Random Observations on the Ontology of Coordination Enablers
03.07.96 21:57 Filed in: Coordination
of Action
We have written regarding the effectiveness of
coordination enablers.
"Our assessment methodology evaluates your organization against a set of Coordination Enablers that reflect the shared concerns that must exist to allow the coordination of action within organizations.
"These coordination enablers include such concerns as:
• Relevant, mission oriented goals
• Adequate performance standards
• Adequate performance measurement methodologies
• Effective communication of goals, standards, and performance measurements
• Mechanisms to adequately reinforce superior performance
In reflecting on why these enablers are effective I thought of the Navy and why organizational action was effective in the military. We observed that despite primitive inter– and intra–organizational communications systems (no emergent technology for the coordination of action) the organization was still very effective at accomplishing a variety of tasks or missions. We postulated that the existence of coordination enablers was critical to that success, but that didn’t explain why.
Since we wrote on that issue, I have been observing the impact that interpretation has on effective action. Interpretation, whether based on grounded assessments or speculation, is very powerful in defining the space of possibilities for action. For example, an individual examines a glass of water and declares it to be half empty. That interpretation of a fact (100 ml of water in a 200 ml glass) immediately restricts the space of opportunities to those that involve a half empty glass of water. It can no longer be treated as full or almost full. Additionally, the interpretation pre–disposes the alignment of new interpretations. Others will be less inclined to challenge the interpretation as not being effective. Further, interpretations will be made of the individual that further restrict opportunities for action. If the individual continues to make interpretations that are assessed as limiting, he will be “labeled” as a pessimist. This label is not a definition or a description, but a declaration of the space of opportunities that the individual represents.
Back to the military example – a CO that is assessed as effective at getting underway on time makes interpretations of the environment in which he exists. His interpretation of the Squadron Commander’s directive to “never be late getting underway” creates within him a space of opportunity that does not accommodate sailing late. His interpretation creates both the standard of always getting underway on time, and and interpretation of him by his crew as someone who gets underway when scheduled, even if “they have to row it away from the pier.” So being assessed as effective becomes primarily dependent on the interpretations one makes about the situation that ultimately define what is acceptable and what is not.
On to nuclear power plant operation – the existence of coordination enablers is both a reflection and a reinforcement of the interpretations that exist with the organization. Absence of the enablers is a declaration that the interpretations that are being made preclude the possibility of success, as surely as the “pessimist” restricts his possibilities by his interpretation of the “half–empty” glass.
So why do the enablers work? The work because they produce an interpretation within the employees that defines the space of possibilities, and when effective, the space of possibilities that is generated precludes the possibility of poor production.
-----------
This article and incorporated images are ©1996 Brad Williamson All Rights Reserved. Permission is granted for reproduction not for profit in its entirety including this copyright notice.
-----------
"Our assessment methodology evaluates your organization against a set of Coordination Enablers that reflect the shared concerns that must exist to allow the coordination of action within organizations.
"These coordination enablers include such concerns as:
• Relevant, mission oriented goals
• Adequate performance standards
• Adequate performance measurement methodologies
• Effective communication of goals, standards, and performance measurements
• Mechanisms to adequately reinforce superior performance
In reflecting on why these enablers are effective I thought of the Navy and why organizational action was effective in the military. We observed that despite primitive inter– and intra–organizational communications systems (no emergent technology for the coordination of action) the organization was still very effective at accomplishing a variety of tasks or missions. We postulated that the existence of coordination enablers was critical to that success, but that didn’t explain why.
Since we wrote on that issue, I have been observing the impact that interpretation has on effective action. Interpretation, whether based on grounded assessments or speculation, is very powerful in defining the space of possibilities for action. For example, an individual examines a glass of water and declares it to be half empty. That interpretation of a fact (100 ml of water in a 200 ml glass) immediately restricts the space of opportunities to those that involve a half empty glass of water. It can no longer be treated as full or almost full. Additionally, the interpretation pre–disposes the alignment of new interpretations. Others will be less inclined to challenge the interpretation as not being effective. Further, interpretations will be made of the individual that further restrict opportunities for action. If the individual continues to make interpretations that are assessed as limiting, he will be “labeled” as a pessimist. This label is not a definition or a description, but a declaration of the space of opportunities that the individual represents.
Back to the military example – a CO that is assessed as effective at getting underway on time makes interpretations of the environment in which he exists. His interpretation of the Squadron Commander’s directive to “never be late getting underway” creates within him a space of opportunity that does not accommodate sailing late. His interpretation creates both the standard of always getting underway on time, and and interpretation of him by his crew as someone who gets underway when scheduled, even if “they have to row it away from the pier.” So being assessed as effective becomes primarily dependent on the interpretations one makes about the situation that ultimately define what is acceptable and what is not.
On to nuclear power plant operation – the existence of coordination enablers is both a reflection and a reinforcement of the interpretations that exist with the organization. Absence of the enablers is a declaration that the interpretations that are being made preclude the possibility of success, as surely as the “pessimist” restricts his possibilities by his interpretation of the “half–empty” glass.
So why do the enablers work? The work because they produce an interpretation within the employees that defines the space of possibilities, and when effective, the space of possibilities that is generated precludes the possibility of poor production.
-----------
This article and incorporated images are ©1996 Brad Williamson All Rights Reserved. Permission is granted for reproduction not for profit in its entirety including this copyright notice.
-----------
|