with Steve Smith, Anne-Marie Carol, Michael Tidball, Bob Dick and Graham ...... it seeks to deepen understanding of organisational life (Kemmis & McTaggart,.
Creating the conditions for sustainable , strategic organizational change An action research study of an internal laboratory service
Vicki J. Vaartjes BSc (Chemistry) Honours
Supervisor: Dr Ron Passfield Submitted to International Management Centres: Pacific Region, and Southern Cross University, Australia, as partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Management, 18 July 2003
ii This artwork, drawn by my niece, Emma Ringer, depicts my vision of the nature of organizational renewal and change. There are many forces that act to bind us to a way of doing and being. To create a different future requires clarity of vision, effort, and persistence.
iii
Abstract This dissertation describes the outcomes and contributions arising from an internally driven, strategic development process undertaken within an internal technical service, the Kembla Laboratory (pseudonym). The organisation consisted of around 110 technical and professional employees, and operated from four major laboratory facilities within a large Australian-based manufacturing plant. The work formed part of my managerial responsibility, as Business Development Manager, and is reported and interpreted as a manager-researcher applying action research methodology from within her own system. The purpose of the work was to focus workplace development on key strategic areas, and to create a learning environment that would support sustainable improvement. This was believed essential to the Kembla Laboratory developing their capacity to self-manage in an environment of long-standing and increasing organisational uncertainty. The process and outcomes of the work are described in terms of a ‘Transformative Change Model’, which identifies four dimensions of activity in the creation of transformative change: (a) Systemic assumptions, which included seeing the organisation as a ‘natural system’, and provided a sound theoretical and practical foundation for the process design; (b) Strategic focus, which required the identification of developmental priorities through the engagement of key stakeholders in the data gathering process; and (c) Generating sustainable change outcomes by adopting a social systems focus, particularly through leadership and workgroup development, and the consequent development of a preferred constructive cultural style; and
iv (d) Through the conduct of systematic process alignment, including the review of management practices, and key human resource management processes: salary review and performance appraisal. Tools used to identify the strategic focus included a customer survey tool based on a modified SERVQUAL model, and the Organisational Culture Inventory, a survey tool supplied by Human Synergistics International. The development process, when conducted in an integrated and intensive way, was crucial to the achievement of improved workplace satisfaction and organisational performance, as defined by financial and safety performance targets. Moreover, these outcomes were underpinned by a shift toward a more supportive, achievement oriented cultural style as assessed by survey re-test. No assessable improvement in customer satisfaction was observed through this work, partly because of the late inclusion of customer data in the development. A ‘Facilitative Model for Learning’ is also proposed that seeks to integrate theories and practice in the field of adult learning and facilitative practice. This model is a descriptive tool and identifies the salient aspects of the developmental methods and activities applied to the work, and particularly to the leadership development process. Also proposed are several other concepts and models that emerged from the analysis of outcomes and literature, and cover areas of theory and practice, including the practice of insider manager-researcher. This work concludes with acknowledgement of the need for further research in the application of the proposed models as design tools, and with questions concerning the ability of the leaders in this system, to leverage the benefits of development to impact the broader system, namely customer service and satisfaction.
v
Acknowledgements I believe that in work of this nature, there is no such thing as an individual effort. For this reason I acknowledge the contribution of a number of people, who have inspired, challenged and supported my efforts throughout this journey. In no particular order of importance, I would like to express my gratitude to these people: To Dr Ron Passfeild, I acknowledge your excellent supervision, unwavering interest, patience and insight. You have always been a great source of encouragement and expertise, and this has been very much appreciated. To the members of my learning set, who in our fortnightly teleconferences over the past year, have been a source of challenge and inspiration. Although membership has changed over this time, I particularly acknowledge the great learning conversations that I have had with Steve Smith, Anne-Marie Carol, Michael Tidball, Bob Dick and Graham Lyttle. To my colleague and long time friend, David Porteous, the ‘Kembla Laboratory’ Manager, without whose support, none of this work would have been possible. I acknowledge your willingness to truly lead by example. I also acknowledge the efforts of the members of the leadership team, who contributed significant time and energy toward their own learning and development throughout this process, and their workgroups - I continue to be inspired by their resilience in a challenging organisational climate. I acknowledge the expert assistance provided by the consultants engaged for this work, Dr Peter Fullerton and Mr Quentin Jones. Thanks to my confidant, coach and friend, Bronwyn Buck, for your gentle encouragement through the tough times. You always believed in me, even when I doubted.
vi Thanks also to my niece, Emma Ringer, for your insightful artwork, and for the many hours you spent editing my final draft. Last, I acknowledge the pivotal role that my family and my close circle of friends have played in this achievement. In particular my husband, John, thanks for your patience and at times, impatience, which spurred me on to get ‘it’ finished! To my children, Natalie and Christopher, who have watched my ‘immersion’ with curiosity: thanks for keeping my feet firmly on the ground. To our parents, with gratitude for the support you provide, and the pride you express. This has by no means been an individual effort – with gratitude to all those mentioned and to any others I may have missed.
vii
Statement of originality I wish to state that this thesis has not previously been submitted for a degree or diploma in any university, and that it represents my own work. To the best of my knowledge and belief, where I have cited or drawn upon the work of others, I have duly acknowledged this fact.
Vicki Vaartjes July 2003
viii
Table of contents ABSTRAC T .................................................................................................................................................. III ACKNOW LEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................................ V STATEMENT STATEM ENT OF ORIGINA LITY ..................................................................................................... VII TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................... VIII LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................................ X LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................... XI CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCT ION ............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6
PREAMBLE ......................................................................................................................................... 2 CONTEXTUAL SYNOPSIS .................................................................................................................... 3 OBJECTIVES AND PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH ................................................................................... 5 SUMMARY OF CONTRIBUTION ............................................................................................................ 6 THESIS STRUCTURE .......................................................................................................................... 11 IMPORTANT FOOTNOTES .................................................................................................................. 14
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF CONTEXTUAL LITERATUR E ..................................................... 16 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 17 DEFINITION, ROLE AND PURPOSE OF INTERNAL SERVICES ................................................................ 18 INTERNAL SERVICE PERFORMANCE ISSUES ...................................................................................... 21 ESTABLISHING A FOCUS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNAL SERVICES .............................................. 24 CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................. 28 CONCLUDING COMMENTS ................................................................................................................ 34
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH M ETHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 36 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 37 METHODOLOGICAL CRITERIA .......................................................................................................... 37 ACTION RESEARCH (AR) METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................... 40 APPLICATION OF AR METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................. 54 CONCLUDING COMMENTS ................................................................................................................ 58
CHAPTER 4: PROCESS O VERVIEW ................................................................................................ 60 4.1 4.2 4.3
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 61 THE TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE MODEL ........................................................................................ 61 CONCLUDING COMMENTS ................................................................................................................ 70
CHAPTER 5: THE “SYST EMIC” DIMENSION ............................................................................ 71 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 72 THEORY OF SYSTEMS AS APPLIED TO ORGANIZATIONS .................................................................... 72 SUPPORTING EMERGENT ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE ....................................................................... 79 IMPLICATIONS FOR FACILITATIVE STYLE ......................................................................................... 86 IMPLICATIONS FOR PROCESS DESIGN ................................................................................................ 88 CONCLUDING COMMENTS ................................................................................................................ 90
CHAPTER 6: THE “STRA TEGIC” DIMENSION ......................................................................... 92 6.1 6.2 6.3
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 93 STRATEGIC PRIORITIES BASED ON LITERATURE AND CONTEXT ........................................................ 93 COLLECTION OF WORKFORCE DATA: THE CULTURE & CLIMATE SURVEY ...................................... 100
ix 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7
COLLECTION OF CUSTOMER DATA: THE CUSTOMER SURVEY ......................................................... 117 CLARIFICATION OF MANAGEMENT PERCEPTION ............................................................................. 126 EVALUATION CRITERIA .................................................................................................................. 127 CONCLUDING COMMENTS .............................................................................................................. 129
CHAPTER 7: THE “SUST A INABILITY” DIM ENSION : SOCIAL SYSTEM S FOC US 131 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 132 RATIONALE .................................................................................................................................... 133 CYCLE #1: CREATING READINESS FOR CHANGE ............................................................................. 136 CYCLE #2: LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROCESS .......................................................................... 140 CYCLE #3: WORKGROUP DEVELOPMENT ....................................................................................... 185 CONCLUDING COMMENTS .............................................................................................................. 190
CHAPT ER 8: THE “SUSTAINAB LE” DIMENSION: SYSTE MATIC PROCESS ALIGNMENT .............................................................................................................................................. 192 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 193 RATIONALE .................................................................................................................................... 193 MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ............................................................................................................. 195 PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL PROCESSES .......................................................................................... 198 SALARY REVIEW PROCESS.............................................................................................................. 202 CONCLUDING COMMENTS.............................................................................................................. 207
CHAPTER 9: EVALUATIO N OF ORGANIZATIONAL OU TCOMES ................................ 208 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 209 SUMMARY OF OUTCOMES .............................................................................................................. 210 ORGANIZATIONAL OUTCOMES IN DETAIL....................................................................................... 213 REFLECTIONS ON THE EVALUATION PROCESS ................................................................................ 221 CONCLUDING COMMENTS .............................................................................................................. 222
CHAPTER 10: REFLECTI ONS ON THE PRACTICE OF AN INSIDER M ANAGE R RESEARCHER ........................................................................................................................................... 223 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 224 PERSONAL ORIENTATION ............................................................................................................... 225 TENSIONS ARISING FROM THE ORGANIZATIONAL ENVIRONMENT .................................................. 228 CREATING A LEARNING ORIENTATION ........................................................................................... 233 CONCLUDING COMMENTS .............................................................................................................. 238
CHAPTER 11: CONCLUSI ON ............................................................................................................. 240 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 241 OBJECTIVES AND PURPOSE EXPLORED ........................................................................................... 241 ASSESSMENT OF THE ‘ELEMENTS OF RESEARCH’ ........................................................................... 242 CONTRIBUTIONS – RE-STATED....................................................................................................... 243 AREAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH .................................................................................................... 249 CONCLUDING COMMENTS .............................................................................................................. 249
REFERENCE LIST .................................................................................................................................. 250 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................................. 267 APPENDIX A ................................................................................................................................................. 268 APPENDIX B ................................................................................................................................................. 269 APPENDIX C ................................................................................................................................................. 270 APPENDIX D ................................................................................................................................................. 271 APPENDIX E ................................................................................................................................................. 272 APPENDIX F .................................................................................................................................................. 275 APPENDIX G ................................................................................................................................................. 276 APPENDIX H ................................................................................................................................................. 275 APPENDIX I................................................................................................................................................... 281 APPENDIX J .................................................................................................................................................. 282
x
xi
List of tables Table 3.1
Application of a cyclic action research approach…………………..
58
Table 5.1
Systemic assumptions and process design implications…………...
89
Table 6.1
Cultural gaps……………………………………………………….
114
Table 6.2
Service gap analysis………………………………………………..
121
Table 6.3
Outcome evaluation criteria……………………………………….
128
Table 7.1
Outcomes of OCI gap analysis……………………………………..
136
Table 7.2
Leadership development process design…………………………...
155
Table 9.1
Organisational outcome evaluation based on strategic priorities…..
211
xii
List of figures
Figure 1.1
Transactional interfaces of Kembla Laboratory……………………
2
Figure 1.2
Elements of research……………………………………………….
12
Figure 1.3
Thesis structure…………………………………………………….
13
Figure 1.4
Evaluation model…………………………………………………...
15
Figure 3.1
Action research cycle………………………………………………
44
Figure 3.2
Current reality/desired future model……………………………….
55
Figure 3.3
Strategic growth……………………………………………………
56
Figure 3.4
Growth orientation of action research……………………………...
57
Figure 4.1
Transformative Change Model……………………………………..
64
Figure 5.1
Appreciative systems view of intervention………………………...
83
Figure 6.1
Forms of data and their potential impact on change……………….
99
Figure 6.2
Virtuous cycle of success for internal services…………………….
117
Figure 7.1
Interaction of culture and leadership to create outcomes…………..
145
Figure 7.2
Facilitative Model for Learning…………………………………....
149
Figure 7.3
Pattern of sustainability of effective team norms…………………..
158
Figure 7.4
Vicious and virtuous cycles and disconfirming data……………….
172
Figure 7.5
Leader initiated change…………………………………………….
185
Figure 8.1
Dimensions of process alignment………………………………….
194
Figure 8.2
Goal setting model…………………………………………………
197
Figure 9.1
Sources of outcome evidence………………………………………
210
Figure 9.2
Outcomes of culture………………………………………………..
214
Figure 10.1
Orientations of a manager-researcher……………………………...
227
1
Chapter 1: Introduction
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." Mahatma Gandhi
2
1.1 Preamble In this work, I share the actions and outcomes of a change process conducted as part of my managerial responsibility in Kembla Laboratory (pseudonym), a corporately owned internal laboratory service. More importantly I share the insights that emerged at a personal level through the design and implementation of the developmental process, and the key business outcomes that were achieved as a result. This work records the experience of a specialised group of technical people within their internal service organisation striving to reform and create a more viable future within a highly competitive and volatile environment –not an uncommon scenario within modern business. The work is documented subjectively from my perspective as principal researcher, and as long term employee and practicing manager, and draws on extensive sources of data, both subjective and objective in the analysis of process and outcomes. In general terms, the contributions that arose from this work are associated with two areas of organisational theory and practice: 1. The design and implementation of strategic change initiatives to produce sustainable results in complex organisational settings, and 2. The issues arising from the conduct of internal action research by practicing managers Although much literature is available on generic applications of organisational change and development, this work contributes to the field by providing a case example of an organisational setting for which literature was non-existent. Likewise, in the arena of internal action research, very little literature is available concerning issues of practice from
3 the practitioner’s direct experience. However, an increasing body of literature is accumulating.
1.2 Contextual Synopsis At the time that this research was undertaken, the Kembla Laboratory (pseudonym) was part of a large metal refining and manufacturing plant, which had been operating in Australia for over 80 years. This plant was in turn a small but significant part of a global resources corporation that was in the throws of significant reorganisation, including extensive strategic review and restructuring. The Kembla Laboratory group consisted of four separate facilities all located within the manufacturing plant, and employed around 110 chemists, technicians and professionals. The key role of the group was to serve the analytical and technical support needs of the manufacturing plant and associated industries as depicted in Figure 1.1.
Transactional Interface Laboratory instrumentation
Procedural actions/ technical improvement
Analysis data
Laboratory employees
Data
Shared information systems
Final manufactured product Process data
Data transfer
Manufacturing operations Customer service interactions
Manufacturing customers
Materials analysis: feed materials, process by-products, intermediate process material & final product
Procedural action/ process development
Manufacturing process inputs
Figure 1.1: Transactional interfaces of the Kembla Laboratory within its operating environment
4 Within my role as Business Development Manager, I held functional responsibility for development of the organisation in the areas of strategy, planning and business improvement. Therefore issues of commercial viability and development of a ‘service culture’ were also a key concern. As a service group, our future largely depended on our ability to utilise our resources, however scarce, in the most efficient and effective way to service our internal customers and thereby satisfy our role within the operational supply chain. Effective resource utilization, interdepartmental cooperation and effective leadership toward a strong service orientation were all necessary for a viable future. In summary, the key developmental concerns that were addressed to varying degrees through this work were: 1. The need to develop the leadership capabilities of the newly formed, broadly based leadership team 2. The pressing need for positive workforce engagement, rather than resistance to ongoing issues of change 3. The need to review, and improve, the historically troublesome human resource management processes 4. The need to make a ‘quantum’ leap in improvement on important business imperatives, including safety, financial and customer service performance As we faced the prospect of an ongoing unstable future it became clear that to achieve timely progress on these issues, a developmental focus was required that would stretch individual and collective thinking and behaviour. If we continued to draw on our tacit understanding of business practice, we would continue to generate outcomes that would fall short of our visions and expectations. What was needed was an approach to development
5 that would create the conditions needed to support the organisation to transform its own management practice and work processes. This context, and particularly the realization of the need to transform, informed the design and implementation of the developmental process described within this thesis.
