Trond HjortelandApr 7

I managed to make a little dent with my series of posts on #SocioTechnical principles of the day, and thought it was due to do something similar, but this time in the context of modern organisations (especially #agile ones) and the modern version of #STS, known as Emery's #OpenSystemsTheory ( #OST). I'll list some systemic problems I have seen in organisations over the years and explain their causes using OST, one each day as I did back then. Probably way too ambitious, but let's see how this goes. Happy to take comments and rebuttals to each one of them, as the point of doing this is to trigger reflections and critical thinking.
Warning: these will probably be a bit more opinionated. 😁

Organisational Dysfunction of the Day

Stand-ups

Context: Your team is using Scrum and has been taught how important stand-ups are (daily coordination meeting), but it feels like a drag and a complete waste of time. Feels more like reporting to someone, be it the scrum master or the product owner. And you really do not care about what the others are working on, as it has little to no impact on what you're doing.

OST explains: This team is probably not a team at all; it's more like a group of individuals working on different things. They may contribute to the same delivery but have not been able to take control of the work design and the coordination needed to deliver it. This is not a self-managing team, but rather a delivery group assigned specific tasks by a manager, in charge of splitting the work so that all team members are working as effectively as possible. This is pure DP1 and nowhere close to the self-managing teams in DP2.

Show threadTrond Hjorteland6d ago

Organisational Dysfunction of the Day

Passing the buck

Context: Have you experienced situations at work where you and your team want to decide on something of concern to you, and someone points out that you need to check with the grown-ups first? Passing the buck to someone else, for them to make the decision and, with that, take responsibility.

OST explains: The team is not self-managing, which is fine if they know that and act accordingly (in DP1), but in this situation, they act as if they can, but are unable to commit. If they were truly self-managing, this would not have been relevant even, as they would gladly take the responsibility for the decision and its outcome, as it is what needs to be done to reach their goals (in DP2). Instead, they are confused and uncertain, and afraid, which is a clear signal of laissez-faire, of missing a clear organisational structure. For most, this is even worse than DP1, because at least command & control is predictable and structured.

Show threadTrond Hjorteland

Organisational Dysfunction of the Day

Retrospectives

Context: You and your team have decided it's time to do a retrospective prescribed by the Agile methodology you are using. You all see the use of it and contribute with a lot of ideas and concerns about your work. You record them all and have a vote on the most important ones, but soon realise almost all of them are outside of your mandate to change. You note them down and hope the department lead can do something about it, but know that probably nothing will change, and the whole exercise feels like a complete waste.

OST explains: The members of the team come into this believing they are self-managing, at least to a level where they are able to adjust the work to make it better. Even the Agile methodology says so by incorporating the retospective as a recommended element. An essential element in learning is both looking back and improving going forward. The issue here is that the team is not self-managing, in a DP2 structure, as they are not able to change what really matters to them. Most likely, they are in an agile setup where the teams have been given some control, but most still reside in management outside, in the existing bureaucratic DP1 organisation. The retrospective and the learning it ought to provide are mostly ineffective.

#OpenSystemsTheory #SocioTechnical #agile

Apr 9 at 8:53amWeb
Show threadTrond Hjorteland4d ago

Organisational Dysfunction of the Day

Passivity in team workshops

Context: Workshops are for many a unique opportunity for people to get together and collaboratively work on a problem or a design of something they care about, be it EventStorming, Retrospectives, Design Sprints and such sessions. In larger groups, involving the whole team or even people from different teams, you frequently see people with more formal power join in, be it a team leader, department head, or even a intervening and controlling facilitator, and that often creates an unfortunate dynamic where the participants feel limited and restricted, so much so that many become inactive and passive, and not contributing in a way a way that they could have. Even though they probably really wanted to.

OST explains: This dynamic is very common in autocratic hierarchies, where power over something, be it people directly or even a certain subject like architecture, creates a dynamic where people often submit themselves to that person simply because of their position in the hierarchy. And not because of their expertise or good arguments. These emotional anxieties, often unconscious, can take different forms, in this case a dependency on the leader, but can also be a fight/flight reaction or subgroups forming. These are referred to as Bion's basic assumptions, "bas", and the only way to get rid of them and replace it with real productive work is not having an appointed leader present. Always go for DP2 in workshops, regardless of how you are organised otherwise.

