The foundation of this posting is an interesting story that has been circulating in the net. It gives wonderful insight into one of the major contributors of organisational decay.
The story is like this. In an experimental study in behaviour, four chimps were put in a large cage and a banana with a live-wire around was hung from the ceiling. If any chimp tried to pull out the banana it would get an electric shock. The chimps tried to touch the banana and realised the danger soon and eventually they learned to keep away from the banana.
Then the researchers stopped the electrical supply to the wire around the banana. Still none of the monkeys touched it. The researchers removed one chimp from the group and introduced a new one to the cage. When the new arrival tried to touch the banana the others stopped him from doing so. Eventually, one by one all the original four chimps who have experienced electrical shock were replaced with four chimps who have never experienced it. But still none touched the banana.
Why? Because “That is how the system works”
We see such rigidity around us very often. Organisations establish a number of processes and practices in certain context. Over a period of time, the context changes but the processes remain as in the Brazilian saying “the winning team doesn’t change”.
This, instead of supporting discipline, then encourages bureaucratic rituals and ‘clerks’ come to prominence instead of business leaders; sort of organisational rigor mortis.
New ideas don’t get support or encouragement and risk avoidance becomes the norm. Everything will have to be cleared by the legal department, which itself is not a bad idea. But often it degenerates to a stage where entrepreneurship and risk taking gets killed and mediocrity and CYA policies become the norm.
The story is like this. In an experimental study in behaviour, four chimps were put in a large cage and a banana with a live-wire around was hung from the ceiling. If any chimp tried to pull out the banana it would get an electric shock. The chimps tried to touch the banana and realised the danger soon and eventually they learned to keep away from the banana.
Then the researchers stopped the electrical supply to the wire around the banana. Still none of the monkeys touched it. The researchers removed one chimp from the group and introduced a new one to the cage. When the new arrival tried to touch the banana the others stopped him from doing so. Eventually, one by one all the original four chimps who have experienced electrical shock were replaced with four chimps who have never experienced it. But still none touched the banana.
Why? Because “That is how the system works”
We see such rigidity around us very often. Organisations establish a number of processes and practices in certain context. Over a period of time, the context changes but the processes remain as in the Brazilian saying “the winning team doesn’t change”.
This, instead of supporting discipline, then encourages bureaucratic rituals and ‘clerks’ come to prominence instead of business leaders; sort of organisational rigor mortis.
New ideas don’t get support or encouragement and risk avoidance becomes the norm. Everything will have to be cleared by the legal department, which itself is not a bad idea. But often it degenerates to a stage where entrepreneurship and risk taking gets killed and mediocrity and CYA policies become the norm.
Innovations are not encouraged but maintenance becomes the key. People get fixed instead of problems getting fixed.
Employees with energy and enthusiasm get stifled and leave and paper-pushers tend to rule the roost. Splitting hair on provisions of staff rules gets more attention than the customer grievance.
Corporate bureaucracy "would be top on the list of sucking the life force out of [workers], making them feel helpless," says Scott Adams, creator of the Dilbert cartoon strip. It contributes to the loss of "any sense of self-worth or initiative [employees] have and turns them into weasels," he says. [1]
Employees with energy and enthusiasm get stifled and leave and paper-pushers tend to rule the roost. Splitting hair on provisions of staff rules gets more attention than the customer grievance.
Corporate bureaucracy "would be top on the list of sucking the life force out of [workers], making them feel helpless," says Scott Adams, creator of the Dilbert cartoon strip. It contributes to the loss of "any sense of self-worth or initiative [employees] have and turns them into weasels," he says. [1]
Such inhibiting bureaucracy eventually could zap the vitality of the organisations and could lead to decay and death. The primary challenge for any leader would be how to prevent this decay.
It does not mean laissez faire cowboy style management. Systems and Procedures form the steel frame on which the organisation can sustain growth. However it is like having a barking dog as a guard dog at home. But if the dog falls in love with its own barking and start barking for the sake of barking, the dog ceases to have value as a guard dog.
And that is the balance we need to constantly strive for...
[1] How to bend the rules of corporate bureaucracy, Denise Kersten, USATODAY.com
Sir, I have loved this story ever since I heard it from you a few years back. I have applied it to various processes and found the same result. People are following same practice (while working), which their immediate ancestors were following. When asked why are you following this practice the obvious answer is because so and so told me to this was at the time of TOI.
ReplyDeleteI remember that in a particular process MIS was made manually from various outputs, it was huge and the SOP even mentioned about the vlook ups and pivot tables, when asked that why do we do all this when the system can provide these figures, the answer was “ we do it this was because this is the way it was previously made”, the same which previously took about 4- 5 hours is now prepared in 10 mins.