1.3 Objectives and purpose of the research 1.3.1 Objectives Given this context, the objective of this work was to understand the nature of strategic change within the Kembla Laboratory and to use this knowledge to facilitate the development of the organisation toward defined outcomes of real commercial value. Although a detailed justification of methodology is given later, I chose to apply an action research paradigm to the work where a dual methodology, consisting of both “research” and “action”, was required (Dick, 1993; Dick, 1997a; Dick, 2002). To this end, the objectives of the work are described as follows: The “research” objective was to: !
Understand through literature, other resources, and by reflection on my professional experience: 1. The peculiar characteristics of an internal service context, and how these characteristics impact change focus and process design 2. The processes through which effective strategic change can be enacted and sustained within this context
!
Using this knowledge, define a model for developing workplace culture and processes that support sustainable change, in a way that creates greater strategic
6 alignment between the group’s capabilities and the service needs of its corporate owner. The “action” objective was to: !
Facilitate a process of organisational development within the internal laboratory service
!
Engage in personal learning and professional development through design, facilitation and participation in the change process
1.3.2 Purpose In specific terms therefore the purpose of this research was: To design and enact a rigorous and effective process of internally driven change that would support the development of a strategically focussed, learning oriented workplace environment that would enable sustained improvement in key outcome areas: workplace satisfaction, customer service and organizational effectiveness. This purpose, once clarified, informed the choice of methodology, tools and developmental activities undertaken through this work. It also provided a point of reference from which to evaluate the developmental outcomes.
1.4
Summary of contribution
1.4.1 Contribution to Practice A sustained improvement in key strategic outcomes, including workplace satisfaction and business performance, was achieved in the context of the Kembla Laboratory through
7 the application of an integrated, systemic development process over a period of 14 months. The achievement of this result was contingent on the approach taken which is described in terms of a ‘Transformative Change Model’ which is proposed and described as part of this dissertation. The model is depicted in Figure 4.1 and is based on the sufficient and detailed attention given to four dimensions of transformative change, namely systemic assumptions, strategic focus, and sustainable action through a social systems focus and systematic process alignment. The way that these dimensions were explored in terms of practice are summarised as: !
Systemic assumptions formed the foundation of the process design. The process was responsive to the emergent nature of change in the organisation as a ‘natural system’ through the application of the action research methodology, and accommodated the differing needs of the system through the application of a multilevel developmental approach. Ideas underlying the systems view were translated into practice in terms of how the strategic priorities were clarified, and the design and enactment of the developmental aspects of the work. This dimension was foundational in that it provided a grounded framework for thinking about how the work would be undertaken to achieve the desired results.
!
The process ensured that the work was of strategic importance because of the involvement of key stakeholders from within and outside of the organisation, in outcome definition. Clarity about both the current reality and desired future outcomes was gained through multiple activities, including surveys and discussion forums. The strategic focus was re-iterated throughout the developmental process as organisational members, and particularly the organisation’s leaders, were actively
8 supported to translate ideas into practice to resolve important and persistent workplace issues. !
Sustainability of outcomes was achieved by giving significant and consistent attention to change at a social systems level. Particular emphasis was placed on raising awareness of and re-shaping cultural patterns and expectations. A key focus of this work was the development of leadership capability and behaviour such that changes in awareness and thinking were translated into effective individual and team behaviours, and ultimately workplace action. As leaders became more capable of modelling and reinforcing preferred cultural patterns, so too arose the opportunity to resolve persistent organisational issues concerned with teamwork, consistency of approach, efficiency and coordination of resources. A key aspect of creating sustainable outcomes was the purposeful conduct of a systematic alignment of management processes to create alignment between these processes and their implicit reinforcement of preferred cultural patterns.
The effective practice of insider action research lies in part in the recognition and management of the impact of the organisational environment. The roles and responsibilities of manager and researcher are in some respects opposed, particularly in terms of how each work within existing power and influence structures. Working from within the complex organisational environment also requires the manager-researcher to recognize and manage the impact of the dominant cultural style, and the anxiety unleashed through the organisations engagement in an emergent development process. Effective insider research also requires recognition of the tensions created through role multiplicity, and the adoption of best practices such as journaling and critical reflection as part of legitimate managerial practice. Underlying this is a personal capacity to manage oneself, to engage in meta-
9 cognitive practice, and to willingly take action that is personally risky and counter-cultural. Perhaps most fundamental of all is a willingness to relinquish the often compelling desire for control and to find new ways of being and acting that are more congruent with effective managerial and leadership practice. 1.4.2 Contribution to theory 1. The integration and outcomes of this work informed the development of a ‘Transformative Change Model’, as detailed in Chapter 4 and depicted in Figure 4.1. The practice outcomes related to this model have already been discussed. The model identifies the key dimensions associated with the effective facilitation of transformative organisational change in this context, namely systemic assumptions, strategic focus, and sustainable action through a social systems focus and systematic process alignment. Although this model is an outcome of the exploration of the framework of ideas as necessary for effective research in this context, nonetheless I propose that an integrated approach may be applicable to other practice contexts. 2. The extensive reflection on facilitative practice within the leadership development process informed a ‘Facilitative Model for Learning’ that seeks to integrate the theory and practice of many reputable theorists and authors on the subject of adult learning and leadership development. This model is proposed as one which integrates different approaches to learning and development, but strives toward synergy and effectiveness of the final outcome. Because of its generalized theoretical basis, it is proposed as a model that may be applicable to other research and development contexts. This model is described in detail in Chapter 7 and is depicted in Figure 7.2.
10 3. A variety of concepts and models are proposed throughout the work, that were informed by an understanding of both theory and practice. In particular, these key concepts include: a. The role of cyclic action research in the creation of growth oriented rather than reflexive outcomes, superimposed on the current reality/desired future model, depicted in Figure 3.4 b. The potential impact of confirming and disconfirming data sources on change, depicted in Figure 6.1 c. The virtuous cycle of success for internal services, depicted in Figure 6.2 d. The interactive relationship between leadership, culture and outcomes, depicted in Figure 7.2 e. Propositions about the sustainability of effective team norms through the use of frequent development interventions, depicted in Figure 7.3 f. A representation of the vicious and virtuous cycles of engagement with disconfirming data in oppositional-avoidant cultures, depicted in Figure 7.4 g. Propositions about the nature of leadership-driven change, depicted in Figure 7.5 h. Three orientations required for the effective practice of insider managerresearcher, depicted in Figure 10.1
11
1.5 Thesis structure To make sense of the complex outcomes of this work, in terms that support the identification of valid research findings, I have arranged this thesis in a way that makes explicit the essential elements of research identified by Peter Checkland (1992). Implicit in the conduct of any research is the ability to yield lessons (Checkland, 1992) or warrantable assertions (Dick, 1997d) from the work. Checkland therefore proposed an “intellectual” framework through which I could order my thinking and writing and through which I could define the nature of the research lessons. The author suggests that we start with the premise that there are elements of research that are fundamental, irrespective of the paradigmatic approach taken. These are represented in Figure 1.2 and are described as: 1. The various frameworks of thinking (F) and ideas that are in some way related and relevant to the research issue. 2. The research methodologies (M) that emerge out of a process of selection from the various frameworks of ideas. 3. The application of these research methods to areas of application (A) and 4. The subsequent learning or “lessons” that arise from this application. The lessons feed back and influence all three elements: frameworks, through expanding and creating theories and ideas; methodologies, through assessment of outcome effectiveness; and areas of application, through generalization or new awareness of possibility. Checkland’s framework provides a way of understanding the essential elements of any research process. Moreover, the framework allows for the ordering of different aspects of the work. In this case, the thesis structure explores each of “F”, “M”, and “A” in turn, and
12 concludes with an evaluation of the outcomes achieved. This structure, although somewhat unusual, provides a means by which the complex aspects of this work can be explored in order to extract lessons and provide a warrant for the assertions made. This structure is outlined in Figure 1.3.
M Methodology
F Framework of ideas Learning about M, F, A
A Area of application
Figure 1.2: The elements of research; based on Checkland (1992, p. 4)
13
Chapter 2 Review of Contextual Literature (A)
Chapter 3 Research Methodology (M) Chapter 4 Process Overview (F) Chapter 5 Systemic Dimension (F)
Sustainable Dimension (A)
Chapter 6 Strategic Dimension (A) Chapter 7 Social Systems Focus (A)
Chapter 8 Systematic Process Alignment (A)
Chapter 9 Evaluation of organizational outcomes (A)
Figure 1.3: Thesis structure indicating the chapters in which ‘F’, ‘M’ and ‘A’ are explored, and the flow of reasoning and information
14
1.6 Important footnotes 1.6.1 The approach to literature An important distinction must be made at this introductory stage about the way that literature has been used and referenced throughout this thesis. My intention has been to rigorously review and cite relevant literature for all aspects of the work undertaken and to ensure that the links between the literature and the work undertaken are clear and concise from a reader’s perspective. To facilitate this, I have chosen to deal with literature in two ways. Firstly, I have included a literature review chapter (Chapter 2) which contains contextual literature only. This chapter outlines the literature that aims to develop an understanding of the unique purpose and developmental issues facing internal service organisations. Secondly, for literature associated with the more generic issues of organisational development and change, I have dispersed such citations throughout the work. Within each major chapter I have identified sub-sections called ‘rationale’ where I have included literature associated with the key issues being addressed. My aim is that such an arrangement will make the links between theory and practice more explicit. 1.6.2 The approach to evaluation The evaluation of the outcomes of this work draws on the evaluation model described by Dalmau, Dick & Boas (1988). The authors suggest that the evaluation of change work starts with the definition of ultimate outcomes, which is the most abstract level of outcomes definition, and works toward less abstract levels by defining targets, immediate effects, processes and resources. The basic rationale is that to facilitate evaluation, one must move to a point where evaluation is possible within the context of the work. The authors also clarify the distinction between process and outcomes evaluation and note that although both
15 occur throughout the work, target level outcomes are more important for outcome evaluation, and immediate effects, processes and resources outcomes are most important in evaluating process. This concept is represented in Figure 1.4 and was applied to this work in two distinct ways: 1. Comment associated with the ‘process’ levels of evaluation, that is resources, processes and immediate effects, are included throughout the process analyses contained in Chapters 5-8. 2. Analysis of the ultimate outcome and target levels is included separately from the process analysis in Chapter 9.
Ultimate outcomes Targets
Outcome evaluation
Immediate effects Processes
Process evaluation
Resources
Figure 1.4: A representation of the evaluation model for change programs based on Dalmau, Dick & Boas (1988).
16
Chapter 2: Review of contextual literature
“We are all capable of change and growth; we just need to know where to begin” Blaine Lee
17
2.1 Introduction This review is intentionally focussed on literature that shapes and defines the contextual setting of the Kembla Laboratory, and the particular developmental issues common to similar internal service organisations. This supports a depth of analysis of the area of application (A) in accordance with Checkland’s framework for research (Checkland, 1992). The chapter therefore starts with an analysis of the key issues identified in the literature, and finishes by analyzing the recommendations of literature relative to the contextual reality of the Kembla Laboratory. So in a sense, this chapter is a mixture of literature review and analysis and aims to specify clear strategic development priorities, this being a key factor in achieving the purposes of this work. Despite a range of literature sourced on the subject of internal service management and development, none was found that referred specifically to the issues encountered by an internal laboratory service. Although this did place limitations on the extent to which the review could relate directly to issues of concern to this work, the available literature did provide considerable insight into the core ideas and concepts surrounding change and development within similar organisations. The review starts with the assumption that context is important when planning change or development initiatives. Literature lends supports to this notion: “context colors everything in the corporation. More accurately, the context alters what we see usually without our being aware of it” (Goss, Pascale, & Athos, 1993, p.100). Knowledge of the context informs the improvement opportunities (Cicmil, 1999), and when compared with a desired future state, provides the tension and motivation required to focus change efforts (Atkinson & Millar, 1999; Cameron & Quinn, 1999; Cummings & Worley, 1997; Kotter, 1996;
18 Senge, 1990). Burnes and James (1996) argue that understanding the context of the organisation is critical, as the context not only determines the type and appropriateness of the changes being pursued, but also what processes will be effective.
2.2 Definition, role and purpose of internal services Given the absence of specific literature about internal laboratory services, this part of the review draws on the internal services literature as well as some generic service industry concepts. In many respects, internal services can be considered to be like any other service organisation in that they are charged with responsibility to generate and deliver services of value to customers. Internal services form a significant part of the companies in which they operate. In terms of operating costs, one estimate is that internal services account for 70% of production costs in the 1980’s. These estimates indicate an increase from around 50% in the 1960’s, which is indicative of the impact of rationalisation, downsizing and outsourcing efforts (Vandermerwe & Gilbert, 1989). 2.2.1 Characteristics of internal services 2.2.1.1 Internal services form a critical part of the internal supply chain. Internal services are discrete sub-systems, integrated within a larger organisational structure and context (Wilson, 1998). They operate in a highly interdependent way with other operational departments, and form a link in the chain of functional units within the organisation that enables it to satisfy its purpose (Gilbert, 2000; Hays, 1997; Marshall, Baker, & Finn, 1998). Hence they have the capacity to make a significant contribution to the success of the organisation (Piede, 1996) and can differentiate themselves and refine
19 their services through their access to corporate information that is often confidential in nature (Wilson, 1998). 2.2.1.2 Internal services are marginal to the organization’s function. Although there is support for the notion that internal services are non-core to company function (Wilson, 1998), there is also recognition that the boundary between core and noncore is not always clear. It is this ambiguity that has enabled many internal services bureaucracies to flourish (Piede, 1996). 2.2.1.3 Internal services provide a range of services to internal customers. Services may be concerned with technical support and quality control, such as laboratories; concerned with human resource management, such as payroll; concerned with supplying the needs of the manufacturing process, such as procurement; or with the delivery of product to the market place, such as transport and marketing. They have as their purpose “the supply of information and service to others within their own company” (Hays, 1997, p.10) where the interaction between service and internal customer is “dyadic” in nature (Gremler, Bitner, & Evans, 1995). 2.2.1.4 Internal services have specific functional relationships with their internal customers. The nature of the relationship between the service and their internal customers can be understood using a model that placed emphasis on the ultimate purpose of the service (Stauss, 1995). The model describes internal services as having a workflow, support/ advice or evaluation/ audit relationship with internal customers.
20 !
Workflow relationships occur when the service is an integral part of the supply chain, and the service is defined by consistent demand and quality specifications.
!
Support/ advice relationships occur where the service is required intermittently and to varying quality specifications, to assist customers in their problem solving and development efforts.
!
Evaluation/ audit relationship has a purely regulatory or monitoring function.
2.2.1.5 Internal services may or may not be managed as a ‘service’. Internal services may be managed as an ‘overhead’. As described by Piede, “Internal services are most simply defined as the services a firm requires to operate but for which there is no direct tie to revenue” (Piede, 1996, p.12). The services provided are not directly billed to external customers and because of this the internal service department’s operating costs become part of the operating or overhead cost structure. Vandermerwe and Gilbert (1989) propose that the most effective management approach is a “market driven” approach, which is focussed on the end user of the service. 2.2.1.6 The internal service is influenced by internal dynamics of the organization as a whole. One of the characteristics which is less well understood and still the subject of research is the effect that organisational dynamics have on the ability of services to satisfy their internal customer’s expectations (Reynoso & Moores, 1995; Stauss, 1995). The effect of negative organisational dynamics, in the form of “internal conflict” between internal
21 service and customer, is cited as an impediment to corporate competitiveness as it absorbs energy and detracts from the company’s purpose (Hays, 1997). 2.2.2 A working definition of internal service Considering the important characteristics described, an internal service can be defined from a functional perspective as follows: An internal service is a service provider that is owned within a company, providing support through information and services, to internal customers as an integral part of the supply chain, ultimately contributing to the generation of a product or service for sale to external customers. This definition of internal services implies the need for co-dependency and collaboration between the internal service and internal customers to produce a final product. While recognizing the potential impact of the organisational dynamics and management practices, the primary emphasis is on delivery, quality and inter-dependence between customer and supplier, all within a shared organisational context. Such a context, which requires a high degree of collaboration between internal customer and service supplier, generates specific performance and development issues.
