What's Best Next

  • Newsletter
  • Our Mission
  • Free Resource
  • Contact
  • Coaching
    • Center for Coaching
    • 2-HOUR DARE
    • Our Coaches
  • Speaking
  • Store
    • Online Store
    • Cart
    • My Account
  • Resources
    • Productivity
    • Leadership
    • Management
    • Web Strategy
    • Book Extras
  • About
    • Our Mission
    • Our Core Values
    • Our Approach to Productivity
    • Our Staff
    • Contact
You are here: Home / Archives for 4 - Management

How Do You Assess a Team for Cohesiveness?

January 21, 2009 by Matt Perman

Lencioni offers these questions in The Four Obsessions of an Extraordinary Executive:

  • Are meetings compelling? Are the important issues being discussed? Lack of interest in meetings is a good indicator the team may be avoiding issues because they are uncomfortable with one another. “There is no excuse for having continually boring meetings” (149).
  • Do team members engage in unguarded debate? Do they honestly confront one another? Even teams that get along well should be experiencing regular conflict and intense debate during these meetings.
  • Do team members apologize if they get out of line? Do they ever get out of line?
  • Do team members understand one another? “Members of cohesive teams know one another’s strengths and weaknesses and don’t hesitate to point them out” (150).
  • Do team members avoid gossiping about one another?

Filed Under: Teams

Something More Important than Knowledge and Experience on Your Teams

January 21, 2009 by Matt Perman

From Lencioni’s book The Four Obsessions of an Extraordinary Executive:

A group’s cohesiveness has far more impact on its success than its collective level of experience or knowledge. Teams filled with industry luminaries have been unable to compete with less experienced and relatively unknown teams that were able to create environments of trust and passion.

Cohesiveness at the executive level is the single greatest indicator of future success that any organization can achieve.

Filed Under: 4 - Management

The Best Investment for Your Organization During a Recession: Organizational Health

January 21, 2009 by Matt Perman

Patrick Lencioni has written many wise and sensible books on leading organizations, such as The Five Dysfunctions of a Team. His main focus is “organizational health.”

“Organizational health” is a low-cost, high-impact investment to make in your organization. It should be a priority during all times, not just during a recession. But during a recession, when there are possibly less opportunities pulling you in so many directions, you (perhaps) have a unique opportunity to give it more undivided attention.

Lencioni makes this point in his latest newsletter, “The ‘Down Economy’ Bandwagon“:

… use this time to invest in your organization’s future, especially when the investment is not a financial one.

The best place for an investment right now is in the general health of an organization. I’m talking mostly about improving the functioning of the executive team, and their clarification of and recommitment to the organization’s values and purpose. Doing this will require a little time and energy, but very little money. And it will yield significant returns now, and even more when the economy rebounds.

I got into Lencioni’s books about a year ago and have found his thinking to be among the most wise and useful out there on how to manage an organization well. He doesn’t give mainly “business thinking.” His thinking is useful to businesses, but it stems from broader principles that pertain to things like working well in working well in teams, managing people humanely, making jobs menaingful, and creating healthy organizations. In other words, his thinking is useful across all types of organizations — including families.

To flesh out the meaning of organizational health, I recently took notes over his book The Four Obsessions of an Extraordinary Executive, which focuses most directly on this topic.

He points out that organizational health is perhaps the key competitive advantage for any organization:

Organizational health is one competitive advantage that is available to any company that wants it, yet it is largely ignored. And, it is highly sustainable because it is not based on information or intellectual property. It should occupy a lot of time and attention of extraordinary executives (139).

What is a healthy organization?

A healthy organization is one that has less politics and confusion, higher morale and productivity, lower unwanted turnover, and lower recruiting costs than an unhealthy one (140).

How do you create a healthy organization?

The first step in making it happen is to realize that, like so many other aspects of success, it is simple in theory but difficult to put into practice. Requires high levels of commitment, courage, and consistency. Does not require complex thinking and analysis—and that is crucial. The second step is to master the fundamental disciplines and put them into practice on a daily basis. That’s what the rest of the book is about (140).

The fundamental disciplines or organizational health that Lencioni mentions are:

  1. Build and maintain a cohesive leadership team
  2. Create organizational clarity
  3. Over-communicate organizational clarity
  4. Reinforce organizational clarity through human systems

I hope to do more posts on organizational health in the future. Also, for more on this I would highly recommend The Four Obsessions of an Extraordinary Executive.

Filed Under: 4 - Management, c Strategy

Four Ways Social Networking Can Serve Your Organization

January 8, 2009 by Matt Perman

BNET has a good article on Four Ways Social Networking Can Build Your Business. Here’s the intro:

Social networking may sound fluffy, but it can translate into real benefits for you and your company. William Baker, a professor of marketing at San Diego State University, surveyed 1,600 executives and found that firms that rely heavily on external social networks scored 24 percent higher on a measure of radical innovation than companies that don’t. Online networks can help you hire the right people, market your product — or even find a manufacturer.

The four ways social networking can serve your organization are:

  1. Finding unexpected collaborators.
  2. Building a global business from scratch.
  3. Finding talent in the trenches.
  4. Viral marketing on the cheap.

Read the whole thing.

Filed Under: 4 - Management, Social Media

Do Goals Get in the Way?

January 8, 2009 by Matt Perman

Yes, that’s the point.

They get in the way of less important courses of action.

This does reduce flexibility — the flexibility to do what is not worth your time. But you should not set or implement your goals in a way that blinds you to genuine, spontaneous opportunity.

There’s the rub.

Seth Godin had two good posts recently that relate to both sides:

The Thing About Goals

Having goals is a pain in the neck.

If you don’t have a goal (a corporate goal, a market share goal, a personal career goal, an athletic goal…) then you can just do your best. You can take what comes. You can reprioritize on a regular basis. If you don’t have a goal, you never have to worry about missing it. If you don’t have a goal you don’t need nearly as many excuses, either.

Not having a goal lets you make a ruckus, or have more fun, or spend time doing what matters right now, which is, after all, the moment in which you are living.

The thing about goals is that living without them is a lot more fun, in the short run.

It seems to me, though, that the people who get things done, who lead, who grow and who make an impact… those people have goals.

