No human being is an island in itself; any human being is part of the whole …… ”. John Donne (1572-1631) • Introduction In recent studies, CEOs report that up to 75% of their efforts to achieve organizational change have not delivered the promised results.
These change efforts have not produced what was expected, however, they produce a succession of unintended and unhelpful consequences.
Leaders end up managing the impact of unwanted effects rather than planned results that did not materialize.
Rather than enjoying the fruits of a redesigned production unit, the leader should be concerned with the hostility and bad relationships created.
What is a system?
A system consists of parts that interact as a whole for a common purpose. Therefore a system is characterized by the parts that make them up and by the relationships that are established between them.
The system is made up of parts that function as a single entity, to achieve a specific objective.
A series of parts that are not connected is not a system, it is just a bunch.
- How would you qualify, Mr. Company Manager, that the group of the management area behaves in your company? As a system or as a bunch? Can you identify situations in which they behave as a system? Can you identify situations in which they behave like a bunch? What do they attribute the different behaviors to? What prevents them from always working as a system?
Every system is based on the interaction of the parts that make it up; consequently, the relationships between the parts and their mutual influence are more important than the number of parts or their size.
These relationships, and therefore systems, can be simple or complex.
As for complexes, we usually associate them with something that contains many different parts. However, a 5,000-piece puzzle has a very simple way of grouping or organizing, since there is only one place for each one.
Now there is another degree of complexity, called dynamics, in which elements are related to each other in many different ways, because each part can have different states, so that a few parts can be combined in thousands of different ways.
Therefore, it is not necessarily true that the smaller the number of parts, the easier it is to organize and understand them.
For example, in a team of professionals working on a project, the mood of each team member can change at any time and thus form a system considered of dynamic complexity.
- What conflicts do we detect in the Management of Organizations?
Starting from the interpretation that in companies, managers are the ones who set the course, orientation and objectives that they aspire to for their organizations, we consider it essential that they work as an effective system:
1. With a clearly defined shared goal or vision
2. With skills to develop mastery in interpersonal relationships.
1. Shared Vision
We can count on managers who individually are the most brilliant in their own, as well as honest and committed. This is not a sufficient condition for the efficiency of a team of people.
We maintain that the possibilities of obtaining the intended results are absolutely diminished or complex if there is no commitment to a defined common vision.
Reflecting:
- Can you say that your management team is aligned on a common vision, and that this vision works as a context and inspiration in the daily life of your company? If your management team believes that everyone agrees on what they want to achieve, are their actions consistent with what they have stated?
Some of the factors that we detect as obstacles that prevent a management team from defining and aligning themselves in a common vision are:
1.a) Privilege personal interests to a shared vision.
1.b) Privilege being right
1.c) Believe that what is proper is the truth, and the only
1.d) Do not listen to the other, thus generating that they do not listen and consequently distancing themselves in the relationship. Reactivity.
1.e) Having defined what you want to avoid, instead of what you want to achieve
1.f) Not work as a whole.
2. Master in Interpersonal Relations
It is very common that we detect in organizations in general, and in management teams in particular, what Chris Argyris calls “defensive routines”.
Defensive routines are called habitual ways of interacting that protect us from threats or embarrassing situations.
- Does it sometimes happen that you do not want to be bad with the other and that is why you do not say what you think ?, Or perhaps you do not want to hurt him. Does it happen that in order not to argue, you prefer not to comment? Do you consider that you do more things than others and believe that it is already an insurmountable situation? Do you think you are resigned to "realities" such as:
- With Fulanito you can't. Why should I say it if you don't understand anything?
- Are you saying to yourself that you are fed up with a lot of things that happen and that you no longer feel like doing anything different? Does it happen that you say things to others, they all agree and then the others do not? Etc., etc., etc.
When we refer to Master in Interpersonal Relations, we propose acquiring conversational and relational tools to generate effective listening, contexts of trust and commitment instead of obedience and control, learning contexts, giving and receiving negative feedback to grow and contribute.
We believe that if managers manage to move from the paradigm of convincing the other, to that of listening and cooperation, to generate listening and open the possibility of dialogue, a paradigm where the key is diversity and add to the differences, the changes will be notable that will be observed in the intended results and the work environment in which they are deployed.
We consider that human beings are prisoners of our own thoughts, of our opinions, of our beliefs, of our mental models.
Therefore we propose to intervene in beliefs, opinions, in the organizational culture, in the ways of thinking.
In this context, we distinguish Ontological Coaching Consulting as the approach that allows organizations in general and their executives in particular, to observe the ways of articulating the interpretations of their problems in order to maintain them, partially modify them and / or release them definitively to give rise to others that make it possible to achieve the desired results.