2.3 Internal service performance issues Internal services can experience difficulties in delivering services to meet the expectation of their internal customers. Hays (1997) cites a 1993 study from Quality Magazine that indicated that two in every three internal customers were dissatisfied with the service they received from their internal services. Another survey of 300 service and manufacturing executives across the world, highlighted internal service performance issues. Although 70% of respondents said that their internal service costs were increasing, only 20% were “very
22 satisfied” with the service they received: "Unfortunately, the performance of internal service providers has not reflected the growing importance of internal services..." (Vandermerwe & Gilbert, 1991, p.50). Yet internal services themselves may remain unaware of the discontent (Hays, 1997). Within the competitive global environment, optimising the effectiveness of internal services has become a key point of leverage for business improvement (Piede, 1996). However, the changes have not always been successful. Piede points out that in an effort to improve, internal services can be caught in a situation where their costs are necessarily increased. In specific terms, issues of concern include internal customer dissatisfaction (Hays, 1997; Wilson, 1998), persistent service gaps (Chaston, 1994) as well as issues of organisational dynamics that impede excellent service delivery (Reynoso & Moores, 1995). Closer examination of these issues requires some understanding of how the unique characteristics of internal services contribute to, and impact on, performance. 2.3.1 Internal services tend to be isolated from commercial realities. Internal services experience difficulties because of isolation and disconnection from commercial realities. Within the US energy utilities sector, internal services are perceived as “internal bureaucracies isolated from the firm’s real customers” (Piede, 1996, p.12). Similarly, Vandermerwe and Gilbert (1991) reported that US managers perceive their internal service providers as being too far removed from the “front line” to accurately understand what their internal customers need to best service the company’s external customers. Internal services were described as lacking sensitivity to the needs of the operational managers and tending to direct their energy toward the wrong things, rather than focussing on the activities that could enhance the company’s competitive advantage. Hirons, Simon and Simon (1998) cite a case where the strong technical emphasis of a
23 research and development internal service had the effect of shielding the group from the commercial realities, thereby limiting the effectiveness of business practices in satisfying internal customers. The mandatory use of internal services, a practice that exists in some organisations, simply adds to the problem (Auty & Long, 1999; Wilson, 1998). The internal service can too easily adopt a “take it or leave it” attitude which exacerbates the adversarial attitudes and limits the internal services understanding of their customer’s needs. 2.3.2 The organization may overlook the potential of internal services. Internal services tend to be “non-core” or peripheral to the company’s main purpose, and not direct contributors to the revenue stream. They are generally regarded as cost centres and as a result their potential as “market-driven value adders” may be overlooked (Vandermerwe & Gilbert, 1991, p.59). Familiar internal service groups may also be overshadowed by external providers (Wilson, 1998). 2.3.3 Organizational dynamics can create tension and limit service effectiveness. The business practices of the internal service can create tension. For example, compulsory use of internal services- the “captive customer” issue (Auty & Long, 1999; Wilson, 1998), too many layers of management, and lack of recognition of the importance of face-to-face communications can be antecedents for service gaps (Chaston, 1994). Auty and Long (1999) identified service gaps arise from conflicting departmental and organisational loyalties: “tribal warfare”. Their work highlighted the conflicting priorities for internal service departments where they questioned whose needs took precedence: those of the internal customer or those of the organisation as a whole? Organisational dynamics may also limit needed improvements by limiting the honesty of feedback provided to internal services, by their internal customers (Stauss, 1995).
24 2.3.4 Customers may undervalue internal services. Internal customers often lack an “appreciation for the technical complexity and professional standards that are part of the task of the internal service unit” (Hays, 1997, p.10). Internal services are often required to deliver services that are vague, unplanned and responsive to the organisation’s immediate needs. Although internal services tend to be responsive to such needs, this can lead to the development of unrealistic expectations in their customers (Piede, 1996) and thereby increase the chance of failure even though customer expectations may be considered unreasonable (Lawrence & Wiswell, 1998). Customers, under pressure to deliver, may overlook the importance of setting clear service expectations, and cooperatively working with the service provider to ensure delivery. In addition, customers may perceive the service as “free” when their operational budgets are not directly impacted, and therefore undervalue the services.
2.4 Establishing a focus for development of internal services 2.4.1 Align services with external customer needs: the supply chain management approach. To improve performance, internal services must become more ‘market-driven’ and develop a better understanding of external customer needs and how this relates to their role in the supply chain (Piede, 1996; Vandermerwe & Gilbert, 1989; Vandermerwe & Gilbert, 1991). When internal supply chain processes are working effectively, the organisation will be better placed to satisfy external customers (Reynoso & Moores, 1995; Stauss, 1995). 2.4.2 Improve service quality The philosophy of service quality as encapsulated within the total quality management (TQM) movement is very much aligned with the supply chain management approach:
25 “TQM emphasises that each step of the production process is seen as a relationship between a customer and supplier (whether internal or external).” (Cao, Clarke, & Lehaney, 2000, p.189). In fact, workflow type internal services represent a “perfect example of the TQM axiom ‘the next process is your customer’” (Stauss, 1995, p.67). Although TQM is quite a comprehensive approach covering human resource utilization, quality assurance, quality results, leadership, strategic quality planning, and information and analysis, the most significant sub-component is customer satisfaction. 2.4.3 Improve customer satisfaction Customer satisfaction is a “post-purchase” affective state, where the customer’s expectations have been met or exceeded (Lovelock, Patterson, & Walker, 1998). As a concept, customer satisfaction management for internal services is relevant: “Successful service organizations understand well the importance of carefully monitoring and managing customer satisfaction…The consensus is that the satisfaction of internal customers (ie employees) is also important, and like in the external service context, an internal customers satisfaction …can be significantly influenced by encounters with internal service providers” (Gremler et al., 1995, p.28). In the internal service context, customer satisfaction management is an essential part of internal customer service strategy (Reynoso & Moores, 1995). Measurement of satisfaction may require an approach that is different to that used in the external service market (Marshall et al., 1998) and internal tensions may limit effective measurement (Stauss, 1995). However, regardless of these difficulties, internal services must understand and meet their role expectations within the organisation (Gilbert, 2000). The ability to achieve internal customer satisfaction depends on:
26 !
Firstly, the importance of understanding internal customer needs through dialogue at each functional interface (Jones, 1996), clear service policies and targets (Piercy, 1996) and through the development of cooperative demand and supply agreements (Stauss, 1995).
!
Secondly, the ability to measure and monitor improvement by designing a suitable measurement tool (Marshall et al., 1998) or the application of an existing tool such as SERVQUAL (Auty & Long, 1999; Chaston, 1994; Hirons et al., 1998; Reynoso & Moores, 1995) or a modified version such as INTSERVQUAL (Frost & Kumar, 2000).
2.4.4 Improve financial management practices Some authors comment on this area and suggest that internal services be arranged as “profit centres” (Piede, 1996; Stauss, 1995) where services are charged back to internal customer departments, and to external organisations. The authors caution that any form of internal competition must be discouraged; however such a financial practice supports internal services to monitor and manage their own costs, recover their operating costs and introduce cash flow that can impact positively on the organisation’s bottom line. 2.4.5 Focus on internal employee satisfaction, attitude and behaviour Literature lends support to the idea that service employee satisfaction impacts customer satisfaction and is therefore a legitimate focus for development: “While job satisfaction may not lead to customer satisfaction directly, service organizations rarely have satisfied customers without having satisfied employees” (Hallowell, Schlesinger, & Zornitsky, 1996, p.28).
27 Being intangible in nature, the effective delivery of services relies heavily on the interactions between customer and supplier: “In service organizations, far more than whose which create products, the actions of people are key to, and the essence of, quality” (Rausch, 1999, p.154). The beliefs that employees hold toward their customers which is reflected in their attitudes, has been linked to customer satisfaction (Bowen & Johnston, 1999; Hallowell et al., 1996; Marshall et al., 1998). Likewise the feelings that employees have toward their work are also transferred to their customers – happy employees lead to more satisfied customers and vice versa (Forman, 1995). Their skills and an ability to focus attention on the right things for the customer are critical to the delivery of quality services. Employees must be capable of developing effective working relationships with internal customers, and coordinating and developing better services (Wilson, 1998). To enable this, attention must be given to how employees are treated and the effectiveness of the equipment and systems, such as human resource management systems, that assist them to do their job (Aycan, Kanungo, & Sinha, 1999; Browning, 1998; Dattner, 1996): “ if an organization delivers good service to its employees, enabling them to do their jobs well, the employees will have the ability to service their customers well." (Hallowell et al., 1996, p.23). Organisational climate is strongly associated with the affective states of employees, which in turn is strongly associated with their customer service intentions (Schmit & Allscheid, 1995). So leaders play a critical role in the creation of a work environment that supports their employees in the delivery of service. Leaders must ensure that employees are clear about their roles and responsibilities, and are equipped to work effectively together both functionally and interpersonally. In essence, leaders support their employees to achieve
28 service quality by creating a positive work environment that minimises stress, encourages innovation and creativity (Varca, 1999), develops employee capability through education (Vandermerwe & Gilbert, 1989), takes care of employee needs (Gremler et al., 1995) and applies effective decision making practices (Rausch, 1999).
2.5 Contextual analysis The preceding literature provides insight into the strategic focus and key outcomes areas of other similar organisations. The following analysis, however, confirms the strategic focus and key outcomes areas relevant to the Kembla Laboratory at the time of this work. The analysis draws on the development issues raised in the previous section, and discusses the relevance of each as a potential strategic focus. !
Align services with external customer needs: the supply chain management approach. Literature supports the idea that by creating greater understanding of the external market place, and the impact of the internal service on ultimate delivery to that market, it is possible for internal services to make a more focussed and effective contribution. This issue was only of minor importance to the Kembla Laboratory at the time of this work. In the years prior, much developmental effort had been given to supply chain management and ensuring that services delivery was not a source of delay or non-compliance to final product delivery. Therefore although an important issue generally, this was not of great importance to the Kembla Laboratory in terms of a strategic focus for this work.
!
Improve service quality: TQM philosophy is cited as providing the foundational principles of service excellence. In years past, the Kembla
29 Laboratory had implemented comprehensive quality control systems and processes, and had earned quality accreditation with national regulatory bodies. Such a standard of quality accreditation was a requirement for product delivery on the global market. Quality standards in most cases were embedded in the way of life for the group in terms of attitude, practice and systems. Some minor, persistent quality issues were present, although these tended to be associated with particular individuals rather than workgroups generally. Therefore, a developmental focus on service quality was not a strategic priority at the time of this work. !
Improve customer satisfaction: Services in general carry the responsibility for provision of services to satisfy or exceed customer needs. Literature therefore provides considerable support for the idea that customers should play a key role in establishing service standards, and that services must then proactively monitor and improve customer satisfaction. Although generally focussed on customer satisfaction in a range of informal and formal ways (e.g. through service review meetings), the group had not actively measured customer satisfaction for many years. Although individual groups tended to maintain an awareness of customer perceptions of service, there was no current understanding of perceptions of the whole group by the diverse range of customers served. Therefore, the particular issue of monitoring customer satisfaction, with a view to directing future service development work, was identified as a strategic priority in this work.
!
Improve financial management practices: This developmental issue concerns adopting financial management practices that built accountability and
30 transparency of internal service delivery. In years prior to this work, the laboratory had adopted the practices recommended in literature and was able to demonstrate a positive impact on revenue by delivering services to the external market place. Therefore, since such improved practices were in place, financial management generally was not a key strategic priority for this work. !
Focus on internal employee satisfaction, attitude and behaviour: The development of people is cited as a key lever in improving all aspects of service delivery. In a sense, literature provides evidence of the foundational significance to developing satisfied, motivated and skilled employees. Such development relies heavily on leaders to create and support workplace a environment that in turn supports employees to do their job effectively. For the Kembla Laboratory, this was a broadly applicable strategic focus for a number of reasons: !
Inexperienced broad based leadership: In the late 1990’s a more fluid management structure was created in the Kembla Laboratory by introducing a broad based leadership team consisting of around 16 managerial and technical specialist representatives. This change was initiated by the leaders of the day (including myself) because of their shared belief that in order to realise a greater ownership of the future, the Kembla Laboratory would benefit from more senior people participating in decision making, direction setting and leadership of change. Such a philosophy is soundly based and provides for a fundamental shift in organising toward a more adaptive and informed workplace (Bak, Vogt, George, & Greentree, 1994).
31 This change meant that those who had previously held a day-today managerial responsibility focussing on their own areas, now had to build their capacity to act on behalf of the whole group. The team consisted of diverse individuals in terms of education, technical background, age, tenure, leadership experience and style. Such diversity created significant challenge for the team, and for the team’s leader, the Kembla Laboratory Manager. Of particular challenge was the unwillingness of some team members to accept the responsibilities of leadership. For many years, it had been easy for organisational members to blame “management” for difficulties and poor decisions. And this view was often borne of valid workplace experience where past changes had been poorly managed, with minimal effort to encourage participation and ownership. Now however, with broadly based leadership, team members could no longer push blame up the hierarchy- they had to adjust to the responsibility that their new leadership role demanded. This issue in itself highlighted a critical development need as any lack of effective functioning of leadership has direct implications for the workplace environment and therefore the ability of employees to focus and deliver effective services. !
Tendency to approach change passively: In general terms, and as evidenced by recent events, the Kembla Laboratory was illequipped to deal with significant internally driven change. This was in large part due to the extensive and often negative
32 experience of change, both internally and corporately driven. The group could well be described as “passive-aggressive”, in a similar way that McIlduff and Coghlan (2000) characterize individual behaviour in response to change. Under pressure, the group exuded a degree of hostility toward corporate initiatives. This was typically expressed as stalling, avoiding, resistance and protecting of turf. As a department operating within a business that was itself a relatively small player in a highly competitive global market, the Kembla Laboratory had been subject over many years to cost reduction pressure, workforce downsizing, increasing service demands and the introduction of numerous development initiatives, often designed and driven by external consulting firms. Added to this was the ongoing examination of whether the group should be outsourced. This history left a legacy of anxiety, fear and hostility, which was largely unexpressed except through passive means. In many respects there was no legitimate means of expressing such opinions, as imperatives were ‘handed down’ with no avenue for disputation except perhaps through industrial action. This history created an environment where the status quo was preferred and opportunities were rarely proactively pursued. Improvement efforts, even when driven from within the group, tended to be viewed with suspicion and were often thwarted in preference for predictability. Therefore in terms of a strategic focus for this
33 work, this tendency was recognized as needing attention, particularly in terms of the processes and methods applied. !
Dominant technical paradigm and tendency to dismiss ‘nontechnical’ developmental efforts: As a technical laboratory, which was focussed on providing objective analytical support to the manufacturing plant, the language and daily practice of the Kembla Laboratory was dominated by a ‘technical paradigm’. The impact of this paradigm included a tendency to reject ideas and changes that were seen as invalid, relative to the beliefs about technical correctness and objectivity. Subjective assessments were viewed with suspicion, or dismissed until adequate data could be produced to back them up. Not surprisingly, developmental efforts up until this time had emphasised the improvement of the technical aspects of work, such as technical training and acquisition of hi-tech laboratory equipment. While this emphasis was necessary in order to ensure the ongoing improvement of the capabilities of Kembla Laboratory in line with growing customer expectations, there persisted a range of issues that this work had failed to resolve. Notably these issues were associated with manifestations of the social system dynamics and included poor teamwork, interpersonal conflict, insufficient and ineffective communication, and lack of collaboration and participation in resolving workplace problems.
