As I reflect on the two main organizations I have worked for, I am reminded of the only constant in organizational development. That constant is change. Brown (2011) noted "Although many organizations have been able to to keep pace with the changes in information technology, fewer firms have been able to adapt to changing social and cultural conditions. In a dynamic environment, change is unavoidable." (p. 6).
At this point in my career I have not professionally been in a parallel situation to the scenario that played out in the YouTube video, A Tale of Power and Vision. However, along the way in my professional career I have met pessimists, pragmatists, visionaries, power players and crowds within an organization. In my previous line of work as a paralegal I discovered that the organization I worked for was very anti-change. Their mentality was that they had remained "successful" for "X" amount of years because they had always stayed "true" to their roots. Coming out of college I wondered why some of their systems were not more modern. For instance most law firms have moved to a paperless system. All files are digitized. While this practice is expensive up front, in the long run you save money on such expenditures as paper (lots and lots of paper), ink, numerous copiers, filing cabinets, folders, etc. Not to mention the number of man hours employees spent each week hunting for files. I could look for a single file for days! Searching for files on a daily basis equated to a lot of wasted labor that could have been directed towards other important tasks. It did not take me long to learn that this organization's mentality was that "if it is not broke, don't fix it". More surprising to me was the impact this mentality had on the staff that had been there for years, and the direct affect the organization's lack of vision had on them.
I got to be close friends with one of my co-workers at the firm. He had been with the company nearly 10 years. He was the epitome of a pessimist. "Dave" hated working for the firm, Hated it! His outlook on things was always very bleak and he never had anything good to say about the company. Even though he'd been with the company for a number of years he was always worried that he was going to be fired or that the company was looking to get rid of him. His attitude was not a healthy one and there were no positive aspects of his feelings towards the organization. I recall asking Dave "If you are so unhappy hear why don't you get another job?" He would reply "What if I leave and the job I go to doesn't work out for me?" He had no hope for the future and was afraid to make a change. I think he became an unfortunate victim of the culture of this organization. Then there was "Jeremy" who was also a paralegal. Jeremy was the epitome of a pragmatist. He also did not like working for the firm, had been there a few years, but was content with the way things were. Even though he made it very clear to me he didn't like the way things were. Jeremy had a little bit more ambition than Dave but was happy in the present and was content with the way things were. He had a very practical approach to working for the firm. I did not consider this organization to be "normal" so I don't believe that Jeremy's (or Dave's) attitude was either necessary or healthy. The only positive aspect of Jeremy's pragmatism was that he did believe he could have a better future. Not with this particular organization but in other interests that he had. The negative effect of his pragmatism was that he was content with the matter of fact manner in which he was "programmed" to approached his job. I feel it stifled his creativity and kept him from pursuing his true love (music).
Working at Embry Riddle for less than a year I have seen several examples of how this organization is committed to change. They are constantly trying to improve their processes. The perspective they take is that there is always an opportunity to improve and perfect upon existing practices. Embry Riddle embraces technology and is committed to providing a superior level of education. For example we recently had our monthly departmental meeting. We were informed at this meeting that a new committee had been formed specifically tasked with innovating new procedures that would benefit the Worldwide Campus. Their goal is to improve the manner in which we serve the university and its students. These individuals are visionaries. The creation of this committee can only enhance and benefit the university. The positive aspect of these visionaries is that they could improve the efficiency, productivity, competitiveness, and overall quality of service we provide. The negative aspects of these visionaries could be the time it takes for these changes to be implemented, whether or not they can agree, poor team communication, poor team participation, or misaligned goals.
Power players (or leadership) are responsible for having the vision to lead organizations into the future. Their vision should inspire others. When I leave my meetings with our leadership teams I can say that I am inspired. The message that is received by myself and the the rest of my team members (or crowd) is reflected in our desire to achieve common goals. I feel that the power players in my organization are well aware of the need for us to constantly change. Brown (2011) wrote "The most important lesson managers need to learn is that there are only two kinds of organizations - those that are changing, and those that are going out of business." (p. 17). Power players impact their organizations by offering a glimpse of what can be achieved with a planned, organization wide, collaborative approach, that is performance oriented, and has a humanistic, systematic approach. If the crowd believes in the power players and in change, great accomplishments can be attained. The negative consequences of the power players is that they could instill fear either with their vision or with their trustworthiness. If the crowd does not believe in a vision it can not be accomplished. An organization that strives to be successful and ahead of the curve should look to the future as an opportunity to become better. To serve those that are a part of the organization and to serve those that make it a success. Organizations alone should not be the only visionaries. As individuals, we should always strive to make our futures better for ourselves and those in it.
Brown, D. (2011). An Experiential Approach to Organization Development. (8th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.
No comments:
Post a Comment