Willing to Be Lucky

I just heard Kurt Andersen quote E.B. White with this glorious phrase.

How willing is your organization to be lucky? What about you in your career and your marketing efforts? Or in the people you meet or the places you go or the movies you see or the books you read?

My closest friends each were found as a result of chance encounters and luck. So were my biggest ideas and some of my most successful ventures.

It’s very easy to plot a course for today that minimizes the chance of disappointment or bad outcomes or lousy luck.

I wonder if you could plot a different course, one that created opportunities for good luck?

Filed Under: 4 - Management, Goals

On Layoffs

December 12, 2008 by Matt Perman

Tim Sanders has a great post from the other day called Layoffs: Unless Required for Survival, a Horrible Act.

I chickened out in titling my post here, opting for the ultra-safe “On Layoffs” because I have some more thinking to finalize in my mind on this subject. But Sander’s post is excellent. Here is the bulk of it:

I think it’s socially irresponsible to hire too many people during good times, only to lay them off when the business cycle goes South.  It happens all the time, I’ve seen it firsthand.  Today, many firms use layoffs as a way of telling Wall Street that they are being responsible – and frequently they get a short lived bounce in the stock price.  Note the phrase ‘short lived’.

In my view, socially responsible companies don’t need layoffs when they are still viable or making money. It is not an expense reduction strategy with an upside.  It should be a strategy of last resort, recognizing the pain and suffering that layoffs bring to its victims.

I would only want to add that lay-offs may also be necessary if a business legitimately needs to “prune” because of an intentional, well-conceived change in strategy and the way they are doing business.

But the fundamental point remains: It is really, really bad practice to hire too many people simply because “times are good.” You shouldn’t let your hiring — or spending — be dictated simply by the fact that resources are abundant.

This point is worth emphasizing in relation to expenditures especially: If something is a wasteful expenditure in bad times, it is probably also a wasteful expenditure in good times. Good times do not make wasteful expenditures less wasteful. There are no times for wasteful expenditures. This is not only right in itself, but if this were implemented more, there would be less need to cut expenses and lay people off when times get rough.

But the corollary of this is just as important to me (more important): If an expense or program is strategic, it is worth continuing in lean times just as much as in abundant times. Some things that are often viewed as “nice but not necessary if times get tough” are often in fact critical to long-term growth and success. Lean times should not be a justification for short-sighted cost-cutting. The book Profitable Growth Is Everyone’s Business: 10 Tools You Can Use Monday Morning does an excellent job making this point, especially in relation to marketing and promotion.

But there is a nuance here to my above comments. There are many more good and important things to do than there are resources. So sometimes good ideas cannot implemented because of real financial constraints. But then when the economy is doing well, the opportunity is created to do some of those things that could not have been afforded in leaner times. If those things can’t gain sustainable traction before a recession hits, sometimes there is no choice but to scale them back (unfortunately).

So I do believe that there are expenses that should be undertaken in good times that wouldn’t have been undertaken in leaner times. But the ultimate principle remains: Wasteful spending, or unnecessary hiring, is not justified simply because times are good. Likewise, don’t cut strategic, effective spending and strategic positions because times are tough.

The initiatives that are right to do are usually right in lean times as well as good times (see above paragraph for the nuances), and the initiatives and expenses that are ineffective to do are the wrong thing to do whether times are lean or abundant.

In good times, make decisions that can withstand the bad times; in bad times, don’t make decisions that you will regret when things recover — they will, in fact, likely delay your recovery and position you poorly when things do turn.

Update: Also see my post “Employees Are Not Overhead.”

Filed Under: c Strategy, Firing

Bad Meetings Generate Real Human Suffering

November 14, 2008 by Matt Perman

When I think of suffering, I typically think first about major trials such as famines or significant personal hardship. As we probably should.

But there are many forms of suffering, some of which we are responsible for placing on others. In our organizations, bad meetings are one such instance that deserve more attention.

Bad meetings have an effect on people beyond the meeting itself. They have ripple effects that flow throughout the organization and, perhaps even worse, into the lives and homes of our employees.

Alternatively, running effective meetings — meetings where you get things done and people actually enjoy being there — creates positive ripple effects that impact the organization and, perhaps more importantly, the lives and homes of our employees.

Patrick Lencioni makes this point very well in his book Death by Meeting: A Leadership Fable…About Solving the Most Painful Problem in Business (p. 253):

Bad meetings exact a toll on the human beings who must endure them, and this goes far beyond mere momentary dissatisfaction. Bad meetings, and what they indicate and provoke in an organization, generate real human suffering in the form of anger, lethargy, and cynicism. And while this certainly has a profound impact on organizational life, it also impacts people’s self-esteem, their families, and their outlook on life.

And so, for those of us who lead organizations and the employees who work within them, improving meetings is not just an opportunity to enhance the performance of our companies. It is also a way to positively impact the lives of our people. And that includes us.

Filed Under: Meetings

Employees are not Overhead

October 31, 2008 by Matt Perman

Standard terminology, at least in the non-profit sector, refers to employees as overhead.

This needs to change.

People are not overhead. People are the force that makes any company effective. That is not overhead.

Matthew Kelly and Peter Drucker make this point better than I ever could:

It has been almost forty years since Peter Drucker observed the single greatest error of our accounting system: people are placed in the liability column on the balance sheet. Machinery and computers are categorized as assets and people as liabilities. The reality, of course, is that the right people are an organization’s greatest asset. (Matthew Kelly, The Dream Manager, page 2.)

Of course, just about everyone is willing to say “people are our greatest asset.” But largely this is still in the realm of theory–it hasn’t penetrated the way we actually work and think. Kelly goes on:

We may have acknowledged this truth in theory, but we have not allowed it to sufficiently penetrate the way we manage our organizations, and indeed, the way we manage the people who drive them.

One indication of the fact that we haven’t yet started taking seriously the reality that people are assets, not liabilities, is that we still use terms like “overhead” to describe them.

Filed Under: 4 - Management

Employee Disengagement Costs You Money

October 31, 2008 by Matt Perman

The other day I picked up a book called The Dream Manager. It’s another business parable, but it is very perceptive. (I had never been into business parables until I started reading Patrick Lencioni’s stuff, which is excellent.)