34
2.6 Concluding comments The literature reviewed identifies the key development issues confronting internal services generally. Their internal nature, along with the complex political and functional relationships that they must manage, creates a unique and complex background in which to manage change. Moreover, such organisations need to be capable of managing the complex responsibilities and relationships that arise from their impact on the supply chain, and also as a result of their corporate responsibility. Clearly there are commercial advantages to be gained if development work focuses on the capabilities of people backed up by effective systems and processes that support customer service. Such ability relies heavily on the capabilities of leaders in creating and sustaining supportive work environments, systems and processes of work. Given the analysis of the Kembla Laboratory context, and drawing on the outcomes of the literature analysis, it was decided that the strategic focus for this work must include: 1. The development of a means by which customer satisfaction could be understood, measured and improved. 2. A focus on the non-technical capabilities of people to improve aspects of the social dynamics such as team work, coordination and communication. Essential to this is the recognition of the role of leaders in creating a supportive environment and systems of work. This is a particularly pressing issue because of the status of the newly formed leadership team. This focus ultimately aims to impact on the key outcome area of workplace satisfaction as a lever for improved customer service. 3. Conduct the work in a way that encourages active engagement and addresses the underlying causes of resistance and avoidance.
35 Such a developmental focus is both strategically sound in terms of the recommendations of literature, and in terms of the context of the Kembla Laboratory at the time the work was undertaken. The following chapters aim to demonstrate how these developments were clarified, enhanced and undertaken to achieve sustainable results.
36
Chapter 3: Research Me thodology
“Social science research is complex not least because human beings can act in relation to researchers in a way that changes the phenomena investigated and determines the results obtained.” Peter Checkland
37
3.1 Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to describe the reasoning behind the selection of action research (AR) as the paradigmatic methodology for this work. This is done by exploring the assumptions that I brought to the work as a manager-researcher relative to the purpose of the work, and by examining the key issues of AR practice based on a range of available literature. Finally, the chapter provides an overview of how AR methodology was implemented in multiple cycles of action to support growth in strategic issues. A point worthy of clarification concerns my use of the term “paradigmatic” in terms of the chosen methodology. Mouton (1996) provides a distinction between three levels within the methodological dimension: (a) the level of research techniques, which are the tangible instruments, procedures and skills required to address the research goals, (b) the level of research methods, which are more abstract and refer to those methods used to execute a specific stage in the research process (e.g. probability sampling method), and (c) the most abstract level of methodological paradigm, which is inherently based upon a set of epistemological and ontological assumptions that directly impact factors such as choice of data and level of participation. It is this third paradigmatic level that forms the focus of this chapter. The levels of research method and technique are discussed within the later chapters outlining the action and outcomes of the work overall.
3.2 Methodological criteria As an experienced manager within the research system, my personal beliefs and assumptions were critical to the methodological choices that were made. In essence they constituted the paradigmatic position that I brought to the work. I faced the particular challenge of adequately ‘seeing’ the salient issues from within the system, and then, as a
38 manager-researcher, acting in a way that would promote the desired results. Given this context, the methodology applied to the work needed to be capable of supporting effective change outcomes whilst being of sufficient rigour to provide trustworthy research findings. At the start of the work, my tacit knowledge of management practice played a primary role in determining the criteria for methodological selection. The mental models that I held based on my past managerial experience highlighted three criteria as being of particular importance in achieving the purpose of this work: 1. That the methodology be rigorous and suitable for internal implementation, 2. That it support a learning orientation, and 3. That it be action orientated and support the achievement of strategic outcomes in real time. Notionally, I considered that these three criteria were essential for the success of the work and must therefore be supported by the chosen methodology. The task therefore was to realise these criteria through the appropriate research approach. 3.2.1 Criteria #1: Rigorous & suitable for internally driven change I assumed that the achievement of the purpose of this work would require persistent effort and focus over time. Rigour was needed not only to satisfy the requirements of research, but also to support systemic change. The methodology needed to support responsiveness and flexibility of action based on the assumption that properties, capacities and capabilities of the system would emerge as a result of the engagement of the system in the issues of change. What was clear was that in order to create different and more effective outcomes, we would need to be willing to explore and experiment with different developmental
39 approaches. Therefore, the methodology needed to be capable of supporting the necessary adjustments in focus and direction as required to match the properties of the system. The methodology also needed to be rigorous in terms of being well validated in literature as a suitable developmental approach, and because I was managing this work it would also need to be suitable for internal implementation. The methodology needed to be easy to understand, draw on existing skills as much as possible and support further skills development whilst the work was being done since time-out for development was not an option. 3.2.2 Criteria #2: Learning orientation If we assume that change within a human system is synonymous with learning, then the methodology must overtly support learning at an individual and collective level. Learning that promotes transformative change involves the creation of knowledge beyond current paradigms and ideas. My experience up to that time was that the organisation tended to be insular and self-sufficient in terms of thinking, methods and models of change. I recognized that my notions of how we could achieve our objectives were somewhat limited by my own experience, and by the beliefs and paradigms of my organisation. For this work I believed it was not enough to do the same things differently; there was a compelling need to transform, and do different things differently. 3.2.3 Criteria #3: Action & outcome orientation I believed that the methodology must promote and support the achievement of real organisational outcomes in the complex organisational system, through appropriate planned action. As a practicing manager I held functional responsibility for the development of workplace capacity and capability in terms of satisfying our strategic objectives. The
40 success of my role was dependent therefore on creating outcomes and resolving issues of real importance. An action orientation was therefore essential if the work was to support real workplace change. Given these assumptions, the task early in the work was to identify a suitable methodology that would support the achievement of purpose as well as meet the criteria that I assumed were important.
3.3 Action Research (AR) methodology Given the criteria that are described, it was necessary to find a means by which these criteria could be satisfied through the application of a suitable and rigorous research process. On analysis of knowledge and change creation approaches in social research, it is notable that the options available arise from a range of ontological stances including subjectivist and objectivist extremes (Morgan & Smircich, 1980). In turn these extremes arise from fundamentally different world views. It could be argued therefore that choice of methodology becomes one of discernment, in terms of the applicability of the various epistemologies, and preference, in terms of the underlying assumptions held by the researcher about the nature of social systems and change. This second point reflects the view that methodological choice has a paradigmatic basis. In general terms traditional research methods are most suitable for clearly defined ‘hard’ systems (Perry & Zuber-Skerritt, 1992), because in such cases the researcher is separated from the research system by a ‘hard’ boundary, and the system is mostly held constant with only specific variables allowed to change. In the social research context, however, suitable research methods must be capable of working with ‘soft’ systems, where together the members of the system including the researcher, engage as active participants in the critical
41 exploration and development of their own dynamic system (Perry & Zuber-Skerritt, 1992). Action research is one such methodology. Action research (AR) takes the central concepts of action learning, which was developed by Reg Revans in the 1940’s (Revans, 1982), and combines them with the rigour of research such that AR achieves the outcomes of both action and research (Dick, 1999; Dick, 2002). An important distinction between action learning and AR is that: “Action research involves action learning, but not vice versa, because action research is more deliberate, systematic, critical, emancipatory, rigorous and public, that is documented in publication” (Perry & Zuber-Skerritt, 1992, p.198). AR is an approach ideally suited to those who desire to achieve change, whilst at the same time deepening their understanding of their system (Dick, 2002), using a process that is cyclic and iterative (Zuber-Skerritt, 2001). When combined in a “tight cycle” of action followed by reflection in multiple cycles, the capability for action as well as the generation of valid research outcomes becomes possible (Dick, 2001; Dick, 2002). The concepts of AR are thought to have been originally espoused by Kurt Lewin who noted the limitations placed by conducting social research in a controlled laboratory environment (Foster, 1972 in Checkland, 1992). Lewin suggested a process by which the researcher could become “immersed” in the problem within the system, take action to generate practical solutions, and learn from this experience. Such a process is emergent and outcomes unfold over time in a manner that is not always predictable. In essence, the domain of action research is in the world of “possibility theory rather than predictive theory” (Wadsworth, 1998, p.6). It relies heavily upon skills in observation, interpretation of results and ability to evaluate outcomes and creatively explore new possibilities. Such immersion in the social system generates significant qualitative data, mostly due to the
42 emphasis on inquiry and discussion processes (Dick, 2002). This creates a critical issue in terms of the significant effort involved in data analysis and extracting meaningful findings (Kock, 1997). 3.3.1 Working definition of AR Essentially, the goals of applied AR are: “to involve and to improve” (Dickens & Watkins, 1999, p.131). Perry and Zuber-Skerritt (1992) provide a working definition of AR based on the combined perspectives of participants at an International Symposium on Action Research held in 1991. This definition outlines the critical situational factors that must be present for work to be considered AR, and include: 1. A group of people working toward improvement or development of their situation 2. Who engage in deliberate interlinking of their action and reflection in a cyclic manner 3. Who also seek to make their findings public through a report of their experience “Action researchers, then, generate context-bound, values-based knowledge and solutions from their public inquiries into systems problems” (Dickens & Watkins, 1999, p.128) A less specific definition of organisational action research is given by Kock (1997): “A general term to refer to research methodologies and projects where the researcher tries to directly improve the participating organization and, at the same time, to generate scientific knowledge.” (p. 2)
43 It is notable that this definition maintains the focus on both action and research, and generalizes the methodologies that can be used to achieve the improvement. Thus organisational AR projects seek direct improvement through varied methodologies, whilst generating plausible findings within the specific context of the work. The author also notes the distinction that AR seeks to create improvements directly during the conduct of the project, rather than afterwards. Also noted is the intention that “scientific” in this case refers to the need for the intervention work to be accompanied by “systematic reflection”, resulting in learning. Perry and Zuber-Skerritt (1992) expand the working definition to outline some key elements of AR that can exist to varying degrees, but that usually increase throughout the conduct of the work. These factors include (a) increasing involvement and collaboration of participants in collecting their own data, (b) decision-making and question forming as a “critical community”, (c) recognition and suspension of existing hierarchical arrangements toward an “industrial democracy”, (d) purposeful engagement in self-reflection, selfevaluation and self-management, and (e) experimentation and action in an environment of risk. 3.3.2 Processes of AR The key processes that are repeated within each AR cycle, as depicted in Figure 3.1, are (a) planning, (b) action, (c) observation and (d) reflection. “Action research is a dynamic process in which these four moments are to be understood not as static steps, complete in themselves, but rather as moments in the action research spiral of planning, action, observing and reflecting.” (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1998, p.15)
44
3 Plan
Act 2
Reflect Plan
Act
Observe
1 Reflect Observe Figure 3.1: Action research process depicted as an iterative spiral (Zuber-Skerritt, 1998)
3.3.2.1 Planning Kemmis and McTaggard (1998) describe planning as “constructed action”. This stage of the AR cycle concerns the development of a plan of action that is prospective, and informed by critical appraisal of situational and contextual factors. In addition, the plan is also critically informed by an understanding of existing risks and constraints so that prospective action can move beyond them. Ideally, planning should be carried out collaboratively (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1998), and draw on a range of available rational planning tools and methods (Passfield, 1998). 3.3.2.2 Action Action, within AR, is critically informed, deliberate and undertaken within an environment of inherent risk. “Action is guided by planning in the sense that it looks back to planning for its rationale. But critically informed action is not completely controlled by plans. It is essentially risky. It takes place in real time and encounters real political and
45 material constraints (some of which arise suddenly and unpredictably as consequences of changes in the social and political life of the setting)” (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1998, p.12). Taking action in such circumstances provides the opportunity to harness the benefits of experiential learning by taking action on issues of real importance and relevance to us as stakeholders in the outcome (Dick, 1997a). Our actions aim to ultimately create change and improve our practice within our specific context. In this sense, action is the means by which we create our reality and is therefore multidimensional in that it relates to our past, present and future action: our past informs our perception of current reality in terms of ideas, insights and possibilities and supports us to plan future action (Zuber-Skerritt, 2001). The importance of experience is well recognized as an underlying principle of andragogy as it relates to adult learning (Tovey, 1997) and is identified in theories of learning such as Kolb’s experiential learning theory (Kolb, Baker, & Jensen, ). To generate experiential learning the context of action should be problem-centred, immediately applicable, and action should be self-directed and initiated by a perceived social-role development need (Castello & Hendricks, 1991). Kolb suggests that the experiential nature of learning involves the dialectic of apprehension, the taking in and incorporation of new ideas to find meaning, and comprehension, the expression of such insights through behaviour. “Learning is like breathing; it follows a rhythm of taking in and putting out, of incorporating ideas and experience to find meaning and expressing the meaning in thought, speech and action” (Kolb et al., , p.10). Hence, the conduct of action as a means of consolidating learning, may be considered an essential aspect of any change process.
46 3.3.2.3 Observation The observation aspect of AR practice is part of what distinguishes this methodology from action per se (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1998). As action is undertaken, the outcomes are observed because of the desire to evaluate the outcomes through critical reflection: “Observation will always be guided by the intent to provide a sound basis for critical selfreflection” (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1998, p.13). Observations, duly collected and recorded, therefore form the basis of the information used in the reflection stage and will include factors such as the effects of action, both intended and unintended, the constraints experienced and circumstances that impact the direction and focus of action taken. The observation stage also recognizes the subjective nature of observing, which is fundamentally biologically based (Maturana, 1988), and is therefore limited by our capacity as observers to notice, perceive and interpret events of importance. Drawing on the observations of others can moderate such limitations. 3.3.2.4 Reflection Reflection intends to interpret and add meaning to the events observed as a result of action. It is a process that seeks to connect explicit experience with tacit knowing, and is a “systematic thought process concerned with simplifying experience by searching for patterns, logic and order” (Cunliffe, 2002, p.38). In AR, this process is evaluative, in that reflection seeks to judge the effectiveness and desirability of outcomes, and is descriptive, in that it seeks to deepen understanding of organisational life (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1998). Moreover, reflective practice intends to generate deep insights and promote learning about self, thereby supporting personal congruence:
47 “Learning is about acquiring increased understanding, practical and worthwhile skills and insights about oneself, and merging these three domains in knowing, doing and being into a congruent whole” (Bunning, 1993 in Zuber-Skerritt, 1998). Effective reflection also questions assumptions and challenges power relations by seeking to make explicit connection between the person, their role and their understanding of their organisation (Vince, 2002). Reflective processes have a collaborative orientation drawing on the perspectives of others, and the multiplicity of AR cycles supports both the questioning of assumptions as well as identification of disconfirming evidence through processes of dialectic inquiry: “In conversation, dialectic processes reveal themselves by a willingness to express disagreement, at the same time striving for agreement” (Dick, 1997b, p.3). Dialectic inquiry in this sense may be described as a process in conversation that “aspires to holism through the embracing of differences and contradictions” (Kolb et al., , p.5). The dialectic supports the exploration of ideas that would otherwise be dismissed as contradictory to existing frames of thought. Therefore, when done effectively, reflection within AR expands possibilities for both understanding and future action (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1998). In the reflective process, there are two cognitive orientations: (a) reflection “on” action, and (b) reflection “in” action. Reflection “on” action involves making sense of observed outcomes after the fact, based on existing mental models. In this respect, reflection on action seeks to link observations with tacit knowledge so that patterns based on mental models can be deciphered and understood. Reflection “in” action however requires the researcher to be present to their experience “in the moment”. As such the researcher must exercise mastery over themselves, pay attention to their own embodied reactions in the process of acting and seek to make on-the-spot interpretations and subsequent adjustments
48 to the process. Such mastery includes the capacity to engage in reflexive analysis of their own thinking, language and behaviour as it relates to their personal impact on the situation, and the creation of their own reality within the situation (Cunliffe, 2002). 3.3.3 Critique of AR Methodology In applying Checkland’sframework for research to AR (Checkland, 1992), we note that AR is not based on a testable hypothesis, but instead a set of research themes, which are founded on understanding gained from many sources, including prior descriptive and experimental research. This constitutes the framework of ideas (F). In recognising the degree of complexity within the area of application (A), as is the case in organisational environments, the researcher seeks to make warrantable assertions from within the research themes, by joining a real-world problem situation, seeking to understand the salient issues and taking purposeful action based on an appropriately applied methodology (M). The action is generally intended to lead to practical outcomes as they are defined and validated from within the system and its operating environment. Through this, the framework of ideas and the methodology are made explicit and others are invited to participate in critical reflection of the outcomes arising from the action. Such reflection, which seeks to make subjective sense of outcomes through interpretation, can feasibly yield findings based on either M, F and A or on the research themes themselves. Thus within an AR environment, as the work proceeds, F, M and the research themes can change significantly, a responsive reaction to the emerging issues and properties of the system. In applying this framework, we can describe all of the key elements in an AR domain, and due to the phenomenological nature of AR, also anticipate that they will change as the work progresses.
