona de comodidad”?
The behavioral sciences through notable researchers and experts such as Kurt Lewin, James March, Herbert Simon, David Mc Clelland, BF Skinner, Chris Argyris, Warren Bennis, Richard Beckhard, Shepard, among others have shown evidence to mobilize The energies of the people - we have said of the people - towards a specific direction, is not something really simple. If so, there could be no difference in the achievements of the different communities. However we know that some communities, countries and nations stand out from others.
And now we do go into one of the most relevant issues for the construction and creation of organizations. It is the enormous accumulation of investigations, field work, experiments, and cases where the phenomenon of formation and creation of groups, their subsequent development, and the most effective mechanics and practices for their maintenance have been explored. On the website www.theodinstitute.org you can find more than 300 excellent works linked especially with the contributions of experts in the field of Groups and Teamwork and another 5,000 additional contributions on topics that are directly related to them such as: leadership, motivation, induction, involvement, diversity, performance, coaching, decision making, among others.
The countries that stand out in terms of the results they achieve excel in the strengths of their organizations and the organizations in turn are sustained by the strength of excellence in group work. Groups turn out to be the key "link" without which the company cannot sustain itself. And, unfortunately, we again find evidence of our poor ability to operate as efficient Groups within the different Latin American communities, especially when said Groups must achieve results with the minimum resources available and in the minimum amount of time.
We have mentioned during the Organizational Development Congress that there are at least 60 notable experts in organizational behavior and organizational development, the vast majority of whom have somehow carried out some type of intervention for change in the community, often focused in organizations. Our organizational leaders within Latin America and the vast majority of consultants are unaware of them. And to this we must add that the latter are not familiar with the large number of "Best Practices" (see: www.monografias.com) that are available to them.
Do you know of any company that has acted competitively and that has remained unchanged for the past 10 years? To answer this question, it is not necessary to observe large corporations; one can simply lay eyes on a gas station or a bakery or just a Cinema (if he has still survived).
The companies and organizations that exist are mainly because they have changed, but it turns out that here again our leaders and managers do not have all the knowledge required to effectively deal with the processes of change and transformation in companies.
There is a lack of knowledge in these people of a large number of people who turn out to be experts in change and the processes of transition and business transformation. And they are also unfamiliar with all phases of a consulting intervention (see: www.gestiopolis.com).
To make things a little more difficult, there is evidence that the prevailing business model is the one known under the name "hierarchical pyramid organization" where it is assumed that someone thinks how staff should do things, and it is assumed that they must abide according to "what the leaders have in mind." This is not the case in most situations, and because of this, when leaders verify that they are wrong, it is very likely that their own company or organization has already begun to move towards the Terminal phase.
So we should not believe that change comes only because of the "intentions" (however good they are) that leaders have in mind. People do not take the proper direction that we desire, nor do they dedicate their efforts with sufficient speed, persistence, and endurance.
As an example we are going to refer to the fact of meeting a stone on our way to which we want to give it a certain direction and place it in a certain different place. According to the intensity of our kick, the size of the stone, its shape and the direction we have chosen, we can somehow foresee where the stone will end up.
But the same does not happen with people because "we cannot anticipate where they will end up or what they will do." Metaphorically, if we kick a person, they may be very angry with us and the situation may even respond to us with an even stronger kick.
But it is always possible that someone can respond in the following way: Could you tell me what I can do for you? In life within companies and organizations, people usually respond by choosing one of these three options mentioned, although the attack is not always always physical but it can have strong psychic characteristics.
I think we have a long way to go and it is related to learning. Fortunately, there is a lot of material that can serve as a guide and for this it is only necessary that we do not discard it. Most of this material is in our sight and every day (in addition to the mentions we have made to various web pages).
