Articles
The Problem with Answers
Dean Robb, Ph.D.
In a dynamically changing, hyper-competitive global marketplace,
the only truly sustainable strategy is a "meta-strategy,"
i.e., the capability to continually generate innovative new strategies,
business models, value propositions, products, and services. In
today's economy, the only viable strategy is building internal
capability for continual strategic and organizational reinvention
and renewal.
Unfortunately, too many executives and management consultants approach
this problem from the same obsolete angle: they provide externally-developed,
expert, 'pre-fab' answers, generally restricted to the
technical/ structural/ economic aspects of organizational functioning.
Basically, they approach the problem of continual renewal from an
economic engineering perspective, and often provide a one-size-fits-all
answer: "Just install this structural/ economic widget, and
you'll be good to go. Call me if you need a tune-up!"
These approaches actually perpetuate the problem they
purport to solve! How? First, take note of the problem: as noted
by Clayton Christensen in his book The Innovator's Solution,
"no company has been able to build
an engine of disruptive growth and keep it running and running."
In other words, nobody has yet successfully implemented
the meta-strategy of continually renewable corporate entrepreneurship.
Clearly, that's a very serious problem. And a core reason
for that problem is our tenacious insistence on trying to solve
it using prefabricated, expert-developed, economic engineering solutions.
Paradoxically, economic/technical solutions are absolutely critical
to renewable corporate entrepreneurship; that's not the issue. So
what is?
First, no single technical solution applies to all companies under
all conditions. Second, what seems to be missing is recognition
that any particular technical or structural
solution is only temporary. Because of environmental turbulence,
it is impossible to know what the context and rules will look like
beyond the near-term. Therefore, any particular technical/structural
answer may not apply, even a short way down the road.
Avoid Technical Fixes for Social Problems
But ultimately, the deepest problem with the prefab technical answer
approach is that it attempts to solve what is, at root,
a social problem using technical means. While it generates
technical and structural solutions as key outputs, the process of
renewal and reinvention itself is not primarily technical. It is
a social process! And without a basic change in the social practices
of our companies, the meta-strategy of continual strategic and organizational
reinvention will remain an elusive dream.
The real answer is actually not an "answer"
at all, but a reliable internal answer-generation process. The ability
to keep the "engine of disruptive growth running" will
come only through a transformation of leadership, management, and
relational processes and practices, allowing the next right strategic
move — and the next right structural or technical fix —
to continuously emerge from within the organization itself.
The goal is to build a social system that can "do its own
work" — i.e., access untapped organizational resources
and use them to respond creatively to changing situations. Such
a system can create answer after answer, even as the rules, the
context, the questions, and the required mode of technical response
all keep changing.
Let's discuss the process of renewal and reinvention by exploring
eight important design characteristics of a functional solution.
For each of these characteristics, perfection is not the goal; what's
important is that the enterprise is working toward some or all of
them. Instead of setting a fixed goal, we're attempting to
orient the direction of growth.
Broaden Inclusion to Tap Insights
The first and most obvious characteristic is inclusion. One problem
with answers is that we can never honestly know where insight into
"the next right move" will come from. Our prejudices
tell us that the best source is the executive suite or middle management,
but in practice it could come instead from that pesky customer service
rep who keeps complaining about "the way things are done around
here," or another person from whom you'd least expect
it.
Leaders must radically increase the "wisdom and guidance
bandwidth," learning how to continuously access and act on
the collective intelligence, wisdom, guidance and creativity
resident across the entire organization. Leaders must expand beyond
their traditional role and comfort zone as technical experts and
rulers, by taking on new, transformational roles as facilitators,
catalysts and learners.
Take the case of the CEO of a leading US-based children's
hospital, who began hearing complaints from patients' parents
and administrative personnel that trying to schedule appointments
with the hospital's multiple clinics was a nightmare. Parents
complained that it often took hours on the telephone, being switched
from clinic to clinic, to schedule multiple procedures and tests
for their seriously ill children. Parents who had to drive over
100 miles to reach the hospital also complained that once they arrived,
they had to stay in a hotel one or two nights so that they could
shepherd their children from clinic to clinic, often waiting six
to ten hours between appointments. Both parents and administrative
personnel "wished" for efficient, one-stop scheduling
capability.
This CEO listened carefully and took all the comments seriously.
Seeing a growing pattern of negative experiences, he decided to
be proactive and launched an initiative focused on patient-centered
scheduling. He replaced decentralized scheduling with a centralized
patient scheduling and triage function. While this may sound simple,
it was an extremely difficult, transformational change that required
overcoming serious political, economic, IT and training barriers
to implement.
Full implementation of this change required almost two full years,
but yielded multiple positive results: increased customer satisfaction,
lowered internal costs, and more effective and efficient use of
clinic and treatment resources. And it all happened because one
CEO decided to listen to people who are often viewed as being at
the outer margins of a hospital's most important operations.
Issue Inclusion: Banish the Undiscussables
A second key characteristic is a different form of inclusion: issue
inclusion. Everything must be on the table and open to probing inquiry.
This means moving toward a zone that is relatively free of undiscussables,
because how can we change something that can't be looked at
or talked about? In an environment of rapid change, we must be open
to inquiry into business models, strategies, products, services,
processes, culture and capabilities: in short, everything.
We must create an atmosphere in which it is not only acceptable,
but a high priority, to ask truly difficult questions that probe
the deepest foundational assumptions that shape our perceptions,
interpretations and actions. This doesn't mean that everything
is on the table all the time. That would be highly disruptive
to ongoing operations. What it means is that a separate time and
place — perhaps periodic retreats — are set aside expressly
for the purpose of asking hard questions about anything that's
relevant to the organization's future direction.
