As interdependency
grows within society and industry, the challenges of effective
collaboration continue to be a focus for executive management.
The model of working within narrowly defined silos and limited
involvement with other areas of the company or industry is no
longer an option.
As managers work through models of interaction that allow
entities with diverse goals to work together on aspects that are
beneficial to all, the political models used through history
provide an interesting framework for comparison.
If we take the simplified view that a political system is a
large-scale social experiment, often with competing interests
and struggles among its members, then it is possible to learn
valuable lessons by viewing political systems as a macro-version
of company strategy and draw parallels between the political
system and comparable corporate strategies.
One of the most controversial political systems through history
has been communism, with mass participation being one of its
core ideologies. However, over time the term communism has been
stigmatized with dictatorship, radical actions and mass
suffering. From a strategic viewpoint, communism has performed
below that of its capital counterpart. Though this result is
commonly interpreted to mean the ideology is completely flawed,
another possible interpretation of this result is that issues in
implementation caused results far from the intention of the
strategy.
A clear problem with communism is that well intentioned views
could be hi-jacked by radicals, who may be better at instigating
group think dynamic behaviours. Individuals are often
intimidated to voice an objection openly without fear of
personal retribution or fear of confrontation.
Technology available today, however, allows groups and
individuals to think at the comfort of their own home, construct
their arguments fully and then take a stance. Anonymous postings
via the internet provide a way of dissociating an idea from an
individual, thus de-personalize potential confrontation during a
discussion. Therefore, it is possible that opinions and
suggestions can be evaluated fairly based on their own merits
and radical actions are not as likely to happen.
Another controversial form of political structure is that of
dictatorship, where the will of a few is imposed on the mass. In
business terms, this is similar to the structure of a
conventional corporation with a strict vertical hierarchy.
Divisions of silos are formed in a company to better allow for
the coordination of activities, with information only channeling
down. The control of these official channels is thus crucial,
with officially sanctioned communications running easily through
these limited channels.
Great ideas stemming from an individual have no simple method of
reaching the mass population and the dissemination of the
different view points is costly, what Ronald Coase called the
cost of information. With the rise of the internet and the ease
of which opinions and social solutions can be communicated, the
dictator structure’s advantage is strongly neutralized. There
will be fewer people with information advantages, who can
potentially abuse the system with their position.
In reviewing either of these political models, a useful exercise
is to place the models in the context of a corporate strategy.
Consider a situation where a company chooses a strategy but does
not foresee the stumbling blocks along the way. In a review of
the efficacy of the strategy, a company can identify the
difficulties that led to its failure and use tools available
today to address them, thus creating value for the company.
Prior to assuming that the strategy was fundamentally flawed,
careful analysis needs to be undertaken to determine if there
were ways in which the thinking behind the strategy could have
been better implemented.
Through the framework of the political models of communism and
dictatorship, business parallels can be drawn. Recent advances
show technology is in the process of turning true collaboration
into an affordable reality. Though the concept of mass
collaboration was a good idea in the days of Marx and Lenin, it
lacked the proper infrastructure to get around the human aspects
and cost of information. Currently, businesses who seek an
advantage are drawing on diverse views. Finding the right expert
to solve a pre-defined “type” of business problem will no longer
provide sufficient advantage. Neither will each functional
employee simply performing the duties on the job description.
Unlocking the insights seen by each individual, who is closer to
the end users, will be the key.
Forward-looking companies have started tapping into the wisdom
of the rank and file employee. Product design and engineering
companies use the concurrent design methodology by forming
diverse teams that include designers, technicians, manufacturing
engineers, and even assembly workers. Design decisions do not
get made over the wall as demonstrated by Cisco Systems, who
effectively used this strategy to sustain product superiority.
When it comes to business or strategy decisions, however, the
circle of influence has remained small, often narrowing to only
senior management. Management needs to make sure a good decision
is made and verified, but does not always have to come up with
the decision.
The customers of a company will determine the ultimate success
of a company. Employees who deal with them directly have the
best knowledge of how to serve them. Company-wide strategic
decisions incorporating their viewpoints will be superior and
the cost of including their viewpoints is ever decreasing.
Companies that choose to embrace this culture will have a
competitive advantage.
To return to the political model framework, while many
dictatorships have fallen as a result of the mass’s demand to
have their voices heard, others choose to go down fighting. The
tools used for such a fight are media censorship, movement
control and restriction to openness to change through
maintenance of traditional methods.
The competitive landscape has changed significantly in recent
years in that mass collaboration is now affordable and will
render such control tools ineffective. Management teams that
learn lessons from failed political models have the opportunity
to structure their corporation to use new technologies to take
away the stumbling blocks and to form new ways of constructive
collaboration. |
