On taking decisions

In the past I have provided links to how great leaders arrive at solutions to problems that apparently had no apparent solutions. Being able to make sense of and take the most appropriate decision is an key change agent skill.

In his book ;"Why Great Leaders don't take Yes for an answer", Michael A Roberto talks about how leaders can enhance the quality of their decision making processes. According to him, leaders ( and in our context;change agents) must cultivate constructive conflict so as to enhance the level of critical and divergent thinking,while simultaneously building consensus so as to facilitate the timely and efficient implementation of choices that they make.

The author distinguishes between cognitive conflict     ( Constructive debate that can enhance the decision to be made) and effective conflict(when personality clashes emerge).Similarly consensus in more about every one understanding the rationale of the decision than uniformly agreeing to it. The author then build the following picture on decision success..

For a decision to be a success, it seems what is needed is a process.. a process that effectively balances conflict and consensus. The key elements to be considered in establishing a process of taking a decision include

• Composition: Who should be involved
• Communication:What are the means of dialogue among the participants
• Context: In what types of environment does the decision take place
• Control : How will the leader control the process and the content of the decision?

Many approaches ( e.g. Edward Debono's Thinking hats) have been recommended and practiced to enable organizations find the right balance.

Winning with integrative thinking

As people responsible to bring in change, we are sometimes faced with problems that seem unsurmountable.I have rarely come across directions on what could be called 'good' problem solving.

Roger Martin in his book 'The Opposable Mind' consolidates research he has done on how some of the most outstanding men and women of our century think (and solve problems). That the research included K V Kamath and (our own) Ramalinga Raju probably makes the book more interesting.

This is what Martin says

Most of us think and decide in almost a sequential manner: To quote the author "We arrive at our choice by considering a set of features we deem salient;creating a mental model of the causal relationships among these features;arranging those causal relationships into an architecture intended to produce a specific outcome;thereby reaching a resolution of the problem at hand". This approach is many cases lead to 'sub optimal' results.

The author then goes on to provide examples like how A.G. Lafley reinvented innovation at P&G to introduce the concept of integrative thinking. Integrative thinking is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in their mind at once , and then reach a synthesis that contains elements of both but actually improves on each.By refusing to accept unpleasent trade-offs and conventional options,integrative thinkers are able to find creative solutions to difficult problems.

Here is a list of take aways regarding integrative thinking that would be useful to us as we attempt to find solutions to problems

• Seperate (mental) models and reality
• The author talks about the 'factory setting' each of us have, which in turn means we think in a certain manner
• Dancing through complexity
• The need NOT to over simplify
• Mapping the mind

The author then goes about to talk of how 'integrative thinkers ' connect the dots or the leap of mind.,
The skills required include

•  Generative reasoning ( a form of reasoning that inquires into what might be rather than what is)
• Causal modeling and
• Assertive inquiry ( an ability to explore opposing models)

The author then goes on to talk about the personal knowledge system of an individual as what makes a difference.Time all of us build one, clear in the understanding that ; may be out there; there is an innovative solution to THE problem , that we just have not thought about..





















P.S. I attempted to put some of this theory into practice .. end result I started car pooling with some of my colleagues. While saving on fuel was defenitely a goal, what led us to this was too things : Pooling meant that we got out of our offices atleast two days a week on time and we got time to talk together

Reasons for a short break - Started writing again - will post by Nov 15 !

I was out in the field travelling till the 28th of May.Post which, some additional responsibilities and organizational realignment took up a lot of my time.

I also realised that while I met my 'quantity' targets of a post a week, I was not very happy with the 'quality' of my posts. I also saw myself repeating almost the same stuff

Please bear with me till I return with more detailed posts. My target date for the same is 15th of August

Deciding what to change: Role of a diagnostic

It has always been a struggle to me to clearly establish an approach to identifying what to change. Six Sigma has its X's and Y's; process consultants have their maturity framework...but how does a CEO decide what needs to be changed in an organization..

Though newly arrived CEO's probably don't ; most consultants seem to recommend some form of diagnostic as the first step to starting a transformation journey.

Mark Gottfredson and Steve Schaubert (of Bain), in their book 'Breakthrough Imperatives (2008,Harper Collins) recommend a three step approach. The authors divide the transformation into steps of

• diagnose the points of departure
• envision the point of result and 
• (build) the road to results

The authors build their diagnostic around the following defined rules ; 

• Costs and prices always decline
• Competitive position determines your options
• Customers and profit pools don't stand still
• Simplicity gets results

We will discuss building diagnostics around these rules in subsequent posts. Any diagnostic will need identifying appropriate measures or performance indictors, finding ways to know the existing performance and establishing some form of benchmarks

What has been your experiences with building a diagnostic

P.S. Apologies for the break of previous weeks. I had another 'writing assignment' for my organization !!

Lateral leadership : A'nother' key change agent skill

Another key skill that every person tasked with making change happen is Lateral Leadership. Roger Fisher (1998, Harper Collins) subtitles his book on lateral leadership as getting things done when you are not the boss. I am sure every 'change agent' can recognize the situation

According to Fisher one can achieve a high level of colloboration that produces high quality results through lateral leadership.This includes three basic steps

• Organize and sharpen one's  personal skills at getting things done by yourself
• Understand clearly your strategic goal of an organized way of getting things done with others
• Learning some tactics of participatory management

Personal competency model

Just came across this 'managerial'  personal competency model, published in some manner by the UK Govt., way back in 1997. The contents resonate with my thoughts on what makes one a succesful change implementor. Hence reproducing the whole table . One can use the table to evaluate skills and gaps and identify improvement actions.

