The link between Organisational Structure and Risk Averse Thinking

Why is it that the bigger the organisation, the more bureaucratic and risk averse it tends to become?

It has to do with traditional hierarchical/management principles of splitting accountability away from the person who is responsible for the delivery of the outcome. In traditional organisational structures, managers are accountable for the actions and behaviours of the workforce which works for them. This leads to management, with support from HR, putting in place 'safeguards' to protect their own back, as - in a Blame Culture - holding accountability can lead to being scapegoated for inefficiencies further down the line.

As the organisation grows, the gap between accountability and responsibility becomes wider with more management layers where the person at the top becomes accountable for all the people who work within the organisation. With layers of delegated accountability, more and more safeguards, policies and procedures are produced to set behavioural expectations to protect those who hold accountability. At the front line however, the policy and procedural expectations translate into total paralysis as staff are overwhelmed with behavioural expectations coming from all directions and as such they fear to act, which actually leaves the person accountable even more open to risk. This often leads to a 'cycle of ever-increasing control'.

This splitting of accountability and responsibility when working with adults leads to a (often dysfunctional) parent-child relationship, or the organisational equivalent of 'carrot and stick' approaches and command-and-control management styles. It also makes performance management and disciplinary practices instigated by managers highly subjective and one-sided.

As such the size and structural design of an organisation has a significant impact on the behaviours of the people working within it.

So how can this be changed?

There are a number of solutions, which depend not only on your organisation's size and structure, but also on the culture, leadership and risk attitudes across the organisation. Here are just a few:

- make a conscious choice to commit to building trust across the layers of your organisation
- commit to changing your organisation's culture from a Blame to Learning/Innovation Culture
- delayer/flatten your organisation
- build multi-layer and multi-disciplinary collaborative innovation teams
- 'lean'ify and simplify policies and procedures, turn them into helpful guidance
- help adults to hold themselves to account through coaching and mentoring
- identify the right leadership style for your organisation
- make risk attitudes visible
- devolve control to teams/departments

Please share below your thoughts, case examples or other possible solutions to reducing bureaucracy and risk aversion in organisations.

Generational Diversity and Agile Working in the Public Sector

To date there is still too much office working in the Public Sector and not enough 'working where the work is', which for the Public Sector is working with the public. It is important to recognise that the Public Sector is on a Cultural journey which will require working differently, and in some cases counter-intuitively.

When 'working where the work is', technology is a great enabler. However there continues to be cultural barriers which link to a need to let go of some control, which understandably is counter-intuitive for political leaders, as well as the expectations of the different generations in the workplace.
Baby Boomers and - to some extend - my generation, Generation X, have become used to an office space we have been able to 'personalise' to our individual needs. In the current climate, office space is a high cost to any organisation, not just the Public Sector, and needs to be reviewed so that organisations don't compromise on their people (talent). In recent years, Generation X has been making more demands for equality, flexibility and work/life balance, however further economic pressures are demanding more compromise around the way we work. Equally access to ever-changing technologies has raised different workstyle expectations for the younger generations that are now sharing our workspaces.

The economy is pushing the Public Sector to think more carefully about the needs for efficiencies. Technology is a great enabler and should be led by the younger generation as the rate of adoption of the use of new technologies is 'speeding up' and will in turn enable new innovations. The younger generations - by the very nature of how an organisation works - are more likely to sit in the front line, hence a need for bottom-up innovation.

The culture set by Top Managers (likely to be Baby Boomers and Generation X) is important to consider as it highly depends on Top Managers' individual ability and willingness to recognise and embrace - not necessarily adopt - these generational changes and expectations, which will feel like a loss of control and in real terms is counter-intuitive, but - as you can see - extremely important.

Managing a virtual workforce requires organisations/managers to trust their front line workforce and embrace the use of technology and social media. This is all part of a wider cultural journey and  remains an enormous challenge for the Public Sector who are trying to get used to being more open and transparent, meaning a counter-intuitive 'loosening of the reins'.

Related blog - http://www.publicservice.co.uk/feature_story.asp?id=23073

Staying afloat - helping organisations survive financial difficulties

Is your organisation experiencing financial challenges? Not unusual in this day and age as financial pressures have affected us all in one way or another. Metaphors can really help you to prioritise your activities and outcomes and how to communicate to your employees. It may help you to think about a ship at risk of sinking. What is the first thing you do?

There are three behavioural options: 'denial', 'panic' or 'analyse, plan, act and review'.

Denial will only mean that those in positions of power and others who depend on them will be caught out. Denial stops communication about what is likely to happen, stops the seeking of highly-needed support and the resulting non-action is most likely to mean the ship will sink with many ill-prepared casualties.

Panic causes more panic. It is infectious and soon ends in chaos. Panic can translate in not knowing where to start, lead to knee jerk and therefore ill-informed decision-making. Reactivity has a negative effect on those who rely on the direction of those in positions of power. The likely result - a sinking ship and ill-prepared casualties (unless you are lucky to be surrounded by others who are more resilient).

The only winning formula is to 'analyse, plan, act and review' in other words, take a step back, get 'all hands on deck' to analyse the damage and trust everyone's commitment to do everything in their power to prevent the worst case scenario. Asking everyone to support the outcomes will also mean they will be more resilient and ready for any further changes (even if it means that the sinking of the ship could not be prevented).

If you find that your workforce are not acting in the way you would expect in an organisation dealing with uncertainty, it is likely that clear, honest and transparent communication is needed or that the communication is not being cascaded by those who lack the resilience needed to cope and lead others in these ever-changing times.