Don’t reorganize – Deorganize!
Organizations tend to do this every now and again: Reorganize the structure to suit a new strategy, a change in the management team, try out a new hierarchy model, and so on.
In this post I lay out some alternatives, and end with a practical first step.
One of the pitfalls of reorganizations is that they provoke a huge amount of anxiety and resentment: people’s direct and indirect managers change, their role description changes, their promotional path becomes unclear.
I would like to suggest a different approach. Instead of a reorganization, gradually deorganize. Shed away redundant structure, and replace them with loose structures. Allow your organization to grow in response to real market needs, and not according to a decision that was made a couple of years earlier based on data that may have been momentarily correct, but have become irrelevant for today’s reality.
Sounds impossible? Actually, you see such structures every day of your life. When you see ants collecting food for winter, when you see schools of fish swimming together, when you watch migrating birds practicing towards their long flights and when they embark on their fantastic and inspiring far-away journeys.
These structures are not decided upon – they emerge according to changing needs of the group. Even ants have changing realities: when their nest is being attacked or flooded, as well as when they prosper and have food in abundance to accumulate for rough times.
In our business life we like to think that we can create strategies that can predict our organizations’ growth and needs for upcoming years. The truth is as far from this as can be. A good strategy is one that enables the organization to continually change in reaction to its present reality.
There are several keys to enable such strategies. There must be more, and I will share the ones I can think of now:
- Build the organization around stable, self-organized, self-maintained teams. Birds breed, old birds perish, and the survival of the individuals depends on the continuity of the flock.
- Build teams around the teams to manage their boundaries, and not manage their people. There is no chimp or seagull in command – and yet there order emerges; the role of the leaders is to protect the boundaries, not to order individuals what to do next.
- Create mechanisms to identify dependencies and dissolve them to increase their self-organization and self-maintenance. Survival of the fittest is not the strongest in physical strength; rather the ones most fit to endure change – guide your teams to the changing reality.
- Reduce integration effects among teams by modularity of the teams’ products. Species that depend on a small variety of foods find it harder to survive. Unless…
- Sometimes dependencies are inevitable, if only for a transient period. Encourage such teams to develop mutual relationships that will lead to win-win conditions. Symbiotic creatures benefit from each others’ strengths, and protect one another from their weaknesses.
- Like ants, continually prepare for rainy days. Education, refactoring, learning, are among the activities that will enable such teams to survive rough times
- Encourage diversity within and among teams. Diversity may manifest itself in members’ credentials (developers, testers, writers, …), seniority and experience, idiosyncrasies, gender, and more. A beehive with only queens or workers will not survive.
If you are a leader in your organization, and you want to learn how to respond faster, how to enable your teams to surpass even their own predictions, start by learning what makes your organization rigid in its current form.
Dan North, the originator of BDD and Deliberate Discovery, will be holding this one day workshop at the Agile Practitioners 2013 conference.
As Prof. Deming so elegantly put it: “Learning is not compulsory. Neither is survival”.