49 “In a word, it [AR] is an emergent methodology. Method and data and interpretation and action develop simultaneously, and from cycle to cycle” (Dick, 1999, p.4). This analysis suggests that we can achieve plausible findings in AR if our interpretive processes are rigorous. Such rigour is primarily derived through the cyclic and critical reflective processes (Dick, 2002) that form the means by which within-system meaning is derived. Within the reflective process, validity is enhanced by a “vigorous and continuous search for disconfirming evidence” (Dick, 2001, p.25), in multiple “tight” AR cycles that support us to test and expand our mental models. When such processes draw on participation of others and are subject of dialectic inquiry, the reflective process can be a powerful source of insight that can be used to direct and focus further action. A particular strength of AR is that it overtly supports participatory processes and thereby gives people an opportunity to be heard and to become involved in the processes of organizing. Those who are affected decide what will change and how it will be undertaken (Dick, 2001). Kemmis and McTaggart describe this strength in terms of reality of social systems and the nature of systemic change: “Action research recognises that we are social beings, and that we are members of groups – active participants in the living, local and concrete process of constructing and reconstructing the language, activities and relationships which constitute and reconstitute the culture of the groups of which we are members. To change the culture of our groups ….we must change ourselves, with others, through changing the substance, forms and patterns of language, activities and social relationships which characterise groups and interactions among their members. In action
50 research we aim to do this collectively and collaboratively, as a matter for conscious individual and group decision.” (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1998, p.17) At an extreme, AR is emancipatory in that by acting on real-world problems, AR aims to achieve “participant’s emancipation from the dictates of tradition, self-deception, coercion” (Perry & Zuber-Skerritt, 1992). Further, emancipatory AR also involves the review and reshaping of the supporting bureaucratic system, as well as transformation of both the organisational processes as well as the systems of learning. Perry and ZuberSkerritt note that some authors suggest that the emancipatory form of action research is the only real action research (Carr & Kemmis, 1993 in Perry & Zuber-Skerritt, 1992). The emancipatory power of AR arises in part from the way that AR naturally challenges the power relations within the organisation through the application of reflective practices (Vince, 2002). And since these processes develop as the work proceeds, it is particularly useful when working with complex and fast changing situations, typical of organisations: “Where flexibility and participation are required, and the situation is complex, any research methodology faces serious threats to validity. I would claim that action research better meets those threats in these circumstances than conventional research” (Dick, 1997d, p.4). Given that AR arises from a paradigmatic position that is different from the positivist view, this does give rise to limitations in terms of what may be expected as research outcomes. AR is not suitable where direct causal explanations are required or indeed where broad generalizability is sought (Dick, 1997d). Although scientific methods can be applied as a part of an AR cycle, overall the methodology does not seek to exert the levels of control required to isolate causal factors with any certainty. In AR we can seek to understand and we do seek to assert plausible findings, but we cannot provide definitive causal
51 explanations. In addition, applied AR is so contextualised that little attention is explicitly given to external validity issues. This means that the extent to which generalizability is achieved depends in part on how the outcomes of the research are reflected in other research within similar contexts. Given that the data sources of AR are more often qualitative, this adds to the difficulty in making valid interpretations. In many respects this makes the application of AR methods complex and difficult for the researcher. 3.3.4 Application of AR to organisations In general terms there is considerable support in the organisational development arena for encouraging a dynamic interplay between ideas and action as a means of generating knowledge (Kotter, 1996; Schein, 1999; Senge, 1992). Schein (1999) argues: “Ideas are not enough. Until those ideas are embedded in the daily routines of practitioners they have not really been ‘learned’. And the evidence is mounting that this final embedding occurs best ‘on the job’ so to speak in the actual social context in which the work is done.” (p.6) Such a philosophy is common to the “action technologies”, namely action learning, action research and action science (Argyris, 1995; Dick & Dalmau, 1999; Raelin, 1997). As a subset of AR, action learning has been widely used within organisations to facilitate organisational learning and transformation (e.g.Dotlich & Noel, 1998; Marquardt, 1999; Passfield, 2001), and as part of leadership development processes (e.g. Castello & Hendricks, 1991; Dotlich & Noel, 1998; Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002; Richards, 1990). Action learning applies the processes of AR, but is more concerned with individual and collective learning outcomes than with the generation of research findings. Global companies such as Citibank, Shell, Ameritech, General Electric and Johnson & Johnson are
52 reported have successfully applied the practices of action learning to address their strategic mandates (Dotlich & Noel, 1998). Although AR has long been applied to the field of education (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1998), it is also a viable methodology for organisational change work (Coghlan, 2001; Davies, 2001; Dick, 2001), particularly since both learning and action are undertaken from within the organisational system. Such an orientation supports those inside to decipher and change their own organisational culture (Schein, 1994). Despite the challenges associated with preunderstanding, role duality and organisational politics, AR is increasingly practiced by managers within their own organisations (Coghlan, 2001). This creates a unique dynamic since the manager-researcher is embedded within the system and seeks to create knowledge through the application of AR practices alongside the practices of every day management. Such a situation can have significant consequences for both the outcomes that can be achieved as well as for the manager-researcher, including ethical dilemmas (Holian, 1999). Dickens and Watkins (1999) describe two organisational applications of AR where the key issues of concern included the democratisation of the workplace culture, and a corresponding improvement in management practice. Notably the practice of AR in these cases raised issues of the importance of management sanction, because the teams concerned were not fully empowered to take action. If unresolved, such circumstances can result in research, with little action. Kock (1997) also describes two case studies of AR applied to strategic change initiatives in a university school and a government department. Both cases involved research aimed at identifying the computer support most beneficial to process redesign workgroups. One finding from the work was that the application of systems that open up critical information to workgroups may well support the process redesign work,
53 but are likely to be resisted by management because of a perceived loss of control over how information flows in the organisation. In the work described by Vince (2002) the reflective practices of AR were introduced to a client organisation as an organizing process, rather than simply an activity undertaken at an individual level. The client organisation was facing a promising commercial future, but was constrained by high control, low risk management practices and poor communication across departmental boundaries. The reflective processes supported managers to recreate designs, structures and behaviours, but more importantly, by surfacing assumptions and making explicit the power relations, the processes created the possibility of change. Schaafsma (1992) describes a quality management program for an Australian telecommunications organisation (Telecom) that involved application of AR methodologies to the development of coherent work values. Through the interactive and participative nature of AR processes, middle managers were encouraged to re-shape their values. 3.3.5 Assessment of AR against methodological criteria 3.3.5.1 Criteria #1: Rigorous & suitable for internally driven change The previous analysis supports the notion that AR can be rigorously applied. Critical reflection is particularly important to this, as is the enactment of change in tight AR cycles since this supports responsiveness to emergent properties. The key stages that inform the responsiveness of the process are (a) the observations we make and take into account, and (b) the reflections we make, through which we create meaning from our observations. When done effectively, we make available information that in turn informs planning and action.
54 The application of AR methodology to organisational change and development is widely supported, with some accounts of the personal and professional implications of such internally driven change by manager-researchers. Therefore, the AR stands as a suitable approach for this work and will, if suitably applied, support the achievement of purpose. 3.3.5.2 Criteria #2: Learning orientation The action and reflection stages of AR are particularly important in building understanding and promoting learning. The action stage is essential to the principles of experiential learning, and the reflection stage is essential for consolidating new insights and making explicit those insights to others. Because AR is comfortable with both qualitative and quantitative approaches to data collection, the methodology also opens up the opportunity for learning about self and the system through data that can be used to build awareness and focus for action. 3.3.5.3 Criteria #3: Action & outcome orientation Action is fundamental to applied AR. The methodology supports purposeful engagement in the resolution of real world problems from inside the organisational system, dealing with all the constraints, idiosyncrasies and contextual factors. AR promotes purposeful and wellinformed action, not just action for its own sake and for these reasons well meets the criteria of action orientation.
3.4 Application of AR methodology The AR methodology was applied to this work to facilitate the development of Kembla Laboratory toward a more desired future state. The strategic aspect of the work required the identification of the desired future in terms defined by the key stakeholder groups. This issue will be discussed in detail in subsequent chapters. However, it is important to note at
55 this stage that given a detailed understanding of both the current reality of the group as well as the desired future, the AR process was applied to support the growth and development of the group in the key strategic areas of workplace satisfaction, organisational effectiveness and customer satisfaction. 3.4.1 The current reality/desired future model The current reality/desired future model (see Figure 3.2) is based primarily on the ideas of theorists who argue that a clear perspective of the present and a compelling vision of the future are both necessary to create focus and energy for change in organisations (Kotter, 1996; Senge, 1990; Senge & Kaeufer, 2000) and in individuals (Boas, 1990; Egan, 1998; Goleman et al., 2002). In particular, Senge identified the notion of creative tension (Senge, 1990; Senge & Kaeufer, 2000) based on the work of Robert Fritz. Senge suggested that creative tension is the natural energy that arises from the gap between the desired future and the current reality. Such tension is a motivating force at an individual and collective level. The idea draws a distinction between a problem-solving approach to change which is motivated extrinsically by a desire to move away from current reality, and creative tension which is motivated intrinsically by a desire to achieve a vision, juxtaposed by the current reality.
Current reality
Desired future
Presence of a “gap” creates tension and energy for change Figure 3.2: Model for change: the current reality/desired future model
56 The current reality/desired future model provided a means by which development needs could be clarified, through the conduct of ‘gap’ analysis. This required the collection of meaningful data to reflect relevant perspectives on the current reality as well as defining the desired future.
Desired future
Action toward desired future Strategic growth
Current reality
Gap! Creative tension
Time
Figure 3.3: Combining the current reality/desired future model with the requirement for strategic growth
3.4.2 The strategic growth imperative Action to take the organisation forward and toward their desired future needed to be growth oriented. Moreover the growth orientation needed to be strategic in nature, addressing issues of real commercial importance (see Figure 3.3). The application of the multi-cyclic AR process was ideal to address this need for strategic growth because the reflective and action stages supported learning in a responsive and adaptive way. Such an approach is essential to avoid a ‘reflexive’ approach, which would undoubtedly yield familiar outcomes that fall short of expectations (see Figure 3.4). The notion of ‘reflexive’ in this sense concerns the assumptions and ideologies that create and sustain the organisational power relationships (explicit and implicit) and ways of relating. Such assumptions are manifest in
57 ways of talking, acting and sense-making (Cunliffe, 2002). When change is reflexive, these assumptions provide the basis for decision making and action, which in effect reinforces them. When such assumptions are based on beliefs that no longer apply, or no longer serve the organisation, then reflexive action will fall short of desired outcomes. Simply put, if we continue to do what we have always done we will get what we have always got! Therefore the process needed to be transformative in its capacity, to move beyond reflexive practices and to promote the required level of strategic development.
Desired future
Growth facilitated by data rich, reflective and action oriented intervention processes as part of multi-cyclic Action Research methodology
Strategic growth
Current reality
“Reflexive” processes
Familiar outcomes that fall short of desired future
Time
Figure 3.4: Contrasting the growth orientation of AR with “reflexive” processes
3.4.3 Multi-cyclic AR Multiple cycles of the AR methodology were enacted during the conduct of this work. Arising from the initial stages, parallel developmental activities were conducted, each within an AR cycle, and each composed of many sub-cycles of action. The details of these
58 activities and analysis of how they contributed to the ultimate outcomes is given in subsequent chapters. However a summary of the cycles is given in Table 3.1. Table 3.1: Application of cyclic AR approach Stage or cycle of work
Purpose
Cycle #1: Generate readiness
To establish stakeholder support, establish resources
for change
and collect data to define current reality and desired future states
Cycle #2: Leadership
Engage leadership team to build leadership capability
development process
at an individual and collective level, and build capacity for achievement
Cycle #3: Workforce
Build the capacity and capability of the workforce
development
through focussed development processes
Cycle #4: Align key
Review and re-design key management processes to
supporting processes
align with assumptions and practices of the desired future state
3.5 Concluding comments It was clear at the start of the work that as an experienced manager-researcher I brought my history, experience, responsibilities and assumptions to the selection of the methodology. In this sense my tacit knowledge of effective management practice and my explicit understanding of the organisation’s context and salient issues, together with my assumptions about people and change played a significant role in the methodological selection. Given the complexity and ambiguity of social phenomena, and after assessing the
59 merits and limitation of AR, the chosen AR approach not only provided a means by which both learning and action could be achieved through the enactment of multiple AR cycles, but was also suitable for internally driven change. Therefore from a paradigmatic and practical perspective, the AR methodology was considered to be the best strategic fit in terms of facilitating change. The practices of AR have been widely used in organisational settings and satisfied the criteria that I identified for the methodology. The application of AR to this work involved a multi-cyclic approach with four major cycles conducted overall. Within each major cycle were multiple tight AR cycles, a practice that supported a highly responsive and rigorous developmental approach. As will be highlighted in later discussions, this intensive application of the methodology provided the consistency of focus needed to support a shift in performance, in spite of the various competing environmental pressures at that time. As was described in the introductory chapter (see Figure 1.3), the chapter that follows provides an overview of how the framework of ideas (F) was integrated into a development process to suit the area of application (A). Although this may be a deviation from usual practice, my intention is to provide opportunity to bring all the dimensions of the work together into an integrated process, and in doing so orient the reader before moving on to data collection and analysis.
60
Chapter 4: Process overview
“The simple fact is that no measurement, no experiment or observation is possible without a relevant theoretical framework” D. S. Kothari
61
4.1 Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to orient the reader to the principles of the transformative change process that supported the achievement of strategic and sustainable change within the Kembla Laboratory. The chapter provides an outline of the framework of ideas upon which the process was based as well as some of the key theoretical linkages to the intervention process employed. One of the difficulties that I experienced in writing up this work is encapsulated in this dilemma: How can I reflect the complexity and interconnectivity of the process and outcomes as they emerged in this real world situation, but still create a readable and understandable account? There is much inherent richness and value in reflecting complexity, however this may come at the cost of clarity. After much reflection I have chosen to separate and classify aspects of the work according to a ‘Transformative Change Model’. This model provides a logical framework from which to describe and analyse the various dimensions of the work. However, because some developmental activities are associated with multiple dimensions, details about them may appear in more than one place.
