Images
of Organization
Gareth Morgan
ABSTRACT
- In this revised management classic, Gareth Morgan, contributes to our
understanding of organizations by suggesting that it is vital to view organizations through multiple
metaphors or images. In several updated chapters (4 and 8) he explores the major
contributions chaos and complexity theory are making to a deeper appreciation of the nature of
change in organizations and develops practical steps leaders can take to tap these new insights.
|
Chapter 1 -
INTRODUCTION: On the nature of metaphor and its role in understanding
organization and management
|
- "Effective managers and professional
in all walks of life have to become skilled in the art of
"reading" the situations they are attempting to organize or manage... Skilled leaders and
managers develop the knack of reading situations with various scenarios in mind and of forging
actions that seem appropriate to the understandings thus obtained. They have a capacity to
remain open and flexible, suspending immediate judgments whenever possible, until a more
comprehensive view of the situation emerges. They are aware that new insights often arise as one
approaches situations from "new angles" and that a wide and varied reading can create a wide
and varied range of possibilities."
- "This book explores and develops the
art of reading and understanding organizational life. It is
based on a very simple premise: that all theories of organization and management are
based on implicit images or metaphors that lead us to see, understand, and manage
organizations in distinctive yet partial ways....The use of metaphor implies a way of
thinking and a way of seeing that pervade how we understand our world
generally."
- "We use metaphor whenever we attempt
to understand one element of an experience in terms of
another. Thus, metaphor proceeds through implicit or explicit assertions that A is (or is like) B.
When we say "the man is a lion," we use the image of a lion to draw attention to the lion-like
aspects of the man. The metaphor frames our understanding of the man in a distinctive yet partial
way. One of the interesting aspects of metaphor is that it always produces this kind of one-sided
insight. In highlighting certain interpretations it tends to force others into a background role...
Another interesting feature rests in the fact that metaphor always creates distortions.... The man
is a lion. He is brave, strong, and ferocious. But he is not covered inn fur and does not have
four
legs, sharp teeth, and a tail!"
- "When we approach metaphor in this
way we see that our simple premise that all theory is
metaphor has far-reaching consequences. We have to accept that any theory or
perspective that we bring to the study of organization and management, while capable
of creating valuable insights, is also incomplete, and potentially misleading....Metaphor
is inherently paradoxical. It can create powerful insights that also become distortions,
as the way of seeing created through a metaphor becomes a way of not seeing."
"One of
the most basic problems of modern management is that the mechanical way of
thinking is so ingrained in our everyday conceptions of organization that it is often difficult to
organize in any other way."
|
|
Chapter
2 - MECHANIZATION TAKES COMMAND: Organizations as Machines
|
- "Set goals and objectives and go for
them. Organize rationally, efficiently, and clearly. Specify
every detail so that everyone will be sure of the jobs that they have to perform. Plan, organize,
and control, control, control. These and other similar ideas are often ingrained in our way of
thinking about organization and in the way we evaluate organizational practice. For many people,
it is almost second nature to organize by setting up a structure of clearly defined activities linked
by clear lines of communication, coordination, and control."
- "The strengths and limitations of
the machine as a metaphor for organization are reflected in the
strengths and limitations of mechanistic organization in practice."
- "The strengths can be stated very
simply. Mechanistic approaches to organization work well
only under conditions where machines work well: (a) when there is a straightforward task to
perform; (b) when the environment is stable enough to ensure that the products produced will be
appropriate ones; (c) when one wishes to produce exactly the same product time and again; (d)
when precision is at a premium; and (e) when the human "machine" parts are compliant and
behave as they have been designed to do."
- "Some organizations have had spectacular
success using the mechanistic model because these
conditions are fulfilled....McDonaldÕs and many firms in the fast-food industry provide the best
examples...Surgical wards, aircraft maintenance departments, finance offices, courier firms, and
other organizations where precision, safety, and clear accountability are at a premium are also
often able to implement mechanistic approaches successfully, at least in certain aspects of their
operations."
