Do Knowledge Workers and Knowledge Managers Face Much More Change ?

.

Much of what the average knowledge worker of today sees as “work” is the daily communion with the computer screen on her or his desk. They access the software with which they work and communicate with other employees through portals, look on the company’s infrastructure of applications, or (increasingly) via the Web tools and services.

As we have learned more about how to integrate software-based capability into our daily work lives, drug we have seen various forms of employee portals, partnership portals, project management portals and, more recently, comprehensive real-time enterprise computing applications take root and grow in many organizations. The IT infrastructures of organizations, coupled with ongoing growth in the scope and use of smart software, will create a type of integrated nervous system, providing top management and workers with an improvement-and-learning focused feedback loop.

When software connects customers directly to business processes, and employees have “line-of-sight” responsibility for making a clear contribution or directly impacting business results – when most of an organization’s strategy and value proposition is directly coded into its CRM, ERM and B2B applications, will the types of supervision and management we learned in the ‘70’s and ‘80’s continue to be effective?

There’s a very real issue here that is helping to create a sort of conundrum – the more that work activities are encoded and embedded into integrated systems, the more the human will and spirit needs to surface, assert itself. This polarity is, I think, here to stay and is behind much of the ongoing discussion of conversation, collaboration and social computing.

The proliferation of information technology, business process re-engineering and wrenching changes to established business models created by the rapid development of the Internet is exerting significant pressure on long-standing business hierarchies. Top-down command-and-control management structures and dynamics struggle to maintain effectiveness in the face of free-flowing streams of content-rich information, coming from all directions. Nevertheless, it’s highly likely that hierarchical structures are here to stay … but it’s equally likely that the exercise of hierarchical power and control will be transformed over time.

The dynamics of how people relate – to work, to markets, to bosses and to each other – are changing. A new organizing principle posited on network dynamics – “wirearchy” – a dynamic flow of power and authority based on connections and conversations, may be emerging as a structural principle and a social dynamic for managing organized activities in both business and society.

Wirearchy is an informal but pervasive emerging structure of governance, strategy, decision-making and control based on knowledge, trust, meaning and credibility. Things get done and results are achieved through the interplay of vision, values, connections and conversation.

Wirearchy is generated by an open architecture of information, knowledge and focus, enabled by connected and converging technologies. It suggests a fundamental change in the dynamics of human interaction in – and with – organizations of all sizes, shapes and purposes, and represents an evolution of hierarchy as an organizing principle and dynamic. However, it will not render hierarchy obsolete, nor eliminate the need for direction and control; rather, it will render them more necessary. However, it will change the meaning of those terms and how they are used and experienced.

Many people won’t accept authority easily any more. While old-guard keepers-of-the-keys cling to authority and power, the older models of how to lead and follow are unravelling. Organization charts are still useful, but only if and as they become more fluid (for example, when supplemented by Organizational Network Analysis and a deeper understanding of information and knowledge flows, or streams).

Certainly, organization charts are beginning to appear in a much wider range of shapes than before, and often convey new messages about power, status and control. An example: “Organigraphs,” or pictures of the ways organizations flow and operate, are clearly more pertinent, accurate and useful in many instances when an organization’s activities are more transparent and porous to the external environment, according to strategy and organizational structure guru Henry Mintzberg. Organigraphs maintain a focus on the flow of an organization’s activities and processes, as opposed to the identification and location of decision-making power.

How do today’s leaders and senior managers respond to these forces? Clues are evident in initiatives emerging in the fields of customer and employee relationship management, organizational development, human resources management and organizational change: The use of techniques such as scenario planning, dialogue, open space, 360 degree feedback, emotional intelligence, coaching and mentoring have all grown significantly over the past several years. Together, these soften the rigidity of outmoded structures, and help people respond and adapt. Most organizations carry out ongoing initiatives to create, clarify and improve capabilities in each of these emerging areas. Indeed, a large percentage of the global consulting industry is focused on diagnosing, developing and implementing strategies for these goals.

Wirearchy is significantly different. While it insists that purpose and a focus on results towards that purpose is a core structural component, it also focuses on the structural and psychosocial dynamics generated by interconnectivity and access to knowledge. From the touchstone of purpose and objectives, it addresses not only with what’s happening at the top, but also what’s happening in the roots and branches of an organization. Where hierarchy created focus and meaning through the control of knowledge, wirearchy implies that the use and control of knowledge acknowledges and involves a much wider range of stakeholders.

