Organizations are structures created to bring
together people who possess requisite competencies and attitudes to deliver
common organizational objectives for the companies they represent. The theories
of organization have evolved over the years to identify appropriate methods and
approaches, and tools and techniques by which an organization can function
efficiently and effectively. The need for such theories arose because some of the
fundamental and essential building blocks of organization such as departmental
arrangements, performance management systems, business priorities, leadership opportunities
while ensuring organizational delivery also generate forces of impedance. This,
coupled with the fact that people tend to have dissimilar backgrounds despite
sharing common criteria and objectives makes people management in an
organization truly challenging and complex.
Several types of organization structures have
been devised to enable organizational dynamics that support rather than impede
business objectives. Functional, geographic, business, project, matrix, and
flat organizational structures are deployed to meet specific requirements. It has,
however, been found that structures rarely solve anything by themselves and
management of interpersonal relationships is something that has enduring
substance and challenge. This blog post hypothesizes that organization being a
social structure at its core interpersonal management needs to recognize and understand
the social forces that operate in an organization. While interpersonal skills
are important to ensure organizational harmony, the social forces in an
organizational setting must first be understood.
Social forces
Just as an industry has competitive forces
that impact firm performance, organizations also have social forces that impact
team and individual performance. Similarly, just as there could be industry
specific generic competitive strategies, there would be generic organizational
strategies to manage the social forces effectively. Social forces in themselves
fall under two categories, neither of which is necessarily bad nor good on an
individual basis. Collectively, however, one set of social forces that are
called Type A Forces collectively generate impedance while the other set called
Type B Forces generate synergy. Both the types do exist in organizations. The
challenge is to enable Type B Forces.
Type A Forces are typically five in number,
and have a significant impact on how people, teams, departments and domains
work together in a firm. These are rivalry, paradoxes, conflicts, misalignment
and silos. It is easy to appreciate that each of the five forces is a natural corollary
of organizational diversity while together they form a counterproductive set.
Type B Forces, on the other hand, are inherently more positive, individually as
well as collectively. These are collaboration, clarity, harmony, alignment and “one
firm” as an operating paradigm.
Individual comparison makes it clear why Type
B Forces are eminently more desirable for an organization. Collaboration, as
opposed to rivalry, enables synergy of mutual strengths. Clarity as compared to
paradoxes avoids loss of time and effort on confusing paths. Harmony as
contrasted with conflicts ensures positivity and fulfillment. Alignment helps
the value chain function seamlessly while misalignment leads to broken
processes. And finally, when specializations and departments turn into silos processes
slow down in an organization while the organization functioning as one firm
works with synergy.
Generational styles
Type A and Type B Forces are not new to
discover or aim for in organizations. They have been in existence from the very
beginning of organized activity. Over time, conservative and non-competitive
organizations are characterized by a preponderance of Type A Forces while
proactive and competitive organizations are characterized by a preponderance of
Type B Forces. Leaders have tried to manage these forces with different management
styles. These styles are both the causes and result of the respective forces,
and often represent generational differences in people management philosophies
of managers and leaders.
Certain leaders facilitate and manage the
Type A Forces in an organization by their Command and Control Style (CCS).
Leaders adopting the CCS model simply direct people to obey. They typically let
the Type A Forces build up and when they feel that such forces have become
inimical to the organization they used their CCS model to root out the negative
forces. This approach works in spurts, and is both a cause and a result of Type
A Forces. In fact, team members who are observant of the CCS model adopt that
in their own behavioral approaches leading to greater generation of Type A
Forces.
Certain leaders facilitate and manage the
Type B Forces in an organization by their Influence and Deliver Style (IDS). Leaders
adopting the IDS model consciously inculcate in their people positive aspects
of collaboration, clarity, harmony, alignment and one firm. They articulate a
shared vision, detail out a workable strategy and demonstrate execution through
constant employee engagement. They are
observant of the emergence of Type A Forces and work towards converting them
into positive Type B Forces. As with the CCS model, team members who are
observant adopt their own positive behavioral approaches, creating a virtuous
organizational ecosystem.
Interpersonal skills
In the context of the foregoing, it is easy to
observe that interpersonal skills would tend to be more impactful in an
organizational ecosystem that has IDS leadership model and Type B Forces. In
ecosystems marked by CCS models and Type A Forces, interpersonal skills act as
temporary palliatives. The effort must therefore be focused on creating a
positive organizational ecosystem that enables the full play of interpersonal
skills. That said, there is considerable misreading of what interpersonal
skills mean in an organizational context. While these are, no doubt, social
skills they are not all about being nice to each other. In an organizational
context, they have certain deliverables too.
Interpersonal skills, though falling under
the category of social skills, are driven by technical or professional
competencies. In today’s competitive world, managing people or partnering
people is impossible without an ability to understand and analyze issues and present
solutions. Strange as it may seem, competency is the foundation of successful
cultivation of interpersonal skills. The foundation of being skilled
interpersonally lies in the ability to build trust and rapport. Trust and
rapport between individuals, whether they are colleagues or bosses and
subordinates, are built based on three fundamental appreciations.
To be acceptable in an organizational
setting, one should be aware that an issue or a problem exists, should be able
to understand the ramifications and empathize with the other person who has the
problem. This ability to build trust and rapport comes with the technical and
professional competency to grasp problems and issues. In the absence of such an
ability, the statements made by different individuals and departments to each other in the ordinary course of
business become positions of silos, rather than approaches of collaboration. Competency
and trust thus coexist but can find the linkage only when people are able to
connect through communication.
The third equally important enabler of
interpersonal skills is communication. Communication, in an organizational
context is not a matter merely or solely of language or grammar, which, of
course, are nice to have. Communication is relevant and complete only when it
comprises an equal and equitable measure of listening and speaking, enabling
both the parties to communication developing a common platform, from which they
can work together.
Skill triad
Successful organizations approach
organization dynamics in a holistic manner. While organization structures are
drawn up to meet business needs, the real emphasis will be on creating an
organizational ecosystem that promotes the positive Type B Forces of
collaboration, clarity, harmony, alignment and one firm concept, managed by an
Influence and Deliver leadership style. In such a solution, interpersonal
skills are developed on a triad of professional competencies, trust and rapport
building and communication. Organizational efficiency and effectiveness require
a holistic approach as outlined in this blog post.
Posted by Dr CB Rao on December 30, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment