OBSERVATIONS AND STUDY CONCLUSION
5.5 Complexity, Chaos and Knowledge Management
practitioners. The more flexible model favoured by practitioners today is the four- activities model which comprises the following:
i) Finding out about the problem including culturally and politically;
ii) Formulating some relevant activity;
iii) Debating the situation using models and seeking debate involving changes to improve the situation in a way that is (culturally) feasible and (systemically) desirable and also accommodates the conflicting interests so that action to improve the situation may be taken; and
iv) Taking action in order to bring about an improvement in the situation.
The above 4 activities may be mapped back to the Kolb learning cycle and coincide with the Diverging / Assimilating / Converging / Accommodating phases as indicated in fig.
2.1. Inthis study, the author chose to use the original seven-stage model as a guideline.
The main reason for this was that he found it very logical and systematic, which, given his background, gave him some feeling of comfort. There were also numerous examples of this in the references that were used. Had he started with the four-activities model, the author feels sure that, as a novice SSM practitioner, he would have ended up expanding these steps back to the original seven steps in order to ensure that it was done
systematically.
Business that is changing so fast that, when it is time to implement the new system, it doesn't resemble the structure that we designed for and for which the system was scoped.
Thus when we deliver, the Business is unable to use the system. However, we are still obliged to produce the required deliverables as per the project schedule as originally agreed." This is a good reflection of the situation on the project at the present time.Itis thus clear that the organisation is undergoing some very chaotic times and should have the right leadership to help the people survive in such a complex dynamic environment.
Itshould be evident to anyone who understands the concept of learning organisations and knowledge management that the way bureaucracy has become a driving force in the organisation has led to many people becoming deskilled and trained incapacity is apparent when it comes to dealing with even the most basic project management activities
Wheatley (2001) says that the outdated belief that organisations are like machines where tasks, roles and functions are engineered to achieve predetermined performance levels is a factor that prevents effective knowledge management.
Itmust however be acknowledged that there is a role for bureaucracy in organisations today. Sycamnias (undated) points out that the success of bureaucracy lies in its ability to succeed at obtaining obj ectives by maintaining control in large organisations. The
structural features of a bureaucracy are the ones that are selectively retained, because they achieve reinforcing consequences, while non-bureaucratic features are eliminated.
However, he cites Merton as arguing that there is an inclination for the rules to become more important than the ends they were designed to serve, resulting in goal displacement and loss of organisational effectiveness as has been experienced in the organisation under discussion. Maccoby (2000) argues that bureaucracies tend to be over-managed and under-led which results in bored and unmotivated staff. The author believes that a balance needs to be found for amount of bureaucracy that an organisation imposes.
One of the causes of the problem situation covered in this study relates to the application of a process that was clearly inappropriate to the situation. The Strategic Governance Council has attempted to establish a standard set of processes to be applied on all projects undertaken by the organisation. The council seems to ignore the fact that each project will have its own dynamic which needs to be handled within the given context of the
environmental forces and project situation that exist at a given time. A standard set of
rules cannot be used to resolve the complex and varied problems that occur on different projects. The project manager and team need to be given adequate responsibility and authority to look for specific solutions to their own particular problems. Senior
management should sufficiently trust the project managers to escalate issues for assistance and support before they become unmanageable. Sharing these specific solutions (where successful or not) with other project managers would be a step towards the creation of a learning culture in the organisation. Merton (cited by Sycamnias, undated) argues that a reason for bureaucracy not working in some situations is due to the undesirable effect of having formalised rules and procedures applied in inappropriate situations; that is, responding to a unique situation as if it were routine, resulting in dysfunctional consequences. This is closely related to the problems of goal displacement mentioned above.
Urquhart (2002) defines a trusting workplace as one that has the following qualities:
• Open communications;
• Empowered employees;
• Rules that are to be treated as guidelines, not a solution; and
• Making everyone in the organisation accountable.
Urquhart argues that, in order to build a trusting workplace, three elements are required.
These are:
i) Dialogue;
ii) Acknowledging the undiscussable; and iii) Encouragement of criticism.
Dahlke (2004) argues that a climate of trust is the most important attribute of a successful and smoothly functioning organisation. He uses a three-pronged strategy to build a climate of trust in organisations. These are indicated in fig. 5.1 below.
Help managers develop an empowering culture
Fig. 5.1: Building a climate of trust within an organisation
Until now, management has focused almost exclusively on creating order. However, in the complex and rapidly changing environments that now exist, it is necessary to open up the unordered complex space in order to allow innovation to occur. According to
Wheatley (2001) it is in chaotic times experienced by organisations that knowledge is born. In order to be open to this, organisations need to have a tolerance for messy non- linear processes and be prepared to devote some time to knowledge creation activities.
Creativity only becomes available when people are confused, overwhelmed and frustrated by not knowing. At such a point, according to Wheatley, a perfect insight miraculously appears. New solutions are born in messy processes that take time, and not by applying a series of incremental planned steps.
Most change in complex systems is emergent. Complexity theory suggests that a)
emergence is likely to occur spontaneously when there is sufficient connectivity between the components (or agents); and b) it may take the same effort to create large emergence as a small one.
The need for organisational change as a result of increased complexity within the
workplace, the increase in global competition, advancing technology and the continuous
need to improve performance has necessitated a new way of thinking about the way things are considered, viewed and get done in the organisation (Cooper, 1998). Deming and Juran (cited by Seddon, 2002) have demonstrated that people's behaviour is governed by the system in which they work, which goes against traditional management thinking.
Change is related to the patterns of behaviour of the people in the organisation: i.e. no change will occur ifthe people's behaviour remains the same. To change the performance requires a change to the system. The authors claim that the lack of a systemic approach to change is the single most common cause of failure of change programmes within
organisations. Systems thinking as a new paradigm is thus crucial for all employees.