Four Groups Blog

I’ve been chatting to the more than thought provoking Jon Husband
about HR, changing practice, the need for deep change and the role of
wirearchies.

One of the thoughts that crossed my mind is the potential
contrast between black & white and coloured networks.

What do I mean by black & white and coloured networks? The rise in
networking, network analysis and the recognition that improved
relationships (and lower transaction costs) are drivers of better
performance has been gaining greater recognition in recent times.

This recognition and the use of the appropriate tools then leads to
the creation of diagrams such as the ones below¹.

While these types of diagrams are presented without context, they are
often used to represent paths of communication, trust, people who
connect groups and influence the flow of information. They also can be
used to show how a process is really carried out and by whom in a way
that can contrast or complement the traditional (or assumed)
organisational structure.

Another key feature of these diagrams is that the lines connecting
people tend to be black and white. There may be arrows to show flows of information and sometimes the line width varies too. Also, the
length of the line usually has no material bearing on the
interpretation of the diagram. My point in all of this being that the
black and white network diagram is exactly that, black and white.

By way of contrast, the use of 4G makes it possible to create network
maps that are coloured and show how each connection has different
qualities to it.

In other words, each connection or relationship can
be assigned a weight/colour to show the nature of a particular
relationship. In this case, green represents the most productive and
engaging relationships while blue, yellow and red require greater and
greater levels of time and energy to be as productive as the green
ones. This then adds a whole new spectrum of information to complement our understanding of the network and people’s relationships within it.

As a final note, it’s also worth making a couple of other
observations. Firstly, while there are just four colours in the
diagrams above, there are actually 14 different types of relationship,
suggesting far greater complexity and granularity than can be shown with just 4 colours. Equally, there is a whole series of tips,
suggestions and ways to improve and develop these relatonships from a
coaching and development point of view.

Finally, given that the information from 4G in its current state is
100 percent psychological and the information in other network
analysis diagrams is 100 percent contextual, the two make very
complementary bed-fellows, each one providing the other with
information that compensates for the other’s blindspot.

Notes

1. Image credit Wikimedia Commons

The presentation below builds on research from Harvard, MIT, Warwick (via Proudfoot Consulting) and a meta analysis from the University of Amersterdam and Carnegie Mellon.

Two ideas to consider…

1. Focusing on the ‘unstructured, intangible and typically unmeasured’ will lead to the greatest increase in profits and problem solving over the coming years.
2. Benefiting from working on the ‘unstructured’ will only be fully realised when it is possible to see this in the context of new technologies, processes and practices. In other words, the emergence of a new paradigm or theoretical approach.

‘Unstructured, Intangible and Typically Unmeasured’

Gartner and others have suggested that

as much as 60% of an organization’s processes are unstructured – and probably also unmonitored, unmanaged, unknown and unruly

In a similar vein, John Hagel of Deloitte writes that

In a rapidly changing world, the knowledge that matters the most is tacit knowledge… Accessing this kind of knowledge requires long-term trust based relationships and a deep understanding of context

The CIPD then offers us the following

The intangible value of an organisation which lies in the people it employs is gaining recognition by accountants and investors, and it is generally now accepted that this has implications for long term sustained performance

There are of course many more examples, one of the most recent being the contrast between Israeli and US airport security. The Israeli’s focus on intangible, human factors, having established successful processes, while the US still focus on the tangible, to the detriment of the more subtle¹.

If only 40% of processes within organisations have been mapped, or are formal enough to commit to ERP programs, for example, that leaves the majority of an organisation’s activity which might be better tackled from a different perspective.

New Technologies, Processes and Practices

The obvious candidate to fulfil the brave new world of intangibles is Enterprise 2.0 and its collection of internet technologies. While the potential exists for E2.0 to be open, democratic, disruptive and transformative, the jury is still very much out on this.

By way of contrast, perhaps Gary Hamel best sums up the status quo. Quoting research from Towers Perrin on engagement, he writes

barely one-fifth (21%) of employees are truly engaged in their work, in the sense that they would “go the extra mile” for their employer. Nearly four out of ten (38%) are mostly or entirely disengaged, while the rest are in the tepid middle. There’s no way to sugarcoat it—this data represents a stinging indictment of the legacy management practices found in most companies

Interestingly, Gary’s recommendations aren’t a million miles away from other recent suggestions on the subject

We’ve got to get management’s dirty little secret out of the HR closet and into the boardroom. And second, if we’re going to improve engagement, we have to start by admitting that the real problem isn’t irksome, monotonous work, but stony-hearted, spirit-deflating managers

These thoughts reminded me of a point made by Rick where he writes

That the HR function needs to become more strategic is a mantra I first heard over twenty years ago when I started working in HR…

Just because senior executives are starting to see the importance of managing human resources it doesn’t mean that they will give Human Resource managers a seat at the top table. It might even be that the HR function never becomes strategic at all and that HR professionals are relegated to a support role while someone else does all the interesting stuff

I think Mark and Seth’s points light the way ahead, but I wonder how long it will be before people management benefits from something as exciting as ‘artists taking over from the technicians‘…

Footnote

1. Finding spending comparisons between Israel and the US is easier said than done.

A good friend, Professor Vlatka Hlupic recently had a piece published in Harvard Business Review called ‘To Be a Better Leader, Give up Authority‘. Congratulations!

The piece focuses on leadership, giving up power as a leader and witnessing corresponding improvements in performance. There are also case studies from CSC and ANADIGICS showing some attractive financial improvements as a result of this new way of working.

Over and above the financial improvements, perhaps the most interesting aspect of the article is the idea of “mutualism.”

Mutualism involves measuring workers not against revenue or other numerical goals, which we have observed to be ineffective as motivational tools, but against qualitative values such as trust, responsibility, and innovation.

And it implies that leaders don’t dictate vision or strategy; instead, they enable employees to create a common vision through, for example, off-sites for discussion of strategic issues and regular feedback and education. Hitting numerical goals has been the natural outcome.

It will be interesting to see if methods such as mutualism increase in popularity and adoption over the coming months.

Welcome to 2009’s third quarterly review, as with previous issues, engagement continues to be at the forefront of people’s thoughts. Behind the engagement debate however there seems to be a growing call for a wider reappraisal of the fundamental way corporations are organised and for me personally, this is the most interesting aspect of this quarter’s articles. Other themes include;

• Shifting the Organisational Pyramid
• The McLeod Review on Employee Engagement
• The Leader/Manager Debate
• Line Managers who Lead
• The Intrinsic Motivation of Autonomy, Mastery and Purpose
• The Irrationality of Human Behaviour
• Tomorrow’s HR Professionals – A Multi-Disciplinary Background

Articles are included from the likes of Harvard Business School, Henry Mintzberg, HR Magazine, McKinsey, the McLeod Review, the Partnership Institute, Personnel Today, Strategy + Business and TED.

Tag Cloud

(more…)