Organizational Dynamics: Team or Bureaucracy?

This was my “thought of the day” from February 11th, 2015.

One of two staff personalities will be dominant in any organization — a staff may prize results and efficiency or a staff may prize the process above all. These two types of staff could be considered producers and bureaucracies. The former is defined by their focus on mission/task/goal accomplishment. The latter is defined by their focus on formats, forms, check lists, minutiae — whether you accomplish anything doesn’t really matter so long as you’re doing things the “right” way.

Leaders shape organizational culture and the nature of the staff that works for them. How does a Leader ensure they build the former Staff personality rather than the latter? I think that comes down to how Leaders and organizations treat risk. Risk aversion, in particular, is a unifying theme behind almost any bureaucratic (vs. effective) process. In general terms, organizations and Leaders have two choices — actions can derive from critical thinking, judgment and decision making by trained and qualified individuals or they can derive from a process intended to substitute for those things. This is THE critical point. Just because something is boiled down into a process is not in itself a bad thing — standardization is a boon to efficiency in a number of instances, and an effective process provides a standard that conserves resources. The problem is when the driving force behind a process is risk aversion or risk diffusion.

This is a natural course for organizations to take when they manifest a so called “zero tolerance” culture. When Leaders don’t tolerate mistakes, the focus of subordinates becomes not making mistakes. The intensity of the desire to avoid blame is proportional to the consequences. The tendency becomes building and entrusting processes and systems that are inviolable so that “the system” can bear the responsibility and risk rather than an individual. I speculate that at the root of every overwrought bureaucracy this is the principal mindset.

So, back to the question, how do you avoid creating an organization where the prime directive of employees is to remain blameless? How do you fight the instinct to hide behind a process, use a system as a shield? Risk acceptance as part of responsible risk management. You cannot be a part of a learning organization without taking responsible risk. Responsible risk may result in failure (though a controlled one), mediocre performance, success or something spectacular. Encouraging subordinates to take responsible risk is essential to effective development of future leaders. It is key to building experience within a field of expertise as well as developing robust responses to adversity. A Leader needs to tolerate honest mistakes and use them as opportunities to teach, coach and mentor. Can you imagine if a football team fired every player that blew a play? No one would make it through the season. Even great quarterbacks throw interceptions and lose games. You don’t fire Joe Montana for losing a game or Jerry Rice for dropping a pass (dating myself, I know). Play makers take risks because controlled risk is a way for skilled operators to create a situational advantage for themselves. A high performing organization innovates by empowering its people to take responsible risk while understanding that not every risk pays off.

It comes back to responsibility, ownership and risk. Good organizations and leaders give subordinates and employees ownership and responsibility of meaningful work. Good organizations tolerate responsible risk and honest mistakes and use them to improve. Good organizations and leaders, ultimately, run on team work and trust (underpinned by responsibility) — not on systems or processes. Whatever an organization relies on will grow — whether it’s team work or bureaucracy.