4.2 The Transformative Change Model The basic assumption underpinning the work was that to achieve a desired future required the adoption of new and different ways of thinking and behaving as a means of creating different outcomes. Moreover these new ways of thinking and behaving must be sustained over time so that the improved outcomes are also sustainable. This required that the process facilitate ‘transformative’ change. Transformation requires both learning and unlearning, the adoption of new basic cultural assumptions, and change to fundamental elements of the
62 systems such as identity and goals (Schein, 1999). In essence, if change is about doing things differently, then transformation is about “the need to do different things differently” (Jay, 1999). A suitable metaphor for this is that of the caterpillar and the butterfly. The essential nature of the creature remains the same in its transformation, however once emerged from the cocoon, the means by which the creature is able to interact with its world are changed forever. The caterpillar is released from the constraints of its past and is able to explore its world with more freedom and capability. In the same way, this work intended the purpose and foundation of technical excellence of the Kembla Laboratory to remain the same, but sought to create opportunity to find new was of interacting within that environment that would enhance the experience of people and generate opportunity for improved outcomes from their efforts. It is important to note that literature reveals that many past efforts at transformative change have had limited success because of the emphasis placed on workplace systems and processes, whilst neglecting the less tangible beliefs and assumptions that drive the social system (Galpin, 1996; Kotter, 1996; Ogbonna & Harris, 1998; Schein, 1992; Schneider, 2000). Such beliefs and assumptions are implicit and part of the organisations culture, and are manifest in how the system works and the outcomes achieved (Schein, 1994; Swe & Kleiner, 1998). The transformative capacity of the process was achieved by encouraging a dynamic interplay between “new patterns of thought” and “emergent action” through the application of a multi-cyclic action research process. In other words, the process was designed to engage people in the exploration and redefinition of their patterns of thought, followed by translation of these into patterns of action. This dual focus is considered essential to creating change that results in a fundamental shift in learning capacity (Schein,
63 1999; Senge, 1992), knowledge creation (Kolb et al., ), work-processes (Jeuchter & Fischer, 1998; Old, 1995), workplace relationships and interactions (Jeuchter & Fischer, 1998; Wheatley, 1999), leadership capability (Dotlich & Noel, 1998; Goleman et al., 2002; Marquardt, 1999) and perceptual capacity (Marshall, 2000). The Transformative Change Model is depicted in Figure 4.1. This model is a descriptive tool that allows the key activities undertaken in this work to be categorized, integrated and elaborated. The model identifies patterns in the intervention approach that were largely implicit whilst the work was being undertaken, but were made explicit through reflective analysis of the framework of ideas (F) as applied in the area of application (A). Therefore the model was not used to design the work, but instead used to order the discussion and analysis of the intervention process and outcomes. The model identifies four dimensions that are both integrated in terms of paradigmatic approach, but separate in terms of effort and focus. These dimensions are: 1. Systemic assumptions that formed the basis of the process design, 2. Strategic focus which is concerned with alignment of development with strategic needs, 3. Sustainable development which is achieved through adopting a social systems focus in terms of development, 4. and supporting this by systemic process alignment. A full explanation of the rationale behind each of these four dimensions is given in each of the following four chapters, and is introduced briefly in the following overview.
64
Figure 4.1: The proposed ‘Transformative Change Model’ that forms the framework for describing the findings of this work
4.2.1 The “systemic” dimension 4.2.1.1 Principles This dimension is primarily concerned with thinking and perceiving based on the assumption that the way we think about change work and the way we see our organisation is crucial to the outcomes achieved. The thinking associated with this dimension is detailed in Chapter 5. The underlying assumption is that organisations in their engagement with change, will behave as ‘natural systems’. The process therefore needed to be capable of responding to the emergent properties of the system as a result of its engagement with change. The process also needed to be facilitated in a way that supported such emergence, and encouraged a focus on relationship between parts of the system.
65 4.2.1.2 Practice The application of the multi-cyclic action research methodology was critical in ensuring the responsiveness of the development process. At each major stage of action, multiple opportunities for observation, reflection, interpretation and planning were created. This approach helped us to come to terms with the emergent and somewhat unpredictable nature of change in this setting, and supported the redirection of the process to suit. Another key part of practice according to systemic assumptions was the adoption of a facilitative style that matched the developmental state of the groups involved in the development work. The ultimate aim of the work was to support the system toward self management by the creation of a supportive and safe learning environment. Lastly, in practice, the activities and processes applied gave significant emphasis to the development of self-knowledge in the system through a focus on the three properties of information, relationship and identity. The approach also applied different developmental methods to different levels within the group, recognizing their differing development needs. 4.2.1.3 Key outcomes The outcomes of this dimension included an understanding of principles that would support a systemic and effective development process. Such an understanding was foundational to the way the strategic focus was clarified, and the way that the developmental work was undertaken.
66 4.2.2 The “strategic” dimension 4.2.2.1 Principles For the work to be of value, it needed to deliver outcomes of strategic value to the organisation and therefore support ongoing viability of the organisation. The strategic dimension therefore involved the identification of strategic priorities that defined the desired outcomes of the developmental process. Part of this clarity arose from a detailed contextual understanding of the organisation’s needs. However, in recognition of the multiple stake holdings within the internal service context, the process invited the participation of key stakeholders in defining both the current reality of the organisation as well as the desired future. 4.2.2.2 Practice The key stakeholder groups that provided the strategic focus of the work were: (1) the Kembla Laboratory workforce, (2) internal and selected external customers and (3) representatives of operations and corporate management. Each of these groups provided data that was used within and beyond the process to define the desired outcomes of the developmental activity. In most cases the data included both quantitative and qualitative sources, which supported external scrutiny and provided a solid basis from which to assess the nature and sustainability of the change achieved. The key activities that were conducted to clarify the strategic focus included: 1. The design and implementation of the Organisational Culture Inventory (OCI) survey process.
67 2. The design and implementation of a customer survey that invited representative internal and external customers to make qualitative assessments as well as quantify their perceptions of Kembla Laboratory performance and service gaps. 3. Improved understanding and communication of corporate imperatives. This aspect of the work included a planned communications forum conducted by the General Manager (“management perspective” meeting) at a critical early stage in the work, supported by ongoing involvement of leadership team members in operations executive leadership meetings and timely communication of the business imperatives by the Kembla Laboratory Manager. 4.2.2.3 Key outcomes The outcomes from this work included an increased and shared understanding of both the current reality and the desired future of the organisation, from multiple stakeholder perspectives. This work also clarified the desired outcomes of the work that would form the basis of evaluation. This clarity was particularly important at the early stages of the work as the outcomes informed the focus of the development and highlighted the need for the work to be transformative. 4.2.3 The “sustainability” dimension –Social systems focus 4.2.3.1 Principles This dimension of the work was founded on recognition of the role that social system dynamics play in change, reinforced by the evidence of literature that supports the notion of “culture” as a moderator of change efforts. The systemic assumptions that are foundational to the work also provide a framework for understanding the social system in terms of people as the system’s agents for change, and relationship effectiveness as a limiting factor
68 in the systems. A principle underlying the notions of culture and organisations as social systems, is recognition of the role of leaders in establishing and reinforcing standards which impact on both the agents of change (ie employees), as well as the system’s capacity to generate outcomes (ie relationships, standards, practices and priorities). The patterning established and reinforced by leaders is mimicked throughout the system and is manifest in the workplace experience of people as well as the business outcomes. 4.2.3.2 Practice Work focussed at a social systems level consisted of two primary activities: 1. The majority of the developmental effort was given to the conduct of a leadership development process that extended over approximately eight months and was guided by the “Facilitative Model for Learning”, proposed within this work. The process aimed to build both the capacity of the team to lead effectively, as well as individual leadership capability. The process included an off-site, workshop style development program consisting of five workshops over a period of eight months. Each workshop applied various methods designed to move the team through the stages of experiential, imaginal, conceptual and practical learning. Utilising the multi-cyclic action research approach to best effect, the process included both offsite opportunities for deep learning, followed by coach-supported on-site opportunities for application and effectiveness review. 2. Workgroup engagement in a range of developmental activities including: a. Individual coaching programs
69 b. Sessions designed to build awareness of the results of the Organisational Culture Inventory (OCI) survey, and engage people in the planning and implementation of workplace change c. Team development sessions tailored to address salient issues within the workgroups concerned d. Workgroup issue resolution workshops aimed at addressing persistent key issues to improve workplace efficiency 4.2.3.3 Key outcomes This stage of the work was enabling in that with the improved focus and capability of the leadership team, came the ability to resolve difficult workplace issues and achieve efficiencies and step improvements in performance. The leaders developed into a more cohesive and functional team, built on a foundation of increasing trust and openness. Because of the strong action orientation, leaders had many opportunities to experiment including opportunities to be proactive in the development of their areas of responsibility. 4.2.4 The “sustainability” dimension –Systematic process alignment 4.2.4.1 Principles This aspect of the sustainability dimension recognizes the critical importance of systems change in the transformative change process. Of particular relevance are those systems that serve to reinforce cultural patterns and assumptions, such as human resource management processes. Through their engagement with such systems, the organisation’s members are reminded of underlying beliefs about fairness and equity, the value of their contribution and
70 the distribution of power. If the systems send messages that are inconsistent with those that are part of the desired cultural patterns and assumptions, then alignment must be created. 4.2.4.2 Practice This part of the work was done progressively during the development process and included improvement of leadership team processes, and redesign and implementation of new human resource management processes including performance assessment and salary review processes. 4.2.4.3 Key outcomes The active engagement of leaders in the process review provided the opportunity for leaders to put ideas into action. The tensions that emerged throughout this process created opportunities for learning more about the system, as well as more about the nature of effective leadership. As leaders gained insight into the persistent gap between the communicated strategy and its realization in day-to-day activity, they became more aware of the discrepancies that existed both in laboratory and corporate systems. Importantly, these activities provided the opportunity to embed preferred cultural standards into important management processes.
4.3 Concluding comments This chapter was written to provide an overview of the descriptive framework used to present this work, the Transformative Change Model, and to summarize the way in which each of the key dimensions was enacted within the context of this work. The detailed analysis of process, action and outcomes concerning each of the four dimensions as applied within the area of application (A), is given in the following four chapters.
71
Chapter 5: The “Systemic” dimension
“The way we see the problem is the problem” Stephen Covey
72
5.1 Introduction This work was founded on principles arising from the assumption that organisations operate as ‘natural systems’, and therefore development practice should be conducted in a systemic way. This chapter outlines this thinking by drawing on relevant literature, and then highlighting the key implications of this in terms of process design and practice. The rationale for this approach, considering the purpose of this work, arises from recognition that building a learning orientation in the workplace that supports a strategic focus may require us to challenge our thinking about how organisations change. Drawing on the words of Albert Einstein: “The significant problems we face cannot be resolved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them”. This suggests that different thinking, and therefore different frameworks, may be useful in the resolution of persistent, systemic problems. A recognized shortcoming of managerial research is not the fact that research has moved toward applying the systems approach to organisational work, but that the fundamental assumptions underlying the approach are often undisclosed (Bergmann Lichtenstein, 2000). As a result, we miss opportunities to use the insights of these researchers for the explicit integration of systems thinking and management practice. This situation provided additional impetus for inserting this chapter prior to data collection and analysis to facilitate the disclosure and exploration of the systemic assumptions up front, particularly in terms of the impact on process design.
5.2 Theory of systems as applied to organisations Prior to the early 1990’s, models associated with Bacon, Newton and Descartes dominated management thinking and practice (Stacey, 1996; Stacey, 1997). Newton’s models of the universe, in particular, were mechanistic and based on reductionist thinking. They assumed
73 that causality of organisational behaviour could be predicted, and that whole systems could be understood through understanding the individual parts. Although there was contradictory recognition that nature behaved in nonlinear ways, the predominant belief was that such behaviour could be predicted by approximation using linear mathematics. In summary, this approach to social systems resulted in three basic assumptions: 1. That systems behave according to cause-effect laws that can be defined, 2. That systems can be controlled to move toward decreasing entropy/ increasing order, and 3. That the system can be understood by examination of its constituents (Stacey, 1997). When applied to management practice, these beliefs translated into a focus on function and process that was controlled through hierarchy and systemization. Out of this mechanistic thinking came control-oriented management practices which tended to create alienation and fear, and were underpinned by beliefs about the inadequacy of people to self-organize (Banks, 1999; Wheatley, 1997; Youngblood, 1997). More recently, the science of complexity, which views organisations as natural systems, has provided an alternate view. Senge (2001) suggests that this view of organisations is set to inspire the post industrial age, just as the machine inspired the industrial. The shift toward the assumption that organisations behave as natural systems is of particular importance because it addresses the issue of nonlinearity that was disregarded in the application of mechanistic models (Stacey, 1997). When applied to organisational modelling it represents a significant shift in thinking, particularly in terms of the impact on concepts and practice of leadership and organisational change. It has, in many respects,
74 given organisations a way of thinking that removes the sense of alienation that mechanistic models and their resultant practices have created (Lewin & Regine, 1999; Wheatley & Kellner-Rojers, 1996). In the late 1990’s writers started to bring together the emerging theories and models of living systems by drawing on the intellectual tradition of systems thinking (e.g. Capra, 1996), and these frameworks were further developed in the context of organisations and leadership practice by others (Chatterjee, 1998; Lewin & Regine, 1999; Senge & Carstedt, 2001; Wheatley, 1999). So what is the science of complexity, and how does it apply to the assumptions we make about organisation and how they change? Stacey provides a useful starting point in this brief exploration of complexity science with his description: “The new science is called the science of complexity and it studies the fundamental properties of non-linear feedback networks, particularly those complex networks that are adaptive. Complex adaptive systems consist of a number of components, or agents, interacting with each other according to sets of rules that require them to examine and respond to each other’s behaviour so as to improve their behaviour and thus the behaviour of the system which they comprise. In other words, such systems operate in a manner that constitutes learning. Since those learning systems operate in environments that consist of other learning systems, it follows that together they form a coevolving supra-system that, in a sense, creates and learns its way into the future.” (Stacey, 1996, p.9) In essence, complexity science attempts to describe what we continue to observe: the complex order that continues to emerge from seemingly chaotic events in the world (Lewin & Regine, 1999). The essential characteristic of complex adaptive systems is their ability to create order from chaos. Wheatley (1999) describes how over time the apparent chaotic
75 movements of a system generate a pattern of order. As the system changes, it shifts away from equilibrium toward a state of greater entropy, or chaos. In effect the system gives up its stable state in order to recreate itself in response to the environment. As the level of disturbance increases, the system continues to draw on its innate ability to adapt and reorganize in a way that is not imposed by central design. For this reason, such systems are known as “self-organising” or “spontaneous-organising” (Lewin & Regine, 1999). They take the form of “dissipative structures” in that they are adaptive, giving up one form for another. In contrast to the chaotic nature of the systems response, such change within living systems is never random. Self-organisation occurs so that the system changes in a way that it is congruent with its overall purpose, a characteristic known as autopoiesis: “living systems change in order to preserve themselves” (Wheatley, 1999, p.85). Complex adaptive systems are common in nature. The human brain is an example, as are the group processes that occur when people collaborate to resolve a crisis. It is reasonable to assume that the concepts behind complex adaptive systems also apply to organisational behaviour, and authors on the subject provide case studies and anecdotal evidence as to why this is so (e.g.Lewin & Regine, 1999; Schneider, 2000). Stacey goes so far as to assert that groups that form organisations are complex adaptive systems, and reveals his reasoning as follows: “They consist of agents, in the form of autonomous individual human beings, who interact with each other, so forming a network system that produces patterns of individual, group and organizational behaviour. Just as with all other complex adaptive systems they evolve, or learn, their way into an open-ended future that they co-create in a self-organizing way. What is being co-created is not just the emergent
76 pattern of behaviour of the whole system but the very principles driving agent’s interactions or relationships with each other.” (Stacey, 1997, p.8) From this and other writing on the subject, a number of key characteristics of complex adaptive organisational systems can be highlighted. 5.2.1 Systems are integrated wholes As complex adaptive systems, we assume that organisations are integrated wholes, whose properties are those of the whole. In other words, we focus on the whole rather than on the individual parts. The properties of the whole are not reflected separately in the parts but are a result of synergistic interaction between the parts (Chatterjee, 1998; Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, Ross, & Smith, 1994). In this way, systems thinking is “contextual” as the properties of the parts can only be understood in the context of the whole (Capra, 1996; Wheatley, 1999) Senge et al. (1994) refer to this as “primacy of the whole” and suggest that when we see our organisations as things or parts rather than patterns of interaction, we easily fall into the trap of looking for the quick fix to problems rather than understanding deeper underlying causes. 5.2.2 Systems operate through networks of invisible relationships We must think of the whole system in terms of a network of relationships (Stacey, 1997). This is often a difficult concept for organisations to comprehend, as it requires a focus on invisible elements of organisational life (Chatterjee, 1998). These invisible elements, which include trust, integrity and a cooperative spirit, are the sources of the creative energy within organisations. When invisibility is confused with non-reality, these aspects of the network are neglected, with detrimental effects on the organisation. Popular concepts such as vision, values, ethics and culture may reside within the minds of individuals, however they cannot
77 be observed without psychological contact with others. Such concepts are observed in organisational behaviour, but somewhat paradoxically, they do not exist elsewhere separate from behaviour (Wheatley, 1999). Stacey’s (1997) notions of the “shadow system” are relevant here because this system represents the more intangible realities embodied in the psychosocial and political subsystems. Negative systems behaviour such as corruption, harmful covert politics and basic assumption behaviour arise from the shadow system. However this system is also the source of learning, tacit knowledge and communities of practice that ultimately feed changes within the legitimate system. As such, the networks of relationships within the organisation can and do create powerful leverage for change. Living systems use their capacity for relationship to attract other systems. In this way they are generative, building complex support structures around them (Wheatley & KellnerRojers, 1996). We can apply this to organisations in recognizing the web of relationships that are essential for the organisation’s success. Relationships between individuals, among teams, between business units and with suppliers and customers, all form an essential focus for complex adaptive systems (Lewin & Regine, 1999). 5.2.3 The properties of the system are emergent Living systems have the innate capacity to self-organize and create appropriate structures and processes to respond to the changing environment. Lewin and Regine (1999) describe emergence in the following terms: “…the interactions of the components of the system generate something that is more than the sum of the parts, or at least qualitatively different from the sum of the
78 parts; and that something is constantly changing. This process is known as emergence.” (p. 27) The authors go on to suggest that the emergent nature of complex adaptive systems is the most important lesson of complexity science applied to organisations because of the potential impact on management practice. The whole emerges as a result of the parts. Chatterjee (1998) describes by saying that each member of an organisation holds the “emergent intelligence that brings the organization into being” (p. 86). Senge et al (1994) use an analogy from a living system: if we divide a living animal into its component parts we do not find the whole represented in any one of the individual parts. The connection and meaning of the parts is only evident when the animal is a coherent whole. This notion is central to Stacey’s view previously quoted (Stacey, 1997), where the author asserts that the collective reality evolves as people work together co-creating a future, and in the process the individuals themselves evolve through their experience. Systems constantly adapt and learn by exploring new possibilities utilising the information available to them. Such systems approach problems in a “messy” way and arrive at solutions from a multitude of directions (Wheatley & Kellner-Rojers, 1996). Order is created from chaos and the properties of the system emerge as a result of the interactions between the parts, depending on the level of complexity and context (Capra, 1996). This is contrary to mechanistic thinking because the properties cannot be predetermined nor controlled (Stacey, 1996). As the system changes, the properties that emerge are constantly influenced by the response of individuals within the system, in a kind of feedback loop. For example, organisational culture is an emergent property that arises out of the “dynamic
79 feedback loop” between the system and how it impacts on the behaviour of individuals within it (Lewin & Regine, 1999). This concept presents a considerable challenge to beliefs about control and linearity. We need to shift mindsets away from a belief that organisational development can be controlled and linearly predicted, toward a belief that organisations evolve and can only be influenced in terms of the “where” and “how” (Lewin & Regine, 1999). In other words, change management must focus less on control and planning, and more on vision and creating an environment for emergent change. Stacey (1996) lends support to this idea by arguing that the act of controlling to achieve a vision or strategy actually minimises the opportunity for complex learning, which is the characteristic that underpins adaptability, creativity and innovation. It is by accepting and encouraging emergent properties that we can create more possibilities than imagined in our organisational change.