Yesterday’s success factors involved secrecy and control, size, role clarity, functional specialization and power. Today’s emerging factors are openness, speed, flexibility, integration and innovation. The concept of wirearchy allows readers to develop a strategy for creating, implementing these factors in ways that respond with value to continuously changing conditions. Its core components are:

  • a crystal clear vision and values
  • a strategically designed and integrated technology infrastructure
  • comprehensive, clear and completely open communications
  • pertinent objectives and focused measurement
  • characteristics of culture that create, support and enable responsiveness, adaptability and fluidity
  • leadership that is clear, focused, open, authentic and shared

Nothing really new there for effective organizations, yet in this new era it will take time, experience and intelligent customizable metrics to know what “success” and “effectiveness” look like and mean. In such an era, where there is literal meaning in the phrase, “everything is connected to everything else,” we will have to watch, learn and imagine how to lead and manage in ways that foster continuous developments in the effectiveness of individual workers, small working groups, the organizations with which they work and the societies in which we all live.
Clay Shirky is a well-know Internet / Web expert who published a book titled “Here Comes Everybody” last year. While it does not focus exclusively on the workplace, it’s a decent bet that the concepts and dynamics Shirky addresses will have major impact on the future of
work.
As the forces he describes continue to spread throughout society and grow in impact, this organizing principle – Wirearchy — is likely to impact the design of collaborative software, the structure(s) of organizations and the ways work and workers are managed in ways that we have not yet encountered.

.

Powered by Qumana

6 Comments

Bruce Stewart

One place to strengthen this is on the subject of measurement (or lack thereof).

Most measures in workplaces are geared to the old model. We ask customer service people, for instance, to handle more interactions/hour (measured by a falling interaction time, which we mistakenly call productivity) rather than collaborative problem solving which actually releases productivity elsewhere in the organization and for the customer.

But overall very, very good. This transformation will also be aided and abetted by the (almost here) collapse of the public sector and its featherbedding attitudes at all levels of organizations. Note that in something like construction the question is “does the job get done” not “did you meet the measures”.

Reply
admin

Thanks for stopping by and offering your interpretation / perspective, Bruce.

As I think you know, I have recently written an article for CLO magazine addressing the high-level measurement issue through the concept of ROII (Return on Investment in Interaction).

You’re right, in my opinion, that we will need new measures (eg for productivity or reduced interaction time as you term it, for learning, for effectiveness, for responsiveness) for this new environment. I see that as a critical extension of the never-settled discussion from the ’90’s of the measurement (or assessment, as my friend David Creelman calls it) of the productivity of white-collar work.

These issues aren’t new .. it’s just that as the ways of IT-and-web enabled knowledge work continue to spread, the issues of how to better manage and assess (not measure, IMO) effectiveness becomes more and more critical.

Reply
Filipe Pinto

The organization is being disintermediated from the market because it is no longer needed to amplify the ideas of those that started the organization in the first place.

Organizations are becoming just a mere “pointer” to groups of wired people that produce and consume services/products.

This is will become more obvious has machines start doing most of the labor (don’t forget the prediction of Arthur Clarke for 2040 – “concept of work is phased out”)

Do Knowledge Workers and Knowledge Managers Face Much More Change ?

Yes.

We are giving the first steps into the knowledge revolution, initiated by Drucker.

That means that you and I need to join forces.

This new market renounces to “zero-sum-games”, embraces co-opetition and despises asymmetric information.

I’m interested in exchanging ideas with YOU, so together we can build this new market.

Reply
admin

Good points.

I like this phrase:

“Organizations are becoming just a mere “pointer” to groups of wired people that produce and consume services/products.”

Reply
Lizzie

I learned a new word today: “organigraph.” I have to confess I have to keep going back to the post to make sure I understand what it means.

Drucker talked about the knowledge revolution, and http://www.ReinventYourEnterprise.com/“ rel=”nofollow”> Jack Bergstrand talks about how to implement it in “Reinvent Your Enterprise.” He talks about the difference between manual workers, and the way things are set up fo them, and knowledge workers, which is a completely different mindset. It’s very interesting stuff and has implications for all kinds of businesses.

Reply
admin

I learned a new word today: “organigraph.” I have to confess I have to keep going back to the post to make sure I understand what it means.

“Graphs”, or graphic representations, of how the organization actually functions / works.

Thanks for stopping by, Lizzie.

Reply

Laisser un commentaire

Votre adresse de messagerie ne sera pas publiée. Les champs obligatoires sont indiqués avec *