The book is about employee engagement:

The problem is, the great majority of people in the workplace today are actively disengaged. This is the dilemma that modern managers face. To varying extents, people don’t feel connected to their work, the organizations they work in, or the people they work with. No single factor is affecting morale, efficiency, productivity, sustainable growth, customer intimacy, and profitability than this disengagement. (The Dream Manager, page 1)

I agree completely. Employee disengagement is a tragedy and is pervasive in the modern workplace. A friend of mine often says of his company that “they pay you just enough to keep you from leaving.” What a horrible way to treat employees.

The biggest reason that employee disengagement is important is because of what it does to people. It creates the “quiet desperation” of the modern workforce that we see all around us. It also has a financial cost. I found it really interesting that this cost can actually be quantified:

If on average your employees are 75 percent engaged, disengagement is costing you 25 percent of your payroll every month in productivity alone. The real cost to your business is of course much higher when you take into account how disengaged employees negatively affect your customers and every aspect of your business. (Page 2)

There are some very effective, and simple, solutions to the problem of employee disengagement. I think it is one of needs of the hour, and in one sense that is going to be a major component of what this blog is going to be about.  And for those interested in a helpful book on the topic in the meantime, The Dream Manager is proving to be a very good read.

Filed Under: 4 - Management

Guiding Principles for Organizational Design

August 11, 2008 by Matt Perman

The Basics of Organizational Design

The Nature of Organizational Design

General Principles

  1. Ultimate principle: Make it easy and motivating for people to collaborate, innovate, and achieve.
  2. “Organizational design is the means for creating a community of collective effort that yields more than the sum of each individual’s efforts and results. Organizational structures, processes, and practices channel and shape people’s behavior and energy. As a leader, you have the opportunity and responsibility to structure these relationships so that people find it easy to collaborate, innovate, and achieve” (Designing Dynamic Organizations).
  3. Organizational design is “the deliberate process of configuring structures, processes, reward systems, and people practices to create an effective organization capable of achieving the business strategy” (Designing Your Organization). It is to harness the efforts of individuals, although often it has been a barrier to them. One of its core purposes is to align individual interests with organizational interests, making it easy for employees to make the decisions that advance the organizational purpose.
  4. Organizational design is a competitive strategy and a hard-to-copy, and thus sustainable, source of competitive advantage.
  5. The six shapers of today’s and tomorrow’s organizations are: Buyer power, variety and solutions, the Internet, multiple dimensions, change, and speed.
  6. The business strategy should set the criteria necessary for determining the priority task to accomplish, and the organization should then be designed to meet those criteria. “Match what is required by the strategy to what is done best by the various structures to optimize the decision” (Designing Organizations).
  7. Every design has strengths and weaknesses. The weaknesses can be made up for through the proper implementation of lateral processes.
  8. Organizational design is more than organizational structure. There are five components: strategy, structure, processes, rewards, people. This enables you to overcome the negatives of any structure, because you can use the other components of the model to counter the negatives while achieving the positives.
  9. Consequences of a non-aligned organization (from Designing Dynamic Organizations):
    1. If strategy missing or unclear, confusion. People pulling in different directions, no criteria for decision making
    2. If structure not aligned to strategy, friction. Inability to mobilize resources.
    3. If processes and lateral capability is left to chance, gridlock. Lack of collaboration across boundaries, long decision and innovation cycle times.
    4. If the metrics and rewards don’t support the goals, internal competition. Wrong results, diffused energy, low standards, frustration and turnover.
    5. If people aren’t enabled and empowered, low performance. Effort without results, and low employee satisfaction.

Reconfigurable Design

  1. The organizational design needs to facilitate variety, change, speed, and integration.
  2. The environment changes rapidly and is turbulent. The company must be able to change as rapidly as the environment does. Therefore, “an organization must be designed from the outset to be more easily changeable” (Designing Organizations).
  3. Aligning with strategy can make an organization vulnerable, because the advantages of a specific strategy are often short lived as the competitors quickly copy it. But the problem is not alignment, but aligning around a nonsustainable advantage. Misalignment will cause conflict, friction, units working at cross-purposes, lack of clarity, and thus dissipation of organizational energy.
  4. What is needed is a new type of aligned organizational design: “structures and processes that are easily reconfigured and realigned with a constantly changing strategy” (Designing Organizations). This is the reconfigurable organization.
  5. The reconfigurable organization can these three capabilities:
    1. Formation of teams and networks across departments
    2. Use of internal prices and markets to coordinate the complexity of multiple teams
    3. Formation of partnerships to secure capabilities that it does not have.
  6. A dynamic organization: An organization that can be easily and proactively reconfigured to take advantage of market opportunities and that views organizational design as a competitive advantage. It can quickly combine and recombine skills, competencies, and resources across the enterprise to respond to changes in the environment. It is characterized by active leadership, knowledge management, learning, flexibility, integration, employee commitment, and change readiness.
  7. “A well-thought-out organization design empowers and enables employees to work in the highly interdependent, team-oriented environments that typify today’s business landscape. And the clearer the rationale for the design, the more quickly design decisions can be reassessed and modified to respond to external forces” (Designing Dynamic Organizations).

The Process of Organizational Design

  1. Organizational design is a continuous process, not a single event, because it is more than structure (and structure should be adjusted as needed as well). “Successful companies are continually evaluating and adjusting their organizations.”
  2. You need to follow a design process that builds commitment, because it takes both fit and commitment for a design to be effective.
  3. We often use our experience to design our organization. But this experience is limited and we can enhance it by blending it with the science of organizational design.
  4. In other words, many leaders make their organizational design decisions on the basis of their own experience and observation. But making sound decisions requires a framework that gives credence to one choice over another.
  5. Benefits of a framework are that you have a common language for articulating why one choice is better than another in objective terms, you are forced to make decisions on the basis of longer-term strategy rather than more immediate demands, you have a clear rationale for the choices considered, and you can more effectively evaluate outcomes, understand root causes, and make adjustments during implementation.
  6. When to redesign:
    1. You are starting up a new company or division
    2. You are planning to grow. Of 1999’s list of Fortune’s 100 fastest growing companies, about a fifth lost 60-90% of their value the next year, and almost half lost at least some value. Most suffered from not having the right infrastructure or people to support continued growth.
    3. You have just assumed a more senior position.
    4. Your strategy has changed.
    5. The organization has changed.
    6. There has been a major change in the external environment.
    7. Your organization isn’t delivering the performance expected.
  7. “Organizational design has to be rounded in an ‘ideal organization,’ that is, a conceptual framework. There has to be careful work on defining and delineating the structural principles. this work, in turn, must be grounded in the mission and purpose of the business, its objectives, its strategies, its priorities, its key activities.” (Peter Drucker, The Practice of Management, 599).

