deliberately and at other times by events beyond our control or the control of others. To repeat the old saying ‘the only constant is change’. We next take a peek into the future and examine the broader picture for what lies there.
Stages of organization development: past into the
organizations. The second stage, process based, is becoming increasingly evident and is characterized by the integration of all activities and tasks into an interlinked system. Processes overlay tasks; they inform us of the flow through which tasks are per- formed. The third stage of organization development is values based. Values tell us why to undertake the process. They give a direction to the process. In this stage managers employ intrinsic motivation; the sense of feelings in eliciting judgements of right and wrong and through shared values align the corporation towards its aims. The fourth stage is ecological based. This stage of evolution encompasses an holistic approach, in which the company is harmoniously synchronized with its natural habitat and wider society.
Stage 1: Task-based management
Companies at this stage operate isolated tasks through centralized formal authority. Work is hierarchical, functional and broken down into discrete simple tasks with each worker performing one or at most a few repeatable functions. The assumption is that only a few people at the top of the hierarchy know what needs to be done and how it can be done. Through command and control those in authority make certain that employees adhere to proce- dural power. In this stage, two types of task-based management styles may transpire: autocratic management or bureaucracy.
Autocratic management appears when there is a belief that employees are capable only of following rules, but have not the intellect to generate new rules in accordance with abstract prin- ciples or organizational goals. In this scenario, the managers create a rule for every contingency, and lines of reporting and authority are clearly drawn. Bureaucratic organization, while possessing many of the characteristics of task organization, increases the likelihood of producing consistency of actions, but this consistency is at the behest of governance through strict adherence to procedures and rigid rules. These features place the organization in a straitjacket, unable to change with the arrival of opportunities and threats.
A task-based organization adopts a negative view of the intrin- sic capabilities of people, in making the implicit assumption that there is a need for extensive control external to the individual.
Additionally, since each task is considered in isolation, work tends to be boring and meaningless. Today, more employees want to express their intrinsic intelligence and pursue something that each considers meaningful. Because of changes in manufacturing from simple to complex goods, it is virtually impossible for man-
agement alone to co-ordinate all the isolated tasks in a complex process. In modern society, knowledge and service workers are becoming the norm. In these environments, the task-based style of management is either beginning to crack at the seams or it simply does not work anymore. This leads to the second stage of organization evolution.
Stage 2: Process-based management
In process-based organizations, there is a shift in focus from iso- lated tasks to streams of related activities involving many differ- ent functional departments. Characteristically, the work is centred on teams, enjoying varying degrees of autonomy.
Employees in the company participate in the improvement of processes, i.e. they make decisions to improve processes and assess the outcomes, and even evaluate their own performance.
Compared with task-based management, process-organization features substantially higher levels of competence and collabora- tion. Participation in decision making necessitates having and sharing greater amount of information. Hence, sharing informa- tion is central in process-based businesses.
Process-based management does not do away with control.
Rather, each team or members exercise greater self-control. When it works, this inner locus of control is continuous, simpler, more direct and more dignified. Self-motivated individuals do well in process-based environments. Also, because of greater devolved decision making, a greater proportion of employees will need an enhanced set of competences to operate effectively.
Process-based management requires that the typical member of the organization more fully utilizes his or her intellect. In these environments work becomes more satisfying because people have a greater sense of accomplishment from their contributions.
In outcomes terms, process-based management results in achiev- ing more with less effort.
Stage 3: Values-based management
According to dictionary definitions, values are defined as one’s principles, standards, or judgement of what is valuable or impor- tant in life. The idea behind values-led organizations is that if the company’s values are sound and widely accepted then employees will, for the most part, be fully capable of organizing their activ- ities themselves as self-managing teams or units. In this situation, the role of managers is to encourage productive values through-
out the organization. In a values-based organization, the ability to receive and give trust will be high. Managers will focus on nur- turing the feelings and sense of identity of their employees.
Collins and Porras (1994) capture the ideals of values-led organi- zations in expressing the sentiment:
the crucial variable is not the content of a company’s ideology, but how deeply it believes its ideology and how consistently it lives, breathes, and expresses it in all that it does. It may be that socially imposed values, combined perhaps with fear of punishment or loss of face, can create an artificial management by values on a tempo- rary basis. However, on the whole, the only way psychological own- ership of sound human values can be accomplished on a
sustainable basis is in an organization in which individuals have strong, individuated self-identities.