The Change Monster : A mental model for org change

Every 'change agent' should have a perspective of the various 'theoritcal' frameworks that has been proposed around organizational change. A realisation of the diversity of the approaches and their conclusions will help a change agent frame his or her response to a situation. I intent to provide short notes on the various approaches in this and some subsequent postings.

One of the 'interesting' frames of references I have seen is that proposed by Jeanie Daniel Duck in the book 'the Change Monster'.( 2001,Randon House).

The Change Curve , as illustrated above, provides a map of the territory of change according to the author.The change curve suggests that every organization going through will change will go through the phases of stagnation( till it is pushed either externally or internally) and should then ideally go through the phases of preparation,implementation,determination and then fruition. 

Assuming that most of get to do things after someone has identified the need for change :-); here is a short list of does and don't in the various phases according to the author

Preparation

• 
  
  Gain alignment
• 
  
  Use anxiety effectively
• 
  
  It is not important that leaders like each other,but they need to be able to work together effectively
• 
  
  Group change requires individual change ; a behavioural contract is required from every individual
• 
  
  Alignment is not the same as commitment and commitment is not the same as getting energized
• 
  
  A ready-willing and able assessment tells us when we are prepared

Implementation

Some of the recommendations for implementation include the need to build leadership strength, the need for informal communications etc

Which other framework do you use ?

Process Vs Functional Organization

Organization structure is one of the key levers available to a leader wanting to make improvements in the organization.A key trend that we see today is the move to 'process based ' or even more a matrix organizations. In the case of matrix organizations also , process tend to be one of the axes.

I do a lot of work in IT function improvement.Many clients are today implementing ITIL as an approach to bring visibility and improvement on the support side of IT. When implementing ITIL, a key struggle has been deciding the balance between the existing functional roles ( say a help desk manager) and the 'newly' introduced process roles (say a incident manager).

In the book,'Designing organizations' ;Jay R Galbraith (2002 Jossey Bass) talks about the type of lateral processes based on management time and difficulty. He talks about various levels : Voluntary and informal group, e- coordination,formal group (ranging from simple to multidimensional and hierarchical),integrator (full time by roles or departments) and finally a matrix organization.

Organizations wanting to implement ITIL are also faced with similar choices. As shown in figure above, they need to make a choice on the level of authority for the newly introduced roles. From a simple  reporting (Weather station) sort of roles (which would then be allotted on a part time basis to an existing functional role) organizations mature and evolve to provide more authority and control to process functions. There exists no perfect answer to where the balance of power resides !


What does all your experience suggest?

Influencing : a key change agent skill

Another critical skill that every change agent should attempt to develop is the skill to influence. On most occasions change agents will have to work through project team members over whom they have no formal authority.

Allen R. Cogen & David L. Bradford in their book "Influence without Authority" (2005, John Wiley) proposes an 'Influence Model' .The influence model aims to provide direction on influencing others

According to the authors the influence model- a careful diagnosis of the other's interests,assessment of what resources you possess,and attention to the relationship-enables one to address 'difficult situations'

The key elements of the model ( see figure) are

• Assume all-the other person or group-are potential allies
• Clarify your goals and priorities
• Diagnose the ally's world-organizational forces likely to shape goals,concerns and needs
• Identify relevant currencies(what is valued): the ally's and yours
• Deal with relationships
• Determine your trading approach: make exchanges

Are there best practices when it comes to influencing? How can a change agent be more effective?

Competencies to enable change: Judgement

As I introspected on qualities that make up an effective change agent, I recognized 'Judgement' as one of the critical ones .Judgement is typically identified as a leadership quality. But given the similarity of the nature of issues ( though may be smaller in scope) that a leader and a change agent has to resolve 'Judgement' becomes critical to a change agent .

Judgement (Neol M.Tichy and Warren G. Bennis 'Judgement' ;2007 Penguin)  is defined as a contextually informed decision-making process encompossing three domains: people, strategy and crisis.

Like a leader,a change agent, entrusted with the responsibility to deliver an improvement in his/her organization must take decisions in the face of ambiguity,uncertainity and conflicting demands.Here is a short list of approaches that can lead to 'good judgement' If you are responsible to drive change through your organization, then, some of these are as much applicable to you

During the sense/identify phase

• Be able to identify the environment early
• Mobilize to act
• Be energized about the future

During the frame/name phase

• Be able to cut through the complexity and get to the essence
• Clearly set parameters of a problem
• Provides context and language

During the mobilize/align phase

• Identify key stakeholders
• Engages and energizes stakeholders around framing
• Taps best ideas from anywhere

During the call phase

• Exercises yes/no judgement
• Clearly explains judgement

As the execution phase

• Leader stays in the game
• Supports those making it happen
• Sets clear milestones
• Gets feedback
• Makes adjustments
• The feedback is continuos