5.3 Supporting emergent organizational change 5.3.1 Change occurs in ways meaningful to the system This view takes a psychosocial perspective and describes change as a pressure that works against the needs of people for stability and consistency. Human systems act in ways to maintain their integrity, sense of identity and sense of control (Schein, 1994). Change will be permitted if it has meaning and relevance and supports people to become more of who they want to become. Otherwise it will be resisted (Wheatley, 1999). Lewin’s change model (Cummings & Worley, 1997; Schein, 1994) described the processes of change in a social setting as starting with “unfreezing”. This is done by presenting the system with information about itself that in some way is disconfirming and therefore disturbing. The system will be motivated to change only if the disconfirming data is
80 presented in conditions of psychological safety and has sufficient meaning to cause discomfort and anxiety because of its connection with important goals or ideals. Without psychological safety the disconfirming data can result in denial and inaction. 5.3.2
Change is synonymous with learning and growth
This draws primarily on the work of Senge who is best known for his work on the “learning organisation” (Schein, 1992; Senge, 1990). He asserts that the adaptive response to change is concerned with the system’s capacity to cope with changes in the external environment. He goes on to describe the concept of “generative” learning, which is concerned with creating new possibilities and greater capacity, and is in some respects a deeper response to change. Such generative learning creates new possibilities for the system by changing mental models, a process which may not be comfortable, but which facilitates the system’s growth. If we refer back to Lewin’s change model, the process of change is one that involves changing mental models through the process of cognitive restructuring (Cummings & Worley, 1997; Schein, 1994). This in itself is a process of growth as it works to expand possible ways of thinking about present and future conditions. Schein describes this process: “the essence of new learning is usually some cognitive redefinition of some of the core concepts in the assumptions set” (Schein, 1994, p.301) 5.3.3 Change is a perceptual phenomenon Change in organisations is a perceptual phenomenon in that it is largely a sensory/ cognitive process. Change occurs all the time, however it is not labelled as change until it is perceived as such. The very process of identifying problems is subjective rather than objective and depends on perception (Cao et al., 2000). The subsequent challenge to our
81 mental models as we seek to create new possibilities, acts to challenge personal habits of perceiving, thinking and acting (Schein, 1992). The effect of perceptual difference is illustrated in the work of Ogbonna and Harris (1998) where they assert that different people tend to interpret the rationale for change differently. For example, the success of the change depends on whether it is perceived to be successful when compared with these various rationales. Likewise, perceptions of what constitutes change versus stability will depend on individual judgement. Another way of looking at the perceptual nature of change is that systems change only when the proposed change is aligned with their sense of purpose (Wheatley, 1999). For those within the system, this process of “self-reference” is the way in which change is assessed as being meaningful and desirable. The system will only allow change if new meaning arises from new ideas or concepts that support them to become more of who they are. In a sense, the system will only change if the issue is worthy of the shared attention of those within the system. Wheatley sums this up neatly by saying: “Self-reference and meaning-making never cease, therefore, change is always possible through those processes…the work of change is always the same. We need to find ways to get their attention; we need to discover what’s meaningful to them.” (Wheatley, 1999, p.152) 5.3.4 Change is motivated by a vision of what could be Another assumption about the nature of change is the idea that the organisation is drawn toward a vision (Eisenbach, Watson, & Pillai, 1999; Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994). This is what provides the impetus for change. If the vision is compelling and is perceived as meaningful, then the system will change in a way that moves toward the vision. Eisenbach, Watson and Pillai (1999), for example argue that: “Changes do not result from “pushes” or
82 pressure to move away from the present situation” (p. 82). Rather change results from being “pulled” toward new, different and attractive possibilities that provide an answer to current issues or realities. A compelling vision is essential to establish a focus for change (Atkinson & Millar, 1999; Cameron & Quinn, 1999; Cummings & Worley, 1997; Kotter, 1996). However a vision can be a more powerful motivator if it is shared, because of the creative tension that is generated (Senge, 1990). Such visions emerge as a result of the collective reflection and conversation about the organization’s purpose that taps into the deeper psyche of the organization. This concept relates to the perceptual nature of change in that creating a shared vision is really about creating shared meaning. 5.3.5 Knowledge creation in systems The systemic view of knowledge creation is one that focuses on the act of conversation as a means by which new meaning is created. Stacey (2000) argues that this is a wholly social process of construction based on the responsive processes that occur between individuals using “the medium of embodied symbols”, such as in sounds, which we call “words”. Stacey (2000) further claims that: “Knowledge is the act of conversing and new knowledge is created when ways of talking, and therefore patterns of relationship, change.” (p. 37). Kolb et al extend this idea of knowledge creation to include the actions that arise from experience. Ways of thinking about knowledge creation in systems terms emphasize the type and quality of information transferred within and between systems, the nature of interactions such as conversation, and the translation of ideas into action. 5.3.6 Intervention in systems Appreciative systems theory, as detailed by Checkland and based on the work of Vickers (Checkland, 1994), provides a model of systemic process intervention. The application of the theory in practice starts with the metaphor of a two-stranded rope as representing the
83 flux of events and ideas within the life of the system, which are inexplicably related and unfold over time. Such a metaphor describes organisational life in the process of being lived, and appreciation starts with the capacity to discern or perceive some aspect of the flux of ideas and events, a process that is selective and individual. With perception comes the application of judgements, which can be “reality” judgements (ie about what is) and “value” judgements (ie about what is humanly good or bad). Such judgements contribute to the stream of ideas and lead to the actions that ultimately contribute to the stream of events. These concepts are illustrated in Figure 5.1. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of this model is the notion that “an appreciative system is a process whose products - cultural manifestations - condition the process itself” (Checkland, 1994, p.83). The system tends not to change its form, but its contents will change continually (but not necessarily continuously). In other words, in a kind of feedback loop, culture predisposes the system’s capacity to perceive and judge, and is itself a manifestation of those processes in action. The system will change, not by reproducing itself exactly, but by small shifts and adjustments.
The flux of events & ideas unfolding over time
Standards resulting from previous experience of the system
Appreciation Standards
•Perception
Action
•Judgment •Manage relationships
Figure 5.1: Intervention in systems. Based on the ideas of Vickers, and interpretation of Checkland (1994)
84 One of the important distinctions made by this appreciative theory is in the notion of relationship management, compared to goal seeking behaviour per se, as motivating human action. From a systems perspective, the emphasis on relationship is an important distinction. Another is the notion of standards, which form the basis of both reality and value judgements, and which are the result of the previous history of the organisation. In other words, the judgements made about real world problems are in themselves informed by standards that are based on prior organisational experience. It logically follows that if an intervention in the organisational experience occurs such that new standards are set, and the impact of these standards are manifest over time, then judgements about the meaning of organisational events, and consequent actions will also shift. A focus on relationship is also emphasized in the approach to systems intervention proposed by Wheatley (1999). This author proposes that bringing health to a system requires the development of self-knowledge: “People need to be connected to the fundamental identify of the organization of community. Who are we? Who do we aspire to become? How shall we be together? And the people need to be connected to new information. What else do we need to know? Where is this new information to be found? And people need to be able to reach past the traditional boundaries and develop relationships with people anywhere in the system. What else needs to be here to do this work with us? As a system inquires into these three domains of identity, information and relationships, it becomes more self-aware. It has become more connected to the truth of who it is, more connected with its environment and customers, more connected to people everywhere in the system. These new connections develop greater capacity; the system becomes healthier” (Wheatley, 1999, p. 146).
85 Therefore, if the process and development activities support the group to explore these key qualities of the system, then the development will promote the system’s health. The last model of systemic intervention used in this work is described in terms of a multilevel approach (Coghlan, 2000; Rashford & Coghlan, 1988). Four organisational levels are identified, each having differing developmental needs: !
Level 1: The individual level: This level is concerned with how a person operates within their role and considers how their role supports them to achieve their personal and career goals. “When it is in place and operating effectively, a person will allow the organization and its goals to be the source of personal goal motivation. The individual will still retain his/ her own individuality while “belonging” to the organization.” (Rashford & Coghlan, 1988, p. 29) This describes a kind of congruence or alignment between what the person envisages for themselves and their actual endeavours within the organisation.
!
Level II: The team level: For teams, this level is concerned with how effectively people collaborate together to achieve shared goals. Rashford and Coghlan (1988) describe effectiveness in terms of the teams capacity to identify and correct dysfunctional behaviours. So for teams that are concerned with becoming a functioning unit, achieving congruence includes discovering why they were together, how they can capitalise on the strengths of diversity, learning how to “be” as a group embracing all individual differences, and from those elements, creating synergy and outcomes.
86 !
Level III: The group or divisional level: This level concerns the effectiveness with which teams work together to accomplish a divisional purpose: “The task of this level is to map the flow of information and partially completed work from one unit to another” (Rashford & Coghlan, 1988, p.29). Achieving congruence at this level requires that the potential of individual teams be realised in how they coordinate and collaborate with each other to achieve the division’s purpose.
!
Level IV: The organizational policy or strategy level: The task of the organisation is to form an effective aggregate from the separate divisions to form a coordinated entity. Moreover, this level is concerned with the capacity of the organisation to create alignment between internal capabilities and external needs for service or product. In other words, this level is concerned with the organisation’s strategic alignment.
5.4 Implications for facilitative style The characteristics of natural systems informed the facilitative style that was used throughout the development process. Notably, the style aimed to create an environment that supported individual and collective inquiry and learning. Because of the emergent nature of change, the facilitative style also needed to be adaptive to the emerging proprieties of the system. This required that facilitators be able to accurately perceive changes in the system and to be able to adapt their style to suit. A facilitative model described by Heron (1999) provides a suitable way in which to explore the impact that different modes of facilitation can have on the group dynamic. Heron identifies three modes of facilitation: (1) the hierarchical mode, (2) the co-operative mode, and (3) the autonomous mode.
87 5.4.1 Hierarchical mode The hierarchical mode requires that the facilitator adopt a directive orientation and exercise overt control over group process and program objectives. The rationale for using this approach is founded in assumptions about the limited ability of the group to self-direct, and the tendency toward stability and resistance of change. The hierarchical mode provides group members with clarity of intent and opportunity to engage with moderated levels of personal risk, because participants do not need to take responsibility for the change at these early stages. Heron provides support for the application of this mode early because of the presumption that participants may be insecure and co-dependent in their orientation to learning (Heron, 1999). 5.4.2 Co-operative mode This mode is characterized by collaboration between participants and facilitator in terms of program aims and applied learning processes. The presumption is that with emerging awareness and skill, participants will be more capable of exercising greater control over their own learning processes. By far this more active mode is the mode that should be most broadly applied because it is necessarily focussed on the facilitator-participant dyad as a means of creating knowledge and supporting action. 5.4.3 Autonomous mode This mode concerns a facilitative style that respects the total autonomy of the group. In this mode the facilitator gives the group total freedom to self-direct and self-pace their engagement and focus. The facilitator does not do things for or with the group, but in essence generates the ‘space’ in which to work. Heron describes this mode as “the subtle
88 art of creating conditions within which people can exercise full self-determination in their learning” (Heron, 1999, p.8) The key learning with regard to facilitative style concerns the need to apply a facilitative approach that meets the group where it is in terms of self-management capability. A more directive mode may suit the early stages of development, but can limit the development of self-management capabilities. Therefore a gradual shift in style toward a more autonomous mode, at a pace that both matches and stretches the group’s development, is required. To do so the facilitator must be observant and adaptive and consciously shift their style as needed. The application of this thinking is discussed in more detail in relation to the developmental work described in Chapter 7.
