Kanban change and organizational models
In my article “The logic of failure in improvement initiatives” I stated that between 60 and 80 percent of change initiatives in companies fail. Here we should ask ourselves what it was that actually failed? What is the object to change? What is an organisation? We can identify very quickly an organisation called Apple, BMW, Johnson & Johnson, Shell, etc. However, are we in an organisation when we simply walk through the company door or sign an employment contract? What happens when all the staff go home in the evening? Do they carry the organisation with them in their heads? Or does the organisation remain back in the offices, the furniture or in the documents waiting to be called to life again on the following day?
Organizational models
The fact is that organizations cannot be reduced to a building or a piece of geared machinery for which change can be managed simply by changing gear or pressing a button on a machine. From the perspective of systems theory, organizations are living social systems, which have a high degree of complexity. If you are prepared to take the risk of excessive polarization, two completely different organization models can be outlined:
Mechanistic organization
|
Systemic organization
|
Comprehensible and clearly structured
|
Complex and contradictory in itself
|
Linear causal chains
|
Multiple interactions
|
Central control, guided by a rational plan
|
Self-controlled, following its own laws
|
Formal logic
|
Integration of contradictions
|
Primarily target driven
|
Primarily sense driven
|
Hard facts and rational relationships
|
Hard and soft factors, emotions
|
Structure and process oriented
|
Oriented towards operational patterns and routines
|
High significance attached to individual requirements and controls
|
High significance attached to joint reflection, cooperation and ensuring results
|
Change through instruction and command
|
Change through dialogue and conviction
|
Centralised management
|
Polycentric management
|