- "However, despite these successes, mechanistic
approaches to organization often have
severe limitations. In particular they (a) can create organizational forms that have great
difficulty in adapting to changing circumstances; (b) can result in mindless and
unquestioning bureaucracy; (c) can have unanticipated and undesirable consequences as the
interests of those working in the organization take precedence over the goals the organization
was designed to achieve; (d) can have dehumanizing effects upon employees, especially those at
the lower levels of the organizational hierarchy."
- "Mechanistically structured organizations
have great difficulty adapting to changing
circumstances because they are designed to achieve predetermined goals; they are not
designed for innovation."
- "Changing circumstances call for different
kinds of action and response. Flexibility and capacities
for creative action become more important than narrow efficiency. It becomes more important to
do the right thing in a way that is timely and "good enough" than to do the wrong thing well
or the
right thing late."
- "The hierarchical organization
of jobs builds on the idea that control must be exercised
over the different parts of the organization (to ensure that they are doing what they are
designed to do), rather than being build into to parts themselvesÉMuch of the apathy,
carelessness, and lack of pride so often encountered in the modern workplace is thus
not coincidental: it is fostered by the mechanistic approach."
- "A final set of problems relate to
human consequences. The mechanistic approach to
organization tends to limit rather than mobilize the development of human capacities, molding
human beings to fit the requirements of mechanical organizations rather than building the
organization around their strengths and potentials. Both employees and organizations lose from
this arrangement. Employees lose opportunities for personal growth, often spending hours a say
on work they neither value nor enjoy, and organizations lose the creative and intelligent
contributions that most employees are capable of making, given the right opportunities."
"Mechanistic
approaches to organization have proved incredibly popular, partly because of their
efficiency in the performance of tasks that can be successfully routinized partly because they offer
managers the promise of tight control over people and their activities. In stable times, the approach
worked from a managerial point of view. But with the increasing pace of social and economic change,
the limitations have become more and more obvious."
|
|
Chapter
4 - LEARNING AND SELF-ORGANIZATION: Organizations as Brains
|
- Images of the brain - "More recently,
the brain has been compared with a holographic
system...When it comes to brain functioning it seems that there is no center of point of control.
The brain seems to store and process data in many parts simultaneously. Pattern and order
emerge from the process; it is not imposed....But the holographic explanation can go too far
in
that it underplays the fact that despite the distributed character there is also a strong measure of
system specialization. The brain, it seems, is both holographic and specialized!
- "Single-loop learning rests
in an ability to detect and correct error in relation to a given set of
operating norms. Double-loop learning depends on being able to take a "double look"
at the
situation by questioning the relevance of operating norms."
- "...many organizations have become
proficient at single-loop learning, developing an
ability to scan the environment, set objectives, and monitor the general performance of
the system in relation to these objectives...However, the ability to achieve proficiency
at double-loop learning often proves more elusive. Although some organizations have
been successful in institutionalizing system that review and challenge basic paradigm
and operating norms, many fail to do so. This failure is especially true of bureaucratized
organizations, whose fundamental organizing principles often operate in a way that
actually obstructs the learning process."
- Guidelines For Learning Organizations
- Scanning and anticipating environmental
change - "Learning organizations have to
develop skills and mind-sets that embrace environmental change as the norm. They have
to be able to detect "early warning" signals that give clues to shifting trends and
patterns....They must embrace the creation of insight and knowledge."
- Challenging operating norms and assumptions
- "To learn and change,
organizational members must be skilled in understanding the assumptions, frameworks,
and norms guiding current activity and be able to challenge and change them when
necessary....For successful double-loop learning to occur, organizations must develop
cultures that support change and risk taking. They have to embrace the idea that in
rapidly changing circumstances with high degrees of uncertainty, problems and error are
inevitable. They have to promote an openness that encourages dialogue and the
expression of conflicting points of view. They have to recognize that legitimate error,
which arises from the uncertainty and lack of control in a situation, can be used as a
resource for new learning. They have to recognize that genuine learning is usually action
based and thus must find ways of helping to create experiments and probes so that they
learn through doing in a productive way. All this, of course, can raise high levels of
anxiety in an organization. In particular, it is difficult for managers who want to be "on top
of the facts" and "in control" to ride the kind of creative chaos on which innovation
thrives. Yet this is precisely the competence that double-loop learning requires."