Design Principles

  1. Alignment is fundamental .“The more the structure, processes, rewards, and people practices reinforce the desired actions and behaviors, the better able the organization should be to achieve its goals. Just as important as initial alignment is the ability to realign as circumstances change” (Designing Your Organization).
  2. Keep the organization as clear and simple as possible.
  3. Bias toward centralizing support functions
  4. Similar roles should be standardized enterprise-wide.
  5. Organizing structure should parallel across the enterprise, as much as possible.
  6. Requisite complexity. Cannot avoid complexity, but can intelligently design and manage it.
  7. Complementary sets of choices. There are many choices, but once a strategic path is set the number of suitable choices for each point is reduced.
  8. Coherence, not uniformity.
  9. Active leadership. Leaders must clearly and continually communicate strategy and create the decision frameworks in which employees operate.
  10. Start with the lightest coordinating mechanism. “Always use the lightest touch when selecting what lateral form to use, choosing the least costly and least difficult process to meet the required objectives.”
  11. Make interfaces clear.
  12. “The basic rule in placing an activity within the organization is to impose on it the smallest number of relationships. At the same time, it should be so placed that the crucial relations, that is, the relationship on which depend its success and the effectiveness of its contribution, should be easy, accessible, and central to the unit. The rule is to keep relationships to a minimum but make each count” (Drucker, The Practice of Management, 545).
  13. Clarity: Each individual and manager needs to know where he belongs. Needs to have a clear home base.
  14. Economy: The minimum effort should be needed to manage and supervise and motivate. Organization structure should encourage self-motivation. The smallest number of people should have to devote time and energy to keeping the machinery going.
  15. Direction of vision: Organization structure should direct he vision of individuals and of managerial units toward performance rather than efforts. And thus toward results—the performance of the entire enterprise. “Performance is the end which all activities serve” (Drucker, The Practice of Management, 554).
  16. Understanding ones own task and the common task: Should enable each individual to understand his own task, and the task of the entire organization. And what each implies for the other.
  17. Decision-making. Needs to strengthen, not impede, the decision-making process.
  18. Stability and adaptability. The individual needs a home; no one gets much work done as a transiet in a railroad station waiting room. Stability is not rigidity—needs to be a high degree of adaptability. A totally rigid structure is not stable; it is brittle.
  19. Perpetuation and renewal.

The Power of Organizational Design to Mobilize Minds

  1. Companies have been constrained, unnecessarily, by the unproductive complexity of working in their own organizations. The massive opportunity is in the freeing of talented people from unproductive complexity, enabling them to use both hierarchy and collaboration more effectively. Large-scale collaboration, across the entire enterprise and enabled by digital technology, is the new element that opens the 21st century corporation to a greater potential to create wealth.
  2. Great financial impact can come from making organizational design the centerpiece of corporate strategy because most companies were designed for the 20th century manufacturing model which focused on tangible assets, where as today the greatest value comes from intangibles. “By remaking them to mobilize the mind power of the 21st century workforce, these companies will tap into presently underutilized talents, knowledge, relationships, and skills of their employees. This will open them up to new opportunities and vast sources of wealth.” (Mobilizing Minds)
  3. Companies need to mobilize mind power as well as capital, which comes from removing unproductive complexity while simultaneously stimulating the effective and efficient creation and exchange of intangibles.
  4. Intangibles are assets like brands, intellectual property, and proprietary networks that are unique to individual firms. With intangibles, you want to capture economies of scope. For ex, if investments in a brand can be shared across multiple products, you have economies of scope.
  5. Increase the number of productive interactions among your workers while reducing the number of unproductive interactions.
  6. Ideas for organizing in the digital age from Mobilizing Minds: Backbone line structure, one company governance and culture through partnership at the top, dynamic management (portfolio of initiatives separate from ongoing operational activities), formal networks, talent marketplaces, knowledge marketplaces, new financial measures (profit per employee becoming the primary metric for profitability, as it puts greater weight on returns on talent than returns on capital), role-specific performance management, and organizational design as strategy.
  7. The real engines of wealth creation in the 21st century are knowledge, relationships, reputations, and other intangibles created by talented people. Companies create wealth by converting raw intangibles into the institutional skills, patents, brands, software, customer bases, intellectual capital, and networks that increase profits per employee and returns on invested capital. These intangibles are true capital in the sense that they can produce real cash returns. A hindrance to this is that our financial performance measurements are geared to the industrial age, not the digital age. So in order to create wealth, companies first need to change their financial performance metrics so that they focus on returns on talent and not only returns on capital.

Our Situation

Organizational Capabilities

  1. Strengths-based organization
  2. Organizational health
  3. Synchronization with the New Marketing: Leverage scarce attention and create interactions among communities with similar interests. Every transaction is a form of media. Tell stories that spread because people want to share them, create remarkable products, gain permission to deliver messages directly to interested people. Ideas that spread through groups of people are far more powerful than ideas delivered at an individual.
  4. Optimization for industry collaboration and partnership
  5. Optimization for large-scale collaboration of constituents. Treat people with respect and connect them with one another.
  6. Big Think
  7. ROWE
  8. Deeds of mercy to illustrate and manifest what we proclaim
  9. Maximize our competence in Management as ministry.