#OpenSystemsTheory #SocioTechnical #OrgDesign

Show threadTrond Hjorteland1d ago

Organisational Dysfunction of the Day

Forming–storming–norming–performing

Context: When putting together a new team or making big changes to an existing one, many recommend using Tuckman's "forming–storming–norming–performing" model to turn the team into a coherent and well-oiled unit. It begins with Forming (orientation), moves to Storming (conflict), progresses to Norming (cohesion), and ends with Performing (high productivity). Leaders are advised to manage this process closely as progress is not linear; teams may slip back to previous stages if new members join or goals shift. And conflict is regarded as necessary, as the "Storming" phase is essential to growth.

OST explains: Tuckman's model only makes sense in an autocratic bureaucracy, especially those of the Theory X type, and aligns with Taylor's view that people must be managed to perform properly. This is classic DP1 thinking, whereas in the DP2 style, McGregor's Theory Y is the model, which assumes employees are self-motivated, enjoy work, and thrive under trust, empowerment, and autonomy. Grouped into self-managing groups that have designed themselves using Participative Design. No need for either storming or norming; the teams jump right to performing after forming.

#OpenSystemsTheory #SocioTechnical #OrgDesign #agile

Show threadTrond Hjorteland12h ago

Organisational Dysfunction of the Day

Analysis paralysis

Context: An agile team is working on a rewrite of an existing legacy solution and feels that its success depends on the function parity it must have with the old one. They therefore end up doing a detailed and extensive analysis to account for as much as possible, even tracking down former developers to get details on some of the more obscure parts. And, even more problematic, they have to figure out which business people own which parts and who all their users are. This drags out in time, and although they have started the work, the extensible analysis prevents them from releasing anything. They are stuck.

OST explains: Agile as a concept is pretty much designed to handle these kinds of situations; at least that is what many may think. It focuses on small increments and puts things in front of the users as soon as possible to tighten the feedback loop, so it makes sense. The thing, though, is that this is not product discovery, as it is an existing product with external product owners and users, both internal and external, and the team has no real product ownership of the app apart from the technical bits. They are not a self-managing product team as a DP2 style should be. Only when they have end-to-end ownership of the whole product, not just a part, can they take full responsibility and accountability so that they can manage it as they please.

#OpenSystemsTheory #SocioTechnical #OrgDesign #agile

Show threadChris Pitts1d ago

@trondhjort I read that as “…aligns with Taylor's view that people must be managed to perform poorly”.

Time for a coffee….

Show threadTrond Hjorteland1d ago
@thirstybear Darn, you had me worried there! I even started fixing the "bug." 😂
Show threadTed M. Young4d ago
@trondhjort What is DP2?
Show threadTrond Hjorteland4d ago
@jitterted Thank you for asking. Has become a lingo for me, and sorry about that, but wrote this to clarify. https://hachyderm.io/@trondhjort/116374020682397482
Show threadanderbill1h ago
@trondhjort good thinking and analysis in these posts. regarding Bion's ideas and the subsequent pyscho-dynamics or work groups and organizational learning: I think these perspectives are ignored and sidelined in our social-tech mediated work comms. Hierarchy be adaptive in some work tasks, and a social defense in others. As you mention emotional anxieties will impact my work, sometimes it is helpful for me to notice that. (would love to talk more about these ideas if appropriate)
Show threadTrond Hjorteland58m ago
@band Hard agree. Obviously. 😋
Show threadEAvolving5d ago

@trondhjort To avoid "almost all [ideas] are outside of your mandate to change", mapping ideas to Covey's Circle of Concern, Influence, and Control may help retrospective participants realize it may be more motivating to search for ideas closer to the circle of control.

https://www.modern.works/blog/the-power-of-coveys-circle-of-concern-influence-and-control

The Power of Covey’s Circle of Concern, Influence, and Control — modern.works

In the journey of personal development and growth, one concept stands out as a guiding light amidst the chaos of life's uncertainties: Covey's Circle of Concern, Influence, and Control.

modern.works
Show threadTrond Hjorteland5d ago
@EAvolving Good bandaid to deal with the problem when you cannot dissolve it completely, like you can with DP2.