- Encouraging "emergent" organization
- "As has been shown, a "top-down"
approach to management, especially one focusing on control through clearly defined
targets, encourages single-loop learning but discourages the double-loop thinking that is
so important for an organization to evolve. This creates interesting paradoxes for
management, for how can one manage in a coherent way without setting clear
goals and objectives? The answer derived from cybernetics is that behavior of
intelligent systems requires a sense of vision, norms, values, limits, or
"reference points" that are to guide behavior. Otherwise, complete randomness
will prevail. But these "reference points" must be defined in a way that creates
a space in which many possible actions and behaviors can emerge including
those that can question the limits being imposed! Targets tend to create
straitjackets. Cybernetic points of reference create space in which learning and
innovation can occur."
- Organizations as holographic brains
(or "designs" that facilitate learning) - "The
metaphor of a hologram invites us to think of systems where qualities of the whole are enfolded
in all the parts so that the system has an ability to self-organize and regenerate itself on a
continuos basis... there are several key principles that can help create contexts in which
holographic self-organization can flourish."
- Build the "whole" into
all the "parts" - Four ways to accomplish a) Corporate
DNA - "The visions, values, and sense of purpose that bind an organization together can
be used as a way of helping every individual understand and absorb the mission and
challenge of the whole enterprise...To create brain-like capacities for self-organization,
however, it is vital that the cultural codes uniting an organization foster an open and
evolving approach to the future." b) Networked intelligence - "Information systems
that can be accessed from multiple points of view create a potential for individuals
throughout an enterprise to become full participants in an evolving system of
organizational memory and intelligence." c) Holographic structure - "A third
way of
building "the whole" into "the parts" rests in the design of organizational structures
that
can grow large while staying small... Consider, for example, the case of Magna
International, an auto parts manufacturer that has grown at a rapid rate....The Magna
philosophy is encoded in a simple set of business principles and the rule that operating
factories must remain on a small s cale to avoid becoming impersonal. Thus, once an
enterprise reaches a size in the region of 200 people, the only way it can grow is by
spinning off another unit...The process has a "fractal" quality in that the same basic
pattern reproduces itself over and over again." D) Holistic teams and diversified roles
- "A fourth way of building "the whole" into "the parts" rests in how work
tasks are
designed. Under old mechanistic principles work processes were usually fragmented into
narrow and highly specialized jobs, linked through some means of coordination...The
holographic approach to job design moves in exactly the opposite direction by defining
work holistically. The basic unit of design is a work team that is made responsible for a
complete business processÉWithin the team, roles or jobs are then broadly defined with
individuals being trained in multiple skills so that they are interchangeable and can
function in a flexible, organic way."
- The importance of "redundancy"
- "Any system with an ability to self-organize must
have a degree of redundancy: a kind of excess capacity that can create room for
innovation and development to occur. Without redundancy, systems are fixed and
completely static....Parallel processing and sharing information can be a source of
creativity, shared understanding, trust, and commitment...shared decision-making (ringi)
contains massive redundancy. It is however, very effective in exploring issues from
multiple perspectives and in testing the robustness of emerging decisions and actions. The
process offers a wonderful example of how intelligent action can emerge from "multiple
drafts."...The second design method incorporates a redundancy of functions. Instead of
spare parts being added to a system, extra functions are added to each of the operating
parts, so that each part is able to engage in a range of functions. This is the principle
guiding the self-organizing work groups...Members acquire multiple skills so that they are
able to perform each otherÕs jobs and substitute as the need arises."
- Requisite variety - Clearly,
it is impossible to give everybody all possible information
about everything. It is impossible for people to become skilled in all possible tasks and
activities. So where does one draw the line? The principle of requisite
variety...suggests that the internal diversity of any self-regulating system must
match the variety and complexity of its environment if it is to deal with the
challenges posed by that environment...The principle of requisite variety if not just an
abstract concepts. It is vital management principle. If a team of unit is unable to
recognize, absorb, and deal with the variations in its environment, it is unlikely to evolve
and survive. The principle suggests that when variety and redundancy are built at a local
level - at the point of interaction with the environment rather than at several stages
removed, as happens under hierarchical design - evolutionary capacities are enhanced.