Environmental Factors

  1. Google and the dicing of everything
  2. The long tail
  3. The need for an authentic story
  4. Direct communication between producers and consumers and consumers and consumers
  5. Infinite channels of communication
  6. The infinite shelf space of the web
  7. The triumph of big ideas
  8. The shifts in scarcity and abundance
  9. Shocks are the system –> change and speed
  10. The falling of interaction costs to almost zero through digital technologies that make large-scale collaboration possible

The Components of Organizational Design

Organizational design is more than organizational structure. There are five components: strategy, structure, processes, rewards, people. This enables you to overcome the negatives of any structure, because you can use the other components of the model to counter the negatives while achieving the positives.

Every design has strengths and weaknesses. The weaknesses can be made up for through the proper implementation of lateral processes.

Strategy

  1. Strategy is your high-level plan for success. It determines the direction of your company, and includes your mission, vision, long-term goals and short-term goals.
  2. Strategy is the cornerstone of the process. It “establishes the criteria for choosing among alternative organizational forms. Each form enables some activities to be performed well while hindering others. Strategy dictates which activities are most necessary, thereby providing the basis for making the best trade-offs in the organizational design” (Designing Organizations).
  3. Is based in part on organizational capabilities, which are the unique combination of skills, processes, technologies, and human abilities that differentiate the company.
  4. The business model is the “internal logic of a company’s method of doing business.” It includes the value proposition, target customers, distribution channels, revenue model, etc.
  5. The business portfolio sit he “set of product lines or business units that a firm manages.”
  6. The first step in connecting strategy to the design is to identify the most important organizational capabilities.

Structure

General Principles

  1. Structure is the way that authority is organized.
  2. There are four areas of structure:
    1. Specialization: The type and numbers of job specialties.
    2. Shape: The number of people in the departments (span of control).
    3. Distribution of power: Centralization and decentralization.
    4. Departmentalization: The formation of departments at each level.
  3. There are six principles of organization that can be used: functional, product, customer, geographic, work flow process, and front-back hybrid.

Structural Dimensions

Functional

  1. Functional structures organize around activity groups (functions).
  2. This structure is best for: Companies with a single line of business, are small, don’t have a diverse line of products, don’t compete based on speed of product development cycle times.
  3. Advantages of this structure are: Allows greater level of specialization, reduces duplication, higher economies of scale, higher standardization, allows people of one specialty to transfer ideas, knowledge, and contacts more easily.
  4. Disadvantages of this structure are: Can’t handle diversification and can create barriers between functions.

Product

  1. Product structures organize into divisions around products and/or product lines.
  2. This structure is best for: Companies that produce multiple products for separate market segments.
  3. Advantages of this structure are: Scales with diversification of product line, compresses development cycle, simple, broad operating freedom.
  4. Disadvantages of this structure are: Can result in duplication of resources and missed opportunities for sharing, with each division reinventing the wheel. This can be overcome by supplementing this structure with lateral processes. Economies of scale can be lost. Can overcome this by centralizing and sharing the functions that cannot be separated into the product units without a scale loss. Can create multiple points of contact for customer.

Customer

  1. Customer structures organize around customer segments, such as client groups, industries, or population groups.
  2. This structure is best for: Environments where buyers have strength and influence over the market, competition is based on rapid customer service and product cycle times, and the organization is large enough to achieve the scale required to duplicate functions.
  3. Advantages of this structure are: Customization, relationships, solutions.
  4. Disadvantages of this structure are: Divergence, duplication, scale.

Geographic

  1. Geographic structures are organized around physical location.
  2. This structure is best for: companies with a high cost of transportation for their products, who deliver services on-site, need to create perception that company is local, need to be close to customers for delivery and support.
  3. Advantages of this structure are: Local focus, possibly lower transportation costs.
  4. Disadvantages of this structure are: Mobilizing and sharing resources. When a customer needs a “global” solution requiring talent from multiple regions, slow response time. Cumbersome.

Front-Back Hybrid

  1. Front-back hybrid structures have the front-end organized by customer and the back-end by product. Gives customer one point of contact, while allowing for product excellence.
  2. This structure is best for: Companies that need to maximize both customer and product excellence and have managers skilled in managing complexity.
  3. Advantages: Single point of interface for customers, cross-selling, value-added systems and solutions.
  4. Disadvantages: Contention over resources, complex.

Workflow

These are not very interesting and don’t sound promising.

Choosing Structures

  1. The choice of structure must be based upon the company strategy. “Match what is required by the strategy to what is done best by the various structures to optimize the decisions” (Designing Organizations).
  2. The strategies best executed by each structure are (from Designing Organizations):
    1. Functional: Small size, single product line, undifferentiated market, scale or expertise within the function, long product development and life cycles, common standards.
    2. Product: Organization has a product focus, multiple products, short product development life cycle.
    3. Market: Important market segments, product or service unique to segment, buyer strength, customer has a knowledge advantage, rapid customer service and product cycles.
    4. Geographical: Cheaper transport costs, service is delivered on-site, need closeness to customers, need perception of the organization as local.
    5. Process: Alternative to functional.

Centralization vs. Decentralization

  1. Start with the premise of decentralization
  2. Then pull out compliance activities and centralize them
  3. Then pull out shared service opportunities and centralize them
  4. Identify the business performance improvement roles that might be played by the center (Designing Your Organization).
  5. “A decision should always be made at the lowest possible level and as close to the scene of action as possible. However, a decision should always be made at a level insuring that all activities and objectives affected are fully considered. The first rule tells us how far down a decision should be made. The second how far down it can be made” (Drucker, The Practice of Management, 545).

Organizational Roles

  1. An organizational role is a distinct organizational component defined by a unique outcome and set of responsibilities. may be a business unit, function, or type of job.
  2. Probably the most important design activity.
  3. Not simply a matter of defining the roles. Three steps: role definition, interface definition, boundary clarification.
  4. For role definition, define expected outcome and responsibilities for each role. Outcome is intended state to be achieved; responsibility is the tasks required to close that gap.
  5. Interface creation is defining the mutual expectations between roles that are interdependent and have a point of interface (handing off work, receiving work, providing a service, collaboration).
  6. Boundary clarification is identifying the boundaries between roles for decision-making and responsibility. Use a responsibility assignment matrix.

