Hi all:
[Host's Note: Peggy, these are great questions! Thanks! ..Rick]
How would you tell the difference between a LO and a high performance
organization (HPO)?
A HPO is intentionally designed to bring out the best in people and to
create an organizational capability that delivers sustainable high
performance results. It is agile and market driven. It demonstrates
respect for individuals and stresses team involvement. Doesn't that sound
similar to the output of a LO?
HPOs have five major components: employee involvement, self-directing work
teams, integrated production technologies, organizational learning and
total quality management. Aren't LOs normally comprised of at least
similar components?
The biggest difference I see between the two may be the mindset behind the
strategic processes. I think HPOs are designed with the mindset that an
organization is a machine and their strategies are technicians' tools. LOs
are created with the mindset that an organization is a living entity and
their strategies are gardeners' tools.
(http://www.fastcompany.com/online/24/senge.html)
So I do believe that organizations are living entities. (Why wouldn't
anyone? Organizations are run by people?)
I also believe strategies are recipes, methods for humans to lend general
structure to complex ideas and situations. So considering how time and
time again human nature has proven to act in unpredictable ways, I would
think that an over-reliance on strategy would be very foolhardy. Strategy
will never guarantee that you will achieve your organizational goals.
Maybe it would be like how most of us try to be healthy. We take our
vitamins. We incorporate exercise into our schedules (ok - me excluded at
the moment). We watch what we eat. (ok -- me excluded again - I just had
some Ben & Jerry ice cream) We practice positive thinking. Etc. These are
all strategies we plan and implement so we can live as best and as long a
life as possible. But we know that our bodies will eventually and
frequently rebel against these activities.
So a HPO efforts would be like how we try to be healthy, except a HPO
would set measurable goals. (Just like I tried to do when I turned 30.
That was FUNNY!) A HPO would understand that change will happen, and would
make efforts to anticipate what those changes might be. However, these
efforts would be like a technician's planned maintenance. Run a diagnostic
here, change some oil there. Get rid of some unnecessary parts, etc. If a
HPO experienced an unanticipated crises, the technician would change a
filter to stop that rattle, replace that pesky screw that got stripped
when she or he changed the filter, etc. Maybe the situation would get
better; maybe it would get worse. But most likely it would overall stay
the same. The chances of the technician realizing the results she or he
expected would be very small, because the technician would be working
blind.
Thoughts?
--Peggy Stuart <pstuart@ctt.bc.ca>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.