Individuals, teams, and other units are empowered to find innovations around local issues
and problems that resonate with their needs. This also provides a resource for innovation
within the broader organization, as the variety and innovation thus experienced is shared
and used as a resource for further learning."
- Minimum specs - "The
three principles discussed above create a capacity to evolve.
But systems also need freedom to evolve. This is where the principle of "minimum critical
specifications" ....comes into play. The central idea here is that if a system is to have
the freedom to self-organize it must possess a certain degree of "space" or
autonomy that allows appropriate innovation to occur...The principle of minimum
specs suggests that managers should define no more than is absolutely
necessary to launch a particular initiative or activity on its way. They have to
avoid the role of "grand designer" in favor of one that focuses on facilitation,
orchestration, and boundary management, creating "enabling conditions" that allow a
system to find its own form...The challenge is to avoid the anarchy and the completely
free flow that arises when there are no parameters or guidelines, on the one hand, and
over-centralization, on the other."
- "The metaphor (brain) invites us to
rethink key management principles in a way that lays the
foundation for a completely new theory of management. Consider, for example, how an
understanding of the functioning of the brain challenges traditional assumptions about the
importance of strong central leadership and control; about the wisdom of setting clear goals and
objectives; about the role of hierarchy; and about the concept of organizational design; and the
wisdom of trying to develop and impose systems from the top down."
"...in developing
the importance of the brain as a way of creating capacities for learning and self-
organization there is a danger of overlooking important conflicts that can arise between learning and
self-
organization, on the one hand, and the realities of power and control, on the other. Any move away
from hierarchically controlled structures toward more flexible, emergent patterns has major
implications for the distribution of power and control within an organization, as the increase in
autonomy granted to self-organizing units undermines the ability of those with ultimate power
to keep a firm hand on day-to-day activities and developments. Moreover, the process of
learning requires a degree of openness and self-criticism that is foreign to traditional modes of
management. Both of these factors tend to generate resistance from the status quo. Managers
are often reluctant to trust self- organizing processes among their staff and truly "let go."
Many early
experiments in self- organizing work designs encountered this problem, and many still do. There is such
a
strong belief that order means clear structure and hierarchical control that any alternative seems to
be a
jump in the direction of anarchy and chaos. As has been suggested, successful self-organizing systems
always require a degree of hierarchical ordering. But this hierarchy must be allowed to emerge and
change as different elements of the system take a lead in making their various contributions. In such
systems, hierarchy and control have an emergent quality; they cannot be pre-designed and imposed."
|
|
Chapter
8 - UNFOLDING LOGICS OF CHANGE: Organization as Flux and Transformation
|
- "Although it is common to draw a clear
distinction between the two (organization and
environment), it seems systemically wiser to view organization and environment as elements of
the same interconnected pattern. In evolution, it is pattern that evolves." In recent years
major insights on how this occurs have emerged from two related lines of development: the
theory of chaos and self-organization on the one hand and complexity theory on the other. Using
physical experiments and computer simulations as metaphors for understanding what happens in
nature, they contribute important elements to a holistic theory of change."
- Complex nonlinear systems like ecologies
or organizations are characterized by
multiple systems of interaction that are both ordered and chaotic. Because of this
internal complexity, random disturbances can produce unpredictable events and
relationships that reverberate throughout a system, creating novel patterns of change.
The amazing thing, however, is that despite all the unpredictability, coherent order
always emerges out of the randomness and surface chaos."
- "Whether we are examining the flocking
of birds, the changing relationships between predators
and prey...the hive behavior of bees, or the way in which organizations and social systems get
transformed over time, it seems that we can detect common processes of spontaneous self-
organization. If a system has a sufficient degree of internal complexity, randomness and
diversity and instability becomes resources for change. New order is a natural
outcome."
- "Complex systems seem to have a
natural tendency to get caught in tensions....falling
under the influence of different attractors that ultimately define the contexts in which
detailed system behaviors unfold....Create a context defined by a few simple points of
reference that are equivalent to the "minimum specs"...and random fluctuations will
self-organize into a coherent form. Chaos theorists have noted that complex systems
can fall under the influence of different types of attractors. Some pull a system into
states of equilibrium or near equilibrium, for example, as a result of negative feedback
loops that counteract destabilizing fluctuations. Other attractors have a tendency to flip
a system into completely new configurations...this illustrates how a system can be
drawn under the influence of different sets of reference points that in effect define
competing contexts. The detailed behavior depends on which context dominates."