Leadership Roles

  1. Current trend is to delayer and flatten. Less layers of management can bring decisions and communication closer to customers, develop more autonomy and accountability lower in the org, and decrease costs.
  2. Conversely, more management positions gives people the opportunity to develop supervisory skills, provides for closer coordination of work output, and frees managers in levels above to concentrate on more strategic priorities.
  3. Rule is to develop the least possible number of management levels and forge the shortest possible chain of command.
  4. Workable executive teams are typically 5-10 people.

Core Business Activities

These are the core activities of any business. In a functional organization, these become the departments. In the other arrangements, these are sub-units within the departments (except for those functions which are shared).

  1. Finance: Controls the money. Makes sure company has the money it needs to operate. Helps departments do their budgets and consolidates them into one company budget. Works with senior management to set sales and profit goals for year and designs controls to keep finances in order.
  2. Accounting: Counts the money. Tracks the flow of money the company generates. Accounts receivable, accounts payable, and payroll al may be distinct sub-departments. Also credit and tax departments.
  3. Operations: Makes what the company sells. In manufacturing company, includes factory. Also includes departments such as shipping and receiving, purchasing, and back-office functions (such as check-processing at a bank). Often called the production Directly responsible for employee productivity, cost control, and quality.
  4. Marketing: Sells to groups. May also include market research, product development, public relations.
  5. Sales: Sells to individuals. May include customer service.
  6. Information systems: Runs the computer systems. Purchase, programming, maintenance, and security of the company’s computers, as well as using information for competitive advantage.
  7. Support functions: Do the rest. Human resources, legal, investor relations, facilities management.
  8. Each division is run by managers, who in turn report to vice presidents, who in turn report to the president and chief operating officer.

Lateral Processes

  1. All structures create silos, because every logic that can be used to group people has trade-offs.
  2. Lateral processes break down silos and coordinate activities across departments. They are information and decision processes that spread across units, enabling the decentralization of general management decisions and proper communication across departments.
  3. Lateral processes allow work to get done at the level it occurs, as people interact directly without having to go up the hierarchy and through their managers, and brings together the relevant players with the right perspectives to solve problems, make decisions, and coordinate work.
  4. Vertical processes concern whole-organization activities, such as strategic planning, budgeting, standards development, capacity management, etc.).
  5. Horizontal processes concern the workflow. Examples are new product development or the fulfillment of a customer order. These are becoming a primary vehicle for managing.
  6. Lateral processes are essential for being responsive on multiple dimensions. They are also the key to the reconfigurable organization. As strategy or the environment shifts, you don’t need to restructure; you just adapt your lateral processes. This is much quicker and more agile. In other words, the lateral structure is “more flexible and easily changed than the vertical. So a focus on its design will allow the company to respond quickly to shifts in strategy without having to restructure the entire organization” (Designing Your Organization).
  7. Lateral capability is the ability to bring the right people together quickly around risks or opportunities, and is the most powerful means of changing direction. It is the ability to build, manage, and reconfigure the various coordinating mechanisms to achieve strategic goals.
  8. You match the type and amount of lateral processes with the level of cross-functional coordination required by the business strategy.
  9. Six types of lateral processes are: networks, teams, lateral activities, integrating roles, and matrix organizations.
  10. The lateral capability is cumulative—you can’t have effective teams or integrating roles, let alone matrix structures, if you don’t have strong networks and well designed lateral processes beneath them.
  11. Lateral capability results in better return on management time, greater speed, higher flexibility, and employees thinking more broadly to understand other perspectives.

Networks

  1. Networks are voluntary processes. They occur spontaneously and thus are the least expensive and easiest to form and use. Organizational design can improve the frequency and effectiveness of them.
  2. People cooperate voluntarily when they have relationships with people in other departments and are comfortable working with them.
  3. Ways to enable the creation and flourishing of voluntary processes: define the key cross-departmental interfaces in each person’s role, interdepartmental events, co-location, communities of practice, annual meetings and retreats, rotational assignments, technology and e-coordination, mirror image departments, consistent reward and measurement systems.
  4. Training courses and conferences can be integral: “Voluntary processes also result from events such as training courses and conferences. Indeed, training budgets are as justified by their networking effects as by their developmental effects” (Designing Organizations, 49).
  5. Note that Steve Jobs found that creativity and collaboration suffered when people weren’t able to work in the same physical space. So he consolidated Pixar into one building in 2000, whereas before it was scattered among four sites.
  6. Principles for designing space to encourage interaction are: Provide communal space, create natural interaction hubs, and base design on function, not privilege. Note: Current trend to switch to totally open floor plans is less than optimally functional.

Teams

  1. Team, task force, or council. More costly than voluntary groups because they do not create naturally but are the creation of management.
  2. Can have different levels of formality, including creation of charters and goals. The charter defines the scope, mission, and authority of the group.
  3. Issue teams: Put together to solve a short-term specific problem.
  4. Work groups: Clusters of employees in same unit who do similar work and must coordinate their efforts.
  5. Cross-business teams: True integrative mechanisms. Pull together people across the departments.
  6. Manger’s role evolving: manager, team leader, facilitator, adviser.
  7. Conditions for successful teams include: Common purpose, team members influencing goals, clear priorities, right skill level and mix, team accountability, clear criteria for leadership positions, decision norms, information, performance measures and rewards.

Lateral Activities

  1. Typically 3-5 that are critical. Might include new product development, innovation management, and market research.

Integrative Roles

  1. These are formally created roles but without formal authority to coordinate work across units. Product managers, project managers, coordinator.

Rewards

General Principles

  1. People need to have a clear view of what success means. Reward systems define the expected behaviors and influence the likelihood that people will demonstrate them. They align the goals of the employee with the aims of the organization.
  2. The most important challenge is how to create incentives for collaborative behavior.
  3. Four components: Metrics, desired values and behaviors, compensation, reward and recognition (the nonmonetary component).
  4. Design of sound metrics rests on six principles:
    1. Bread: Not just financial.
    2. Criticality: Only what’s important. Too many overwhelm the system.
    3. Time orientation: Both lagging and leading. Leading to predict future trends, lagging to test accuracy. Measuring only lagging indicators is like trying to steer a boat only by its wake.
    4. Consequences: Beware of unintended consequences.
    5. Alignment: Avoid conflicting measures.
    6. Targets: Make challenging but not impossible.
  5. Balanced scorecard measures are: Financial, customer, internal business process, innovation and learning.
  6. Four dimensions of recognition: goals and results, values and behaviors, special achievement and effort, overall contribution. Shouldn’t reward one to exclusion of others. For example, reward only goals and results, and people can tend to focus on the end over the means. Reward only values and behaviors, and people can lose site of business results.

