Human capital is not isolated in the world, but rather it is within a structure where it contributes and receives knowledge.
Human capital integrates and forms part of departments, sections, business units, areas, sectors and other groups of people. In turn, these groups constitute and form the company.
At the same time that the knowledge deposited by human capital is interrelated and interacts with other people in the company, a method and system is needed to manage it and get the most out of it, this is what structural capital is based on.
Companies have human capital in themselves, as business people, managers, consultants, supervisors, we see how in organizations of the most varied nature the employees who really provide value and are important to the company are a minority. Imagine if this minority could multiply and become a majority? Do you not think that the income and results would be higher? This is what structural capital is all about, from moving from a structure focused on the individual to a group and organizational structure aimed at positively influencing the market.
In the past, companies were promoters that being bigger was positive for corporate development, being pyramidal structures, the predominant factor related to knowledge was that it was accumulated and managed from the top, so growing vertically did not mean a major obstacle for consolidated companies.
The information was received by the hierarchical personnel and a return was made to the operators through an order. If production reports indicated a decrease, machines were speeding up, and operators had to work faster than usual without knowing the reason, they simply had to meet production goals regardless of what they perceived.
The bureaucratic chains of command fulfilled the mission of governing the policy that was sent to them from above, functioning as a one-way domino effect, but not back. The lack of power against the hierarchy has been the fundamental reason for forming unions, whose objective was to be in a situation of greater power when it comes to negotiating with the owners a better working, salary, hourly condition, etc.
Centralization and bureaucracy continue to exist today, as do the chains of command that emerged in the industrial age. Just as we see the negative, it is also important to recognize the positive. The majority of companies are adopting the position of shrinking and decentralizing, not because they are willing to share the staus quo, but because management became aware that the dynamics of current markets require companies with agile structures capable of responding hyper-quickly to the hyper-changing global markets we live in. If elephants were successful before, now it is hares that succeed.
Technology has greatly accelerated the circulation of knowledge, previously it circulated in analog form, now it does so in digital form. Conclusion: Information Flies !!!! And if information flies, knowledge is Superman. Let's look at it more clearly.
The advent of the digital and interconnected economy has brought about a radical change in the way companies use knowledge. On the one hand, they accelerate and optimize external and internal processes. Without going any further when you go to the supermarket, through the optical reader the information of the products you chose from the shelves is processed, the company instantly obtains your data, the amount of your purchase, your consumption habits, what is the product What else do you buy, the stock of that product, the average expenses that you periodically make, etc. Not to mention that the purchase is made by credit card, all your data will go, in addition to the supermarket, to another company that from that moment knows who you are and most likely it will start to rain a cataract of mailings without knowing where they come from,or how they got their data.
The information was not collected by the manager or by the management, the information was obtained by the personnel at the base of the pyramid, that is, the employees who are in contact with the client, face to face with the market. So it is important to keep these people aware that they are important, otherwise the superiors would not have to organize.
Some companies seem to be quite clear about it and act accordingly. At Chrysler they have involved their dealers in a project to reduce costs. Each supplier must analyze their internal process to find out what steps can be taken to reduce component costs without lowering quality. Also, vendors are involved in such a early design stage that they can come up with ideas from their own competition. The result has been a total savings of several billion dollars.
Taking into account the base employees as information collectors is not enough to obtain significant changes, it takes agility and dynamism to distribute the information and knowledge among all the members of the organization. This is one more than clear reason to conclude how bureaucratic the middle managers are, if the middle managers are beginning to be eliminated it is for the simple reason that they bureaucratize the company.
In intermediaries we find strong points and weak points in their management. As the most significant weakness: they filter information and knowledge, after all that is the power they hold against those below and they will use it according to their criteria. If we aim to carry water in hand to a plant, we must carry it ourselves, because if we make a handrail, chances are that nothing will come (unless Acquaman works in your company). With the circulation of knowledge something worse happens, because not only little or no information arrives, but it is deformed producing contrary results.
Free access to knowledge is necessary to allow the formation of self-organized and self-sufficient jobs capable of improvising and making decisions without having to ask permission from the top or the central house.
Management today must understand that power passes through knowledge, and if instead of centralizing it and accumulating it in a vertical structure, it leaves it free to flow through all levels of the organization instead of concentrating it in a hierarchical minority, the results will be higher.
Organizational environments are changing faster than ever. Because the effectiveness of organizational design erodes over time as the environment changes, the organization must be designed to adapt to current and future environments, not past environments. The most interesting aspects of organizations are not the ways in which they repeat the past, but the ways in which they revitalize their energy, "describes GP Huber and WH Glick in their book" Sources and Forms of Organizational Change.
The change in management must be to move from vertical thinking to horizontal thinking, where knowledge and opportunities to stand out circulate not only laterally, it must also spiral in all corners of the company.
© Pablo L. Belly All rights reserved. This article may be redistributed, forwarded, copied, printed, or quoted as long as it does not modify its content and does not use it for commercial purposes. You must include this note, as well as the name of the company Belly Knowledge Management International and its author: Pablo L. Belly, the email [email protected] and the address www.bellykm.com