- "In explaining how systems can
transform themselves in this way, chaos theorists have
become particularly interested in understanding what happens when a system is
"pushed" far from equilibrium toward an "edge of chaos" situation. Here, it encounters
"bifurcation points" that are rather like "forks in the road" leading to different
futures.
At such points the energy within the system can self-organize through unpredictable
leaps into different system states....Bifurcation points and associated "attractors"
always exist as latent potentials within any complex nonlinear system. They signal
potentials for self-organization and the evolution of new form. However, the path of
system evolution is completely unpredictable, because, given the complexity and non-
linearity, seemingly insignificant changes can unfold to create large effects.
- "Quantum and qualitative change, incrementally!"
- Managing In The Midst Of Complexity
- "These insights have enormous implications for
modern management, giving rise to at least five key ideas for guiding the management of change.
In a nutshell, they suggest that it is important to:
- Rethink what we mean by organization, especially
the nature of hierarchy and control
- Learn the art of managing and changing
contexts
- Learn how to use small changes to create
large effects
- Live with continuous transformation and
emergent order as a natural state of affairs
- Be open to new metaphors that can facilitate
processes of self-organization."
- Rethinking organization - "Instead
of seeing these qualities (order and organization) as states
that can be externally imposed on a situation through hierarchical means, or through
predetermined logic that we bring to the design of bridges or buildings, managers are invited to
view them as emergent properties. New order emerges in any complex system that, because
of
internal and external fluctuations is pushed into "edge of chaos" situations. Order is natural!
It is
emergent and free! But most interesting of all, its precise nature can never be planned or
predetermined."
- The art of managing and changing "context"
- A second extremely important implication of
a chaos-complexity perspective rests in the idea that the fundamental role of managers is to
shape and create "contexts" in which appropriate forms of self-organization can occur.
As has been noted, the implicit rules, reference points, or "minimum specs" that define an
"attractor" create a context in which a system can acquire detailed empirical form...The focus
on
attractor patterns thus creates a powerful perspective for the management of stability and the
management of change, suggesting that transformational change ultimately involves the
creation of "new contexts" that can break the hold of dominant attractor patterns in
favor of new ones...New contexts can be created by generating new understandings
of a
situation, or by engaging in new actions. New understandings can transform the
autopoietic
processes of self-reference through which a system produces and reproduces its basic sense of
identity. This can be achieved by exposing the system to new information about itself or its
environment and by encouraging...double-loop learning....New context can also be created by
engaging in new actions that help to push the system into a new state more directly. Experiments,
prototypes, changes in rewards, changes in key personnel...can by themselves embody powerful
messages that catalyze other changes in the context as the system adjusts itself to the new reality.
While new understandings can create a heightened sense of the need for change, and a direction
in which an organization may feel it needs to go, new actions help to get it there. The
conventional way of thinking about organizational change puts these in a sequential order. But
from a chaos perspective they often need to be reversed. New action can catalyze new
understandings."
- Using small changes to create large
effects - A third major implication of the chaos-
complexity perspective, and one that brings a great deal of pragmatism to the task of managing
and changing contexts, rests in the idea that in "edge of chaos" situations, small but
critical
changes at critical times can trigger major transforming effects...it follows that any
person wishing to change the context in which they are operating should search for
"doable" high-leverage initiatives that can trigger a transition from one attractor to
another. Chaos theory also gives clear indications of where they should look for these
initiatives. As will be recalled, the tensions between competing attractors generate
"bifurcation points" leading to different paths of future development. Most often these
manifest themselves as paradoxes or tensions between the status quo and alternative
future states...The chaos manager must recognize these "forks in the road" and create
a context
supporting the new line of development by finding interventions that transcend the paradoxes or
make them irrelevant For examples, by creating a successful prototype, or by getting key opinion
leaders behind the initiative, he or she may be able to create the crucial time and space in which
success can be demonstrated, publicized and made irreversible. The challenge of managing
complex systems often seems completely overwhelming. The complexity defies comprehensive
analysis, and it is often difficult to know where to intervene. The above principles encourage us
to cut through this complexity and focus on a few key principles that offer the promise of
achieving quantum change incrementally! In much of the management literature quantum change
and incremental change are seen as opposites. Quantum change is seen as being produced
through large initiatives. Incremental change is viewed as the route to marginal improvements.
