REPLY Why don't organizations function better? (SD6549)

[SDMAIL John Gunkler]

Posted by  "John Gunkler" <jgunkler at sprintmail.com>

Bill Braun writes:  "This is seemingly at odds with Jay's admonition of
being problem focused." -- and that, I think, gets us to part of the answer.

What I've always railed against in organization design is that it is not
"problem" focused.  In my experience, the design of the organization is the
last thing you do when trying to make things better.  That is, "form follows
function" -- or, figure out the best process (or system) that you can, test
it out (get data), revise the process -- and only when you feel confident
that you have a system that produces what you want it to produce with the
least waste ("solves the problem" the best way you can devise) -- ONLY then
do you consider what is required in the design of the organization.

There are some very wealthy people who have made careers out of doing this
the other way around (think McKinsey & Co. for example) -- but I don't know
of any data that shows that their method actually works.  They act as if
changing organization structure will drive other, desired changes.  But I
believe that is backward.  It's merely "moving the deck chairs on the
Titanic" or "rotating bald tires" as my mentors told me.

There are methods out in the business world these days that do this the
right way around, I think.  Design for Six Sigma (which is an extension of
"design for manufacturability") and Design for Lean Production both start
from the problem/opportunity statement, work from a proven process/system,
and build the organization around them.  And they get results.

John
Posted by  "John Gunkler" <jgunkler at sprintmail.com>
posting date  Sat, 1 Sep 2007 11:07:18 -0400