Coupled with deep inquiry, we need deep listening. We must create
a space in which prejudice, knee-jerk reactions, ego, status and
power are put aside. There must be space in which truly new (hence
disruptive and dangerous) answers can emerge and glow, a place of
deep respect and consideration. Again, this is because we can never
truly know where — and from whom — the next "right"
insight or answer will come.
Inquire Deeply and Often
A fourth key characteristic is frequency. One dictionary definition
of "institution" is "a set of structured, patterned
relationships that is well-established and accepted as fundamental."
In other words, an institution is a rigid social system that's
profoundly resistant to change. That's a monumental impediment
when innovation and change are top priorities, yet that's
exactly what most corporations end up turning into: institutions.
One primary reason that companies turn into rigid institutions is
avoidance of the inquiry process. It's either not done at
all, or done very infrequently, with the inquiry being shallow,
guarded, and politically correct.
In an enterprise that wants to sustain growth in the 21st century,
the process of probing inquiry should be a relatively frequent,
permanent part of the new landscape. The paradox is that we must
institutionalize a process that prevents enterprises from turning
into institutions! Such inquiry should be practiced at least two
or three times a year, and more often in highly turbulent industries.
Encourage Individuality and Diversity
A fifth design factor is internal diversity and differentiation.
A critical foundation for sustainable innovation within a social
system is inclusion of internal differences, of all kinds. Earlier
we talked about physical inclusion — having a process that
in some form includes all or many organization members. However,
the mere fact of physical inclusion does not guarantee emergence
of any kind of creativity or "newness."
One example of this is company "town hall" meetings,
where everyone attends, but everyone also knows that the unstated
rule is to only ask questions or make comments that stay safely
within the boundaries of the corporate "party line."
Another is corporate Boards of Directors that too-frequently function
as a rubber stamp for the CEO.
An essential foundation for innovation in a social system is the
inclusion of internal social and psychological differences:
diversity and individuality. To quote President John F. Kennedy,
"Conformity is the enemy of growth."
Encourage Humility and Intrinsic Self-Worth
The sixth and seventh design characteristics on our list of eight
apply to everyone, but especially to leaders and managers. One is
humility. Building an authentic, functional internal answer-generation
capability requires leaders and managers to develop the personal
humility that allows room for people below them in the hierarchy
to know more than the leaders do.
The "design DNA" of today's organizations tends
to create a cadre of leaders who believe that they are supposed
to be all-knowing and all-powerful. This is a charade that very
seriously blocks innovation and growth.
Coupled with personal humility must be a deepening sense of intrinsic,
self-determined personal identity and self-esteem. In today's
world, the prevailing system dictates that the higher up the corporate
ladder one sits, the more deeply one's sense of identity and
self-worth becomes enmeshed in external, social trappings like status,
role, power, and size of organization.
However, in a fluid world, all these organizational factors should
be relatively fluid too. Significant organizational change, for
example, leads inescapably to significant individual, positional
change; everything is contingent and transient. But the problem
here is organizational "gridlock."
When people derive their identity and worth chiefly from social
externals like role and perks, they live in a constant state of
fear and threat, because the potential for change, and with it the
loss of these prestigious externals, is always looming. Organizational
change thus poses a deep threat to perceived identity and self-worth.
So, to protect one's sense of identity and well-being, it
becomes paramount to protect and defend the status quo, not to mention
one's position in it. Protective covert and overt attempts
to exert unilateral power and control over others become pervasive,
resulting in widespread organizational gridlock, which kills off
innovation and change.
To create organizational fluidity and space for deep inquiry that
can effect profound organizational change, we must build a system
that supports the development of intrinsic, self-determined
personal identity and self-esteem. This is true for everyone in
the enterprise, but especially for its leaders because the problem
of an externally-centered identity tends to get worse the higher
up the corporate ladder people rise. This creates a serious problem:
the leaders of our enterprises, charged with being visionary and
spearheading transformational change, are often the most resistant
to change because they have the most to lose (both objectively and
subjectively).
One way to counteract this phenomenon is the eighth and last key
design characteristic of an internal answer-generation capability:
lowered power and status differentials. Flatter and fairer organizations
ameliorate the problem of organizational gridlock, because lower
power and status differentials reduce the need to defend, protect,
and control. As a result, increased openness to change, new ideas,
and new ways of doing things can all take root and thrive.
[print this page]

About Dean Robb, Ph.D.
Dr. Dean Robb is Founder and Executive Director of the Center for
Corporate Renewal (www.ctrforcorporaterenewal).
Since 1994, he has helped numerous domestic and foreign business
leaders build high-performing, innovative, entrepreneurial enterprises.
His expertise combines 26 years of practical, real-world experience
in corporate America with in-depth research in human and organizational
systems.
The Center for Corporate Renewal helps senior executives build
the capability for:
- Strategic Focus: Make sense of a changing
environment and gain focus on the next right strategic move
- Disciplined Execution: Align and mobilize
the entire organization behind this new strategic focus
- Creative Renewal: Renew the entrepreneurial
spirit by repeating these two actions over and over again.
For information on how Dr. Dean Robb can work with your organization
to instill a spirit and ethic of renewable corporate entrepreneurship,
email him at drobb@ctrforcorporaterenewal.com
or call him at 908-757-4721.
Permission to reproduce this article is hereby granted, given that
the contact information is kept intact with the article.

Return to Articles
|