While this is true under conditions of linearity, in complex nonlinear systems small incremental
changes can produce large quantum effects. If people focus on finding high-leverage initiatives
within their sphere of influence that have the capacity to shift the context, potential for major
change can be unleashed. There are at least two ways in which this potential can unfold. First,
small changes may in themselves catalyze a major change, because the change itself proves
pivotal....Second, small changes can also create a critical mass effect. Though small and
insignificant in themselves, together they build an overwhelming force."
- Living with emergence as a natural state
of affairs - "In complex systems no one is ever in
a position to control or design system operations in a comprehensive way. Form emerges. It
cannot be imposed, and there are no end states. At best, would-be managers have to be content
with an ability to nudge and push a system in a desired direction by shaping critical parameters
that can influence the course of system evolution....Successful experiments can go a long
way in creating a foothold on a new reality. In particular, they offer important insights
on the feedback loops and defensive routines that sustain a dominant attractor pattern
and what can be done to help a new one emerge....The chaos manager must also develop a
heightened awareness of the importance of "boundary management." As noted earlier, new
experiments often get neutralized by the status quo. It is thus vital that the chaos manager
become skilled in the art of managing boundaries: building them when it is necessary to
shield an initiative from the forces of the old attractor, and breaking them when the
initiative is strong enough to survive on its own."
- Being open to new metaphors that can
facilitate self-organization - "New images and
metaphors of the managerÕs role are often needed...to cope with the ambiguity, paradox,
pressures, and uncertainties that the absence of fixed states and clear end points entails...The
research on chaos and complexity is full of resonant images based on the behavior of termite
colonies, beehives, and other processes that illustrate the nature of self-organizing systems. They
provide a valuable resource for carrying organization and management theory into a new
domain."
- Managing paradox - "In our discussion
of chaos theory, mention was made of how systems that
are moving away from the influence of a dominant attractor pattern towards a potential new
configuration encounter "bifurcation points" or "forks in the road," at which energies
for change
either dissipate and dissolve in a way that allows the old attractor to reassert itself or shift the
system into a new form. An understanding of the dialectical nature of change offers important
insights on the process, suggesting that the "fork in the road" usually arises around key
paradoxes
or contradictions that block the way to a new future. The successful management of change
requires skill in dealing with these contradictory tensions....Potential new futures always create
oppositions with the status quo. This dialectical principle gets played out in many forms:
- Innovate ----------------------------Avoid
mistakes
- Think long term--------------------Deliver
results now
- Cut costs----------------------------Increase
morale
- Reduce staff-------------------------Improve
teamwork
- Be flexible---------------------------Respect
the rules
- Collaborate--------------------------Compete
- Decentralize-------------------------Retain
control
- The first step in the successful management
of paradox rests in recognizing that both
dimensions of the contradictions that accompany change usually have merit. The
second vital step....rests in finding ways of creating contexts that can mobilize and
retain desirable qualities of both sides while minimizing the negative dimensions. All the
skills of managing in the midst of complexity, discussed earlier..., are relevant here. To the extent
that the paradoxes created by change remain unaddressed, they become the stalemating context.
"The whole
idea that change is an emergent phenomenon offers a powerful mind-set for managing
change. It encourages us to gain a reflective understanding of the logic driving the flux around us
and to
nudge and shape the logic wherever we can. Yet it also requires us to recognize that we can never be
"in
control." The message is that, even though our actions shape and are shaped by change, we are just
part
of an evolving pattern. The challenge, of course, is to cope with this paradox: By recognizing that
even
though we cannot exert unilateral power of control over any complex system, we can act through the
power and control that we actually do have. Using the image popularized by chaos theorists, the
invitation is to recognize that although we may be no more than "butterflies" in terms of
our
power on the overall system we can have enormous effects, especially when we use our
insights about system dynamics and the nature of change to determine how and where to
intervene. And, of course, the more butterflies the better!"
|
|
|
1. Thoughts
