Michael,
We need to remember that there are NO two people on this planet who are physiologically (mentally or physically) identical. Therefore, each person must first learn/interpret a given situation (process, problem, opportunity, etc.) in their own way before they can/will take some action.
Engineers can develop efficient/perfect processes and systems but there is no such thing as a perfect social system/network. Some people, unfortunately, still think they can develop efficient/perfect social structures. They are essentially pursuing a fairy tale.
Complex adaptive systems (self-organizing systems) such as social systems/networks develop certain distinguishable patters (dynamic order) over time but those patterns are in constant motion. For instance, it only takes one person in a complex adaptive system (network) who happens to have a "bad day" to change a particular dynamic order.
It's best to remember that people are NOT machines by any stretch of the imagination. That's why more education/training or trying to change a culture can only take you so far. It can never lead to some form of total perfection when it comes to social systems. For example, "Does every pilot fly the same plane EXACTLY the same way?" That's an impossible feat!
There is, however, a big difference between dynamic order and chaos when it comes to social systems. Nevertheless, let’s not deceive ourselves into thinking that we can somehow develop perfectly functioning social systems. One doesn’t have to look far to see the misery we create by treating people like machines.
Cheers,
Charlie
Michael,
Unless a business eliminates all people (it’s totally automated) it will ALWAYS have an informal self-organizing social system that will exert a tremendous amount of influence on its operations. So, one really has two choices: ignore such emergent networks and let them function clandestinely or develop an organizational context/ecology that will “influence” most of the informal networks to support the business’s goals and objectives.
What one needs to do is place emphasis on continuously expanding what I call “the organizational sweet spot” where the formal and the informal systems overlap. Most people, essentially, will support formal organizational goals IF they understand how the goals benefit the business, its customers, society as a whole, their fellow worker, and themselves. It’s surprising how many workers are clueless of such outcomes.
You can have a “disciplined” work environment when you treat people humanely and when they grasp the benefits cited above. The key to success is to fully understand what one can and can’t control. Simply put, organizational contexts can be managed/adjusted but not the people who work and function within those work environments. The reason for that is straight forward. People’s “relationships” are emergent and thus can’t be managed. That is, they can be influenced but not controlled.
Unfortunately, that subtlety as to what can and can’t be controlled in a work environment is still hard to grasp for most managers. There is, however, a bright light at the end of the management tunnel. There are currently great strides being made in “social neuroscience” that is starting to take the guess work (that’s been mostly wrong) out of our management theory. Learning how to “unmanage” social systems will be the name of the game in the future.
Charlie
Michael,
Again, a business's effectiveness is primarily dependent on the size of its "sweet spot" or the extent the formal and informal systems overlap. "Real" leadership is all about "value-added facilitation" not command and control.
Charlie