Any grouping of individuals assembled for some business purpose is governed by four major interactive requirements: a lean organizational design; some guiding principles; a limited number of policies and procedures; and recommended practices. Each of these four requirements, individually and collectively, impose conditions on the system that can, if not controlled, generate work that does not add value.
Organizational Design
Organizational design generates lost time when too many interfaces become involved in any transaction and too many people are involved in the decision loop; the more people involved in the decision process, the greater the opportunity for generating lost time. As more professional disciplines, more functions, and more departments become involved in the decision process, it becomes more difficult to rationalize the redundancies and reach a decision without excessive hours of discussion.
In expanding economies, organizations add people without as much rigorous evaluation of future needs. Projects are added without the necessary evaluation and current projects continue even if they have a low potential for adding value. It’s not difficult to be successful when the economy is on an up cycle and all systems are "go" and meeting their objectives. But there comes a time when the economy declines and requires a reduction in staff. Such situations generate countless hours of lost time, not only at the time the staff is reduced but also in debating the future viability of the department or organization.
The usual response to added workload is: If we’re going to take on this new project, we need more people. But added staff may not be the answer. Why not consider the complete project load and eliminate those tasks that have the least or perhaps no impact on the organization’s performance or may no longer need to be completed? Just ask: Why are we working on this project? What are the benefits? If eliminating certain projects has no negative impact on the department or the organization, why pursue them?
You have most likely heard about building a "lean and mean organization." Lean and mean really doesn’t work. Lean, yes; mean, no. Lean and managerially disciplined provides a more responsible approach for the organization and its employees.
Guiding Principles
Guiding principles usually define how the organization will function. They define the organization’s philosophy of operation. But as a manager you will also develop an operating philosophy; that philosophy will most likely have your stamp on it. That philosophy will define your style and your expectations. That philosophy will define you as a manager. Will you be proactive? Will you foster creativity and innovation? Will you be receptive to new ideas? Will you go out on a limb to protect an employee? Will you treat everyone with respect? This list of questions is endless and depends on the purpose of your department. Your philosophy will also most likely reflect the organizational philosophy to a greater or lesser extent.
But guiding principles can also become stumbling blocks. The educators suggest that principles need to be internalized, but for how long? IBM fostered a policy of taking care of its employees, but did they carry it too far? In the early 1990s IBM’s CEOs were complaining that employees had become too comfortable. Who allowed them to become comfortable? Where were the CEOs in the 1980s when it all began? You can’t argue about taking care of employees, but you can go too far. IBM eventually reduced its total employment from a peak of 407,000 in 1986 to 325,000 in 1992. As time went on, IBM made further reductions in total employees. Principles and processes that are internalized must be reviewed periodically to determine if the foundations of those principles maintain legitimacy.
Throughout this article I have promoted the idea of managers being proactive as a guiding management principle. But being proactive does not suggest keeping your organization in turmoil with a new flavor of the day. One program needs to be digested before another is presented. Being proactive involves being productive. You can’t emphasize creativity and innovation verbally and then fail to provide the required resources or infrastructure. You can’t continually seek new ideas without focusing on completing the work at hand. If you’re a proactive manager you will go out on a limb to support your employees rather than turn the decision over to the bureaucracy. These are the high-anxiety activities. Respect for the individual cannot be compromised. Each of these questions requires balancing the needs of the group and the individual. Principles must let the department members know where you’re taking the group and what it wants to be. The message must be clear and cannot change every time some new crisis arises.
Policies and Procedures
Policies and procedures (P&P) were introduced at one time to develop standards of operation. Everyone didn’t have to start at the bottom of the learning curve. But like many things P&P went amok. Too often they include thousands of pages of minutiae that created a bureaucracy determined to make sure they’re fully enforced. P&Ps are essential, but when they hinder performance they need to be either modified or discontinued. Unfortunately the people who write the policies and procedures seldom have to implement them. They also write them with little or no input from the implementers. Policies cover human resources, technology, quality, intellectual property, and continuing education, as well as many other activities, often right down to how to purchase a pencil. Procedures describe the process by which certain activities are performed and can help or hinder performance. But procedures cannot be so prescriptive that they do not make allowances for personal judgment. Responsibility and accountability for actions cannot be dictated. Managers who focus on delivering results will find ways to circumvent restrictive procedures that prevent reaching objectives. These system-imposed time wasters need to be controlled. You need to question all procedures and reduce them to a minimum. While you may be concerned about the organization’s P&Ps you must be cautious about adding restrictive policies and procedures for your department.
Recommended Practices
Recommended practices arise from benchmarking processes from within and outside the organization. The purpose is to avoid reinventing the wheel. If some process has provided significant benefits in some department, can that same process be duplicated in other departments? Although the recommended practices are less restrictive than procedures, they cannot be allowed to hinder progress. What may work in one department may not work in another, even though conditions are similar. However, the benchmarking process cannot become an end unto itself. Benchmarking only provides a benefit if its application adds value in some way. It may be more appropriate to take the time and develop the next-generation process than depend on what has become common property and provides no competitive advantage.