Compensation

  1. On compensation: “The trend in reward and compensation systems is to value people for their skills and knowledge they bring to the organization and how they use them rather than for their particular position they are currently filling. This shift from job focus to person focus helps build a reconfigurable organization. It changes the definition of success from moving up a job ladder to increasing skills and developing additional capabilities that are of value to the organization.” (Designing Your Organization, 191)
  2. Trends are:
    1. From a focus on salary to total compensation philosophy
    2. Predictable merit increases to variable compensation. Performance-based rewards that have to be re-earned each year and don’t permanently increase base salaries. Allows for differentiation in performance and yet holds down costs.
    3. Paying for time to paying for performance
    4. Valuing the position to valuing skills and knowledge
    5. Rewarding individuals to rewarding teams and business units
  3. “Traditional compensation methods value a job, regardless of who is in it. When jobs are well defined, stable, and provide little opportunity for development within the job boundaries, this system works well. What many companies have found is that it doesn’t work well in environments characterized by: integration of activities across many individuals, fluid tasks and responsibility definitions, high dependence on exchange of knowledge, interactions among multidisciplinary people.” (Designing Dynamic Organizations, 207)
  4. Do person-based, rather than job-based, pay. “Financial status and rewards in most organizations are based on the types of jobs people do. This approach is based on the assumption that job worth can be determined and that the person doing the job is worth only as much as the job itself is worth…. It is not clear that the worth of people can be equated with the worth of their job. This approach clearly does not fit with a company that depends on people for its competitive advantage. The alternative that is being increasingly adopted is person-based pay. It bases pay on each individual’s skills and competencies.” (Treat People Right) The benefit of person-based pay is in the kind of culture and motivate the system produces. Instead of being rewarded for moving up the hierarchy, people are rewarded for increasing their skills and developing themselves. This creates a learning culture in which personal growth and development are prized. So learning culture correlates with person-based pay.

People Practices

  1. People consists of the HR policies, including recruiting, selection, rotation, training, and development. These are the “collective human resource practices that create organizational capability from the many individual abilities resident in the organization” (Designing Dynamic Organizations).
  2. The purpose of HR policies is to “produce the talent required by the strategy and structure of the organization, generating the skills and mind-sets necessary to implement its chosen direction” (Designing Organizations).
  3. Dynamic, reconfigurable organizations are characterized by people practices that support learning and the development of strategically important capabilities. “Learning and development are key enablers for the organization.” (Designing Your Organization)

Other Structural Issues

Corporate Center

  1. The corporate center consists of the staff and activities that take place outside the operating units. The operating units are the profit centers, where the primary business activities take place.
  2. Corporate center activities general report to the CEO and provide support for all business units and the overall enterprise.
  3. Examples of activities are: enterprise-level management (CEO/COO), legal, financial reporting, payroll, HR, training, public relations, government relations, strategy, marketing, sales, distribution, IT, supply chain.
  4. Three primary roles: business performance improvement (creation and sharing of capabilities), shared services, and compliance.
  5. Typically organized into functions.

Management Levels

  1. Head of product divisions are general managers. (Product divisions develop well-rounded executive talent with the experience of running an end-to-end business.)
  2. Frontline drives performance, senior leadership drives strategic initiatives and cross-firm collaboration, and top management determines long-term health of the enterprise.
  3. Top management: The people held accountable by the board of directors for the performance of the entire firm.
  4. Senior management: Direct reports of top management, and is usually responsible solely for the business arenas and support functions it leads.

International Strategy

  1. Five types: export, partner, geographic (add units), multidimensional network (the geographic dimensions share power), transnational (all the firm’s units around the world play both leading and contributing roles in creating organizational capabilities).
  2. Adding geographic units and then collecting them into an “international division” reporting to the CEO is the most common way to move across borders.

Specific Cases

  1. Internet activities: Should be centralized in a single department because of the specific expertise needed.
  2. Knowledge management boundary-spanning integrative roles have come up recently. In this category are chief knowledge officer, chief learning officer, and chief innovation officer. Knowledge officers identify opportunities for knowledge creation that will create value for the company and coordinate knowledge sharing. See themselves as change agents, charged with overseeing the development of knowledge management systems and creating environment and culture that will stimulate knowledge sharing.
  3. “Social networks increase the opportunities for collaboration, as well as the effectiveness and value of that collaboration, by connecting parties with related knowledge and interests while reducing the search and coordination costs of both parties. They enable individuals and teams to mobilize knowledge and talent.” (Mobilizing Minds)

Implementation

  1. You have to build a process for building commitment into the design. For the success of the design depends not only on fit, but also on And if people do not feel that they were a part of the process, they will not be committed to it and you will have passive resistance.
  2. Part of this is interviewing employees in the planning stage. Another is testing alternatives in interviews with people. In these interviews, if someone dislikes an alternative, they need to propose a counter solution as well.