(Collins and Porras, 1994) Giving genuine freedom and trust to employees who are devel- oped enough to accept and use it, enhances innovation and increases the diversity of opinions. Immature companies, which lack the ability to handle diversity, will tend to perceive the situ- ation threateningly. In contrast, values-based companies foster and enjoy unity in diversity. The paradox, of course, is the greater the diversity, the greater the need for unity. For this reason, a strong sense of common vision and purpose is essential for these companies. Fortunately, self-actualized people are predisposed towards win-win interpersonal strategies (as opposed to win- lose) and often possess the ability to simultaneously satisfy indi- vidual and collective needs. In such companies, superficial role-playing and the manipulation of others are likely to dimin- ish with the general increase in personal integrity. The question is, how many companies today have reached the stage of values- based organization? While opinions may differ, it is more than probable that only a handful exist.
Stage 4: Ecological-based organization
There is an emerging perspective in management which is begin- ning to appreciate that an organization is inherently a part of the self-organizing universe, of which man is an integral part. The implicate order is of holistic intelligence, which is intercon- nected in nature with everything (Bohm, 1980). By stimulating the deeper levels of curiosity and creativity, and awakening the best drives within us, businesses can become the agents of flow to the natural order, rather than prospectors wishing to impose
control over nature. This is the ‘being’ of the ecological organiza- tion. The ecological organization binds and harmonizes itself and people to nature. It is characterized by principles such as:
● harmony with the natural environment
● efficiency on a par with nature’s ‘principle of least action’
● spontaneous and frictionless co-ordination
● creative inspiration akin to artistic genius
● doing well by doing good: prosperity and social value
● spontaneous change in an evolutionary direction
● leadership which promotes full human development.
In this emerging view, organizing is not an act of dominion over the environment; rather, it is a reflection of innate processes of natural systemic order.
Where are knowledge and learning companies on this continuum?
The answer to this question is best answered by a brief reiteration of the chief characteristics defining such companies. Present-day knowledge and learning companies are characterized by:
1 Systematic process approach. The knowledge and learning ori- entation requires a minimum of control and direction to be effective. Nevertheless, it must be constructed in a systematic manner to engender individual, team and organizational learn- ing. This demands defining and managing through a clear and accountable knowledge and learning process-based system.
2 Leadership. A participative leadership style with a high level of facilitation and coaching skills is the most appropriate for the management of knowledge organizations. Leadership behaviours that stifle learning are identified and avoided.
3 The team. Flatter structures, with fewer tiers of management and greater empowerment of teams, are a feature of the current knowledge organization. These structures have changed the way people work and support each other. Support for effective teamworking has moved from a directive role to a facilitating role. Additionally, the greater responsibility placed on team members has meant that they need to be supported by team- building and group-learning activities. Enhanced competen- cies are much needed to make possible the seamless switching that is needed in moving continuously from a knowledge cre- ation mode to a knowledge exploitation mode.
4 The individual. Support for individual learning commonly arises in the form of coaching and mentoring. There is also a
general provision to assist with self-managed learning, over and beyond formal training to build employee competencies.
The emphasis is on identifying and removing barriers to learn- ing, and allowing individuals sufficient freedom to maintain high levels of intrinsic motivation. At the same time, individ- ual activities are process aligned to business objectives.
5 Technology systems. Recent developments in computer sys- tems present many new opportunities to develop and use knowledge. Knowledge and learning are facilitated through efficient and effective collection, storage and retrieval systems.
Information technology developments have enabled expansion of learning possibilities. This is especially the case if techno- logical solutions have been designed with the end-users in mind.
6 Culture and environment. Knowledge management and learn- ing requires that opportunities for individuals and teams to experiment are maximized. This has led many companies to attempt installing creative inquiry attitudes in employee approaches to problem solving. This has involved careful introduction and management of risk into the workplace, to encourage innovation through experimentation. This transi- tion has not been easy for tradition-bound organizations.
From the above features, it would seem safe to say that most com- panies embarking upon the knowledge and learning journey are in the middle of the second stage. Probably, the leaders of the knowledge learning pack are gradually edging to the cusp of Stage 2 or taking their first steps onto the platform of Stage 3.
Managing knowledge and learning has provided the ability to respond to many of the challenges of turbulences in the global economy. Companies seeking to survive and flourish in this new environment cannot afford to ignore the imperative of managing knowledge and learning. Organizational learning and knowledge management are not the next business fads but are part of the next rung on the ladder in the evolution of business organization.
In the scenario of future developments, the next step for most knowledge and learning led organizations is to deeply inculcate and embed the values of learning so much that they become ingrained behaviours. This will be the challenge of transition to a values-based organization. In the long run one hopes that knowl- edge and learning organizations use their reflexes and insights to construct organizational interaction and outcomes harmonious to the natural ecology of the world in which we live. Corporations can be the agents to a better world, but only if they will it.