Related Business Concepts

Growth and Innovation

  1. An organization can grow in three ways: acquisition, organic sustained growth, organic breakthrough growth.
  2. Acquisition: Purchase another company.
  3. Sustained growth: Extend the core business through product improvements, extending product line, creating new generation of products.
  4. Breakthrough growth: A “more radical departure from the core business in which wholly new products are launched into new markets.” Organization must acquire the new capabilities while continuing to maximize its existing business.
  5. Both types of organic growth depend upon innovation: turning novel ideas into commercially viable products and services.
  6. Types of innovation, moving from sustaining innovations to breakthrough innovations: product improvement, line extension, next generation, new product, new technology, new business.
  7. “Breakthrough strategies require a higher degree of separation from the core business both during the development and the commercialization and launch phase” (Designing Your Organization).
  8. The degrees of separation, moving from integrated to separate, are: existing product unit, lightweight product team, heavyweight product team, separate unit.
  9. Err on the side of separation rather than having a new business housed within an existing business unit. If launch is successful, can integrate it back in, or if the business model is different, put it into its own division. Or form a joint venture, sell it, spin it off as separate, or shut it down.
  10. Instead of separating out new ventures ad hoc, can set up separate divisions to house and nurture the new products and opportunities. Called accelerators. Nokia has a ventures organization in addition to its handset and network businesses that does this. Tests and develops ideas that are beyond the scope of Nokia’s current businesses but within the overall company vision. After the new venture is established, it is integrated back into the core business, it becomes a new business unit, or it is sold.
  11. The unit ought to report directly to the executive level, regardless of its size, because otherwise it can be hampered by lack of attention and resources.
  12. Four general strategies for growth: sell more to the same base of carefully selected customers, systematically cook up new products or services, establish control of a market such that you grow as it grows, or grow by rethinking how you get your service or product to customers.

Business Portfolio

  1. Differing degrees of diversity: single business, integrated business, related business, mixed portfolio, conglomerate/holding company.
  2. Integrated: Variety of products but seek to sell as a package.
  3. Related: Strong similarities among business units, but products not sold as integrated solutions. Technology, resources, knowledge shared across lines of business, which the center facilitates.
  4. Mixed: There is a common theme among the businesses, but they have very different underlying business models. Ex is Disney, having a movie studio, theme parks, publishing, television networks, retail stores, and music.

Partnerships

Types of Partnerships

  1. There are various types of relationships that can be formed with other organizations: markets, contracts, sourcing and alliance, equity, and ownership. Each form is progressively greater in its coordination and dependence.
  2. Markets is a spot contract for specific projects and activities as needed.
  3. Sourcing involves a contract as well, but is a closer and longer-term relationship. Parties reveal their long-term plans and participate jointly in development. Or, producer can give more customization to the other party, who in turn provides more security to the producer through making them a sole or preferred supplier.
  4. Equity relationships involve a transfer of equity. There are three types: the network integrator takes a minority shareholding the suppler, each member takes a small share in the others, or a joint venture.
  5. In a joint venture, a separate company is created with its own equity, which is usually split evenly.
  6. Ownership provides more security, as in the equity model the relationship can still fall apart. So if the vulnerability is too great for one partner, or the opportunity for profit is too large to share, they will purchase the other.
  7. Thus, companies are driven to more complex forms of relationships because of coordination, vulnerability, and value capture.
  8. The first priority in selecting a partner is to understand their strategic intentions.

Partnership Structures

  1. For any of these, there are three types of partnership structure: operator model, shared model, and joint ventures where the joint venture is autonomous.
  2. Operator model: one partner takes the management responsibility for the joint activity.
  3. Shared model: management responsibility is shared between the two partners.
  4. Joint venture: the venture is autonomous, with its own board and decision-making.

Bibliography

Designing Organizations: An Executive Guide to Strategy, Structure, and Process, Jay Galbraith.

Desiring Your Organization: Using the Store Model to Solve 5 Critical Design Challenges, Amy Kates and Jay Galbraith

Designing Dynamic Organizations: A Hands-On Guide for Leaders at All Levels, Jay Galbraith, Diane Downey, and Amy Kates.

Organizational Design: A Step-by-Step Approach, Richard M Burton, Gerardine DeSanctis, and Borge Obel.

Mobilizing Minds: Creating Wealth from Talent in the 21st-Century Organization, Lowell Bryan and Claudia Joyce.

The Practice of Management, Peter Drucker.

The Ten Day MBA, Steven Silbiger

The Complete Idiot’s Guide to MBA Basics, Tom Gorman.

Meatball Sundae, Set Godin.

Managing Performance to Maximize Results, Harvard Business School Press.

Executing Strategy for Business Results, Harvard Business School Press.

 

Filed Under: 4 - Management, d Alignment

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17

About

What’s Best Next exists to help you achieve greater impact with your time and energy — and in a gospel-centered way.

We help you do work that changes the world. We believe this is possible when you reflect the gospel in your work. So here you’ll find resources and training to help you lead, create, and get things done. To do work that matters, and do it better — for the glory of God and flourishing of society.

We call it gospel-driven productivity, and it’s the path to finding the deepest possible meaning in your work and the path to greatest effectiveness.

Learn More

About Matt Perman

Matt Perman started What’s Best Next in 2008 as a blog on God-centered productivity. It has now become an organization dedicated to helping you do work that matters.

Matt is the author of What’s Best Next: How the Gospel Transforms the Way You Get Things Done and a frequent speaker on leadership and productivity from a gospel-driven perspective. He has led the website teams at Desiring God and Made to Flourish, and is now director of career development at The King’s College NYC. He lives in Manhattan.

Learn more about Matt

Newsletter

Subscribe for exclusive updates, productivity tips, and free resources right in your inbox.

The Book


Get What’s Best Next
Browse the Free Toolkit
See the Reviews and Interviews

The Video Study and Online Course


Get the video study as a DVD from Amazon or take the online course through Zondervan.

The Study Guide


Get the Study Guide.

Other Books

Webinars

Follow

Follow What's Best next on Twitter or Facebook
Follow Matt on Twitter or Facebook

Foundational Posts

3 Questions on Productivity
How to Get Your Email Inbox to Zero Every Day
Productivity is Really About Good Works
Management in Light of the Supremacy of God
The Resolutions of Jonathan Edwards in Categories
Business: A Sequel to the Parable of the Good Samaritan
How Do You Love Your Neighbor at Work?

Recent Posts

  • How to Learn Anything…Fast
  • Job Searching During the Coronavirus Economy
  • Ministry Roundtable Discussion on the Pandemic with Challies, Heerema, Cosper, Thacker, and Schumacher
  • Is Calling Some Jobs Essential a Helpful Way of Speaking?
  • An Interview on Coronavirus and Productivity

Sponsors

Useful Group

Posts by Date

Posts by Topic

Search Whatsbestnext.com

Copyright © 2023 - What's Best Next. All Rights Reserved. Contact Us.