5.5 Implications for process design In summary, the science of complexity provides a model for organisations that is organic, relationally focussed and ordered, despite the seeming chaos of the surrounding environment. This contrasts extensively with the mechanical models of organisations, the predominant model of years past. In complexity science the emphasis is given to the agents of the system, and the relationships between them. Systemic change is seen as emergent in nature but will tend to emerge in ways that are congruent with the system’s purpose. Bringing the agents of the system together in meaningful ways, such as through conversation, creates the opportunity for shared knowledge construction and changed relationships, which in turn builds the synergy of the system. In terms of systemic development, appreciative systems theory provides a means of understanding that if we seek to create a shift in judgements and behaviours in the life of the system, then the developmental process must support the establishment of new
89 standards. When these standards are socially contrived and contextually relevant, then a shift in the deeper psychosocial dynamic of culture becomes possible. To complete the picture, the systemic developmental approach recognizes that systemic health arises from an increased self-awareness and the application of a multi-level development approach. A summary of the impact of this thinking on process design is given in Table 5.1. Table 5.1: Assumptions and process design implications Systemic assumptions
Contrasting mechanistic
Implications for process
assumptions
design
The system is an integrated
System is the sum of its part Design must consider whole
whole, and a network of
and be understood by
system engagement, and
interactions
analysing its components
support a clear understanding of how working on parts fits within the emergent whole
The properties of systems
The properties of the system Design must support and
are emergent, unpredictable
can be controlled and
build upon the emergence
and result from interaction
predicted through cause-
of new order by focussing
within and between the
effect laws
attention more on the
agents of the system
building an environment which supports emergent change
Systems change in messy
Systems can be managed
The process must account
and chaotic ways, moving
and maintained toward
for the ambiguity and
90 into and out of order
stability and increasing
unpredictability, and allow
order
the system to find its own sense of order
Systemic change is enabled
Change is externally
The process must support a
by change at individual and
designed, introduced and
multi-level approach to
group levels
enforced
learning as a lever for systemic change
The invisible relational
Power is created through
The process must focus
networks that comprise a
hierarchy and structure
attention on the creation of
system are its source of
functional and empowering
power and adaptability
relationships between the systems agents
The manifestation of the
Change programs are
The process must support
system in action, the
planned and implemented to the systems engagement in
culture, predisposes the
meet a prescribed design
change at a “cultural” level,
system to ways of
and support the examination
responding to issues of
and development systemic
change.
standards
5.6 Concluding comments This chapter has identified many of the key theories behind the framework of ideas (F), and their implications for practice. The thinking underlying this dimension of the transformative change process was not one that stood alone, but continued to be an integrated part of how
91 the engagement was considered, managed and conducted. The systemic dimension was based on recognition of the need to observe the organisation differently in order to discover different ways of creating and supporting change. In a sense, this dimension provided a solid theoretical foundation on which the rest of the work was based, in terms of developmental focus, methodology, facilitative style and activities. The way that this theory was applied to practice within the area of application (A) features throughout the following chapters.
92
Chapter 6: The “strategic” dimension
“To begin with the end in mind means to start with a clear understanding of your destination. It means to know where you’re going so that you better understand where you are now and so that the steps you take are always in the right direction.” Stephen Covey
93
6.1 Introduction This chapter presents the first of the data collection and analysis chapters in this thesis, and addresses the key aspects of the work that contributed to the “strategic” dimension of the transformative change process. Strategic is defined as “of great importance within an integrated whole or to a planned effect” (Source: MirriamWebsters Dictionary on-line). This definition implies alignment with an overall objective and stresses the importance of the work to the purpose of the whole. As a manager-researcher, my ability to make claims about the strategic value of the work was particularly important because growth in strategic effectiveness was a key responsibility of my role as Business Development Manager. Hence this stage of the work created an important foundation through which developmental focus and priority were established.
6.2 Strategic priorities based on literature and context The focus of this work was based on an understanding of theory and a detailed understanding of the salient commercial issues facing the Kembla Laboratory at that time. Such understanding was essential to the identification of clear outcomes for the development work. The concept of outcome clarity has been promoted as important to both individuals (Covey, 1989) and organisations (Eisenbach et al., 1999; Kotter, 1996; Senge, 1990) as a means of focussing and motivating change efforts. From the analysis of literature in Chapter 2, the strategic issues identified of relevance to the Kembla Laboratory context included:
94 1. Focus more on the non-technical capabilities of people to improve aspects of the social dynamic such as team work, coordination and communication. Essential to this is the recognition of the role of leaders in creating a supportive environment and systems of work. This is a particularly pressing issue because of the status of the newly formed leadership team. This focus ultimately aims to impact on the key outcome area of workplace satisfaction as a lever for improved customer service. 2. The development of a means by which customer satisfaction could be understood, measured and improved. 3. Improved focus on what the service must do in order to maintain an effective contribution to the overall purposes of the organisation. 4. From a process point of view, conduct the development work in a way that encourages active engagement and addresses the underlying causes of resistance and avoidance. 6.2.1 The ‘ultimate outcomes’ of the development Based on a clear understanding of the salient issues of the Kembla Laboratory, and following extensive discussion with other members of the leadership team, the following broad ultimate outcomes were identified: “To facilitate development of the (Kembla Laboratory) group toward achieving a level of effectiveness that enables them to: !
Support a work environment that is a positive experience for employees
!
Delight their customers
95 !
Focus on and achieve their organizational goals (eg safety, customer service)” (Vaartjes, 1999)
On analysis, each part of this aim is clearly linked to the developmental focus identified in the internal service literature and contextual analysis. The first acknowledges the critical role that employee satisfaction plays in enabling effective service delivery. The second acknowledges the need to focus on customer satisfaction as a means of becoming more ‘market focussed’. The third acknowledges the importance of the internal service contribution both in terms of the supply chain concepts and of the responsibilities of organisational membership. Each of these implicitly recognizes the critical role of the relationships amongst functions, individuals and workgroups, and between the laboratory and its customers. A working definition of the term “effectiveness” in the context of these objectives was articulated as: “In all cases, the working definition of “effectiveness” should be contrived from an understanding of the needs and perspectives of the key stakeholders in each outcome” (Vaartjes, 1999). This recognizes the value of stakeholder perception and the critical role of stakeholder support in terms of promoting ownership of outcomes and resourcing the work (Baines, 1998; Kotter, 1996; Moran & Brightman, 2000; Wheatley, 1999; Wheatley & Kellner-Rojers, 1998). It also recognizes the preference toward customer-defined standards as key to application of quality management principles (James, 1993; Johnston & Daniel, 1992). The result of applying this principle was that in the early stages of the process the key stakeholder’s groups needed to be identified and engaged. 6.2.2 Identification of key stakeholders Three stakeholder groups were considered important to this context:
96 6.2.2.1 Workforce This stakeholder group included all members of the Kembla Laboratory workforce including those in leadership roles. This group provided an “insider” point of view from the perspective gained through personal experience as employees. The successful engagement of this stakeholder group was considered of critical importance to the overall success of the work, not only because of the need for ownership of outcomes per se, but in recognition that this group carried the prime responsibility for sustaining the changes into the future. 6.2.2.2 Customers This stakeholder group included internal operations customers as well as some key “external” customers who were engaged in long-term commercial relationships with the Kembla Laboratory. This group provided perspectives based on their experience and expectations of service delivery, combined with their understanding of operational and technical service requirements. Their engagement was seen as critical in terms of focussing the development in the latter stages. 6.2.2.3 Operational & corporate management The leadership stakeholders included two groups: 1. Senior operational management who were functionally accountable for the general performance of Kembla Laboratory relative to corporate imperatives, and 2. The Kembla Laboratory leadership team. The leadership stakeholders provided a perspective of Kembla Laboratory performance based on the impact and contribution of the group to the overall success of the manufacturing process. Therefore this group was essential in providing data that clarified
97 the focus of the development and identified the priorities and imperatives based on commercial and organisational needs. Moreover this group was critical in ensuring leadership support for the initiatives in terms of sponsorship and resourcing. 6.2.3 Data collection 6.2.3.1 Sources of input data The input of data to facilitate and focus the change was a critical part of the overall work. Of particular interest was data that brought clarity to the strategic intent and encouraged alternative perspectives on current issues as well as future possibilities. In particular, data was essential in supporting the system to learn more about itself (Wheatley, 1999). However to achieve increased understanding, it was essential to be clear about what type of data should be collected. 6.2.3.1.1
Subjective versus objective data
It was desirable in this work to draw on both subjective and objective data to define the current reality and desired future states. Objective data included key performance indicators that were defined in accord with the strategic intent of the group. Of equal importance was the subjective view of the Kembla Laboratory employees and stakeholders in defining and perceiving success. Therefore this work sought to capture both forms of data. 6.2.3.1.2
Implicit versus explicit data
Data collection in this work emphasised the more implicit sources of data (eg cultural assumptions) rather than the more explicit sources (eg workplace procedures). The reasons for this bias includes recognition of the implicit form of beliefs, assumptions and mental models held within the system, and the role that such implicit knowledge plays in the
98 created workplace environment and the generation of workplace outcomes. By its implicit nature however, such data is relatively inaccessible through means of rational inquiry. However it is this very data that is of most value in terms of transformative change. 6.2.3.1.3
Confirming versus disconfirming data
In general terms system data has two forms: (a) confirming, and (b) disconfirming. Confirming data supports a hypothesis; when we take action and the results we generate are in alignment with our predictions, our ideas are confirmed and we feel encouraged that we are on the right path. Disconfirming data however, which is contradictory, sends the message that we may not be on the right path, that our hypotheses and predictions may be fundamentally flawed. Such data therefore has the effect of stopping us in our tracks and forcing reassessment of our direction. The notion of disconfirmation as a facilitator of change is central to Lewin’s change model, where disconfirmation is essential to create sufficient anxiety and discomfort to “unfreeze” the system and create a readiness for change (Cummings & Worley, 1997; Schein, 1994). Therefore in this work, although confirming data is useful in terms of recognizing achievement, of greater value is the explication of data that is disconfirming in nature, that supports refocussing and clarification of development imperatives. I propose the model given in Figure 6.1 as a representation of these ideas in practice and suggest that the process of disconfirmation can create readiness for change as long as the validity of the data is not denied. Such denial may be driven by anxiety and fear (Schein, 1992), the desire to preserve the freedom to self-create (Wheatley & Kellner-Rojers, 1998) or perceptions of significant risk and uncertainty (Covey, 1992). Disconfirming data that is acknowledged and leads to the search for alternative thinking and action supports learning and change.
99
Encourages
Confirming Organizational data Qualitative (stakeholder perception) & Quantitative (process measures)
Supports stability
Strengthens purpose Reinforces success strategies
Denied
Discourages
Disconfirming
Creates tension & anxiety Encourages search for meaning & new ways
Acknowledged
Supports change Figure 6.1: Forms of data and their potential impact on change
6.2.3.2 Overview of data collection processes The following key activities were undertaken as part of this data collection process: 1. Workforce engagement in a culture and climate survey process (March 2000) 2. Conduct of a customer satisfaction survey (November 2000) 3. Increased involvement of leadership in operational and corporate management matters and meetings (Ongoing) These key activities informed the strategic focus of the development work, and are discussed in detail in the remainder of this chapter.
100
6.3 Collection of workforce data: The culture & climate survey 6.3.1 Rationale When applying assumptions about organisations as complex adaptive systems, then a manifestation of how the system works is known as the system’s ‘culture’. The notion of organisational culture is widely accepted and cited in literature and although the way in which it is discussed tends to vary, there is little apparent disagreement that culture has the capacity to impact the outcomes and effectiveness of organisations. Organisations achieve outcomes through the interaction of culture with the structures and processes of the organisation (Swe & Kleiner, 1998). Thus culture has the capacity to exert significant power on the organisation and what it achieves (Schein, 1994). Culture forms as a consequence of prior learning, and, by shaping the organisation, also sets the scene for future learning and action (Allen, 2000; Schein, 1999). Culture is a characteristic of the organisation through which its uniqueness can be expressed (Burnes & James, 1996), in much the same way as personality is unique to the individual (van der Post, de Coning, & Smit, 1997). This thinking is very much aligned with the emergent and contextual nature of systems. Well-known writer on the subject, Edgar Schein, describes organisational culture as: “a pattern of shared basic assumptions that the group learned as it solved its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems” (Schein, 1994, p.12) An important element of this definition is the creation of shared assumptions through behavioural learning and reinforcement. Once a culture has developed, the set of shared
101 assumptions on which it is based tend to operate in out-of-awareness and become a defining property that contributes to the group’s uniqueness. It is notable that Schein avoids identifying behaviour per se as a direct indicator of culture. Instead he focuses on the underlying assumptions because behaviour is influenced not only by underlying assumptions, but also by other social and individual drives. This differs from the concept of culture identified by Cooke and Rousseau that makes a clear connection between shared beliefs and values and how these guide the thinking and behavioural styles of people within the organisation. Culture is context specific, so in large organisations sub-cultures are common. Such subcultures which may be quite different in character from the broader culture, will all tend to carry the core elements of that culture (Cameron & Quinn, 1999; Schein, 1994; Schein, 1999). Sub-cultures develop when there are different approaches applied to rewards, goals and values across the various levels, functions and business units within the organisation (Cooke & Rousseau, ). The work of Lok and Crawford (1999) provides data that demonstrates that subcultures have the capacity to have a greater influence on some dimensions of organisational effectiveness (such as employee commitment in a hospital system) than the broader culture. In general terms however, the core culture is thought to have the most pervasive influence on how the organisation operates and succeeds (Schneider, 2000). The concept of culture described by Schein (1994) is notably depicted as having three levels: 1. Artefacts are the visible structures and processes of a culture represented by those things that are available to any observer from inside or outside the organisation. For example, artefacts include company logos, the physical environment and set-up of
102 the company, the language or jargon and the rituals and celebrations that have importance. Artefacts also include observable behaviour and although easy to perceive, artefacts tend to be difficult to interpret in terms of how they reflect the underlying culture. 2. Espoused values which are the statements, strategies and goals established by the organisation are a direct result of a group developing beliefs around their work through a process of acting, observing the effects of their actions and adopting those that yield the results they want. These are the values or the right ways of doing things that are spoken about in the organisation and that have been subject to “social validation”, where they have been confirmed through the shared social experience of the group, and have been experienced as minimising anxiety and maximising comfort. Leadership plays a critical part in the development of espoused values, as it is the leader’s role to reinforce the outcomes that are desirable for the organisation’s success. Espoused values in action form the ‘glue’ that binds groups together around a central purpose and process. For those values that are experienced as consistently applicable, a “cognitive transformation” can occur where the values are transformed into unquestioned underlying assumptions. Members of the organisation will continue to espouse the values associated with these assumptions and when operating at a conscious level, espoused values will tend to predict observed behaviour. 3. Basic underlying assumptions are the deepest level of culture, based on the group’s beliefs about ‘the way things are’ and ‘the way things are done’ that have been validated to such an extent that they have become unconscious and automatic. Basic assumptions are shared mental models that operate out of conscious
103 awareness and because they have served the organisation well in the past, they tend to be unquestioned (Schein, 1992). When organisations are experiencing times of stability, this level of culture becomes the dominant influence on organisational behaviour (Dalmau, 1994). This level is the most difficult to decipher and is the least obvious to those influenced by it. Culture has an essential role in providing people with stability and meaning in their organisational life. The very existence of a ‘culture’ implies both structural stability and integration of the group process at a sub-conscious, intangible level, all of which lend stability to the group. Schein (1994) suggests that “culture formation… is always, by definition, a striving toward pattering and integration” (p. 11). He and others (e.g. Old, 1995) describe patterning as the automatic behaviours and processes of an organisation that act to integrate what an organisation is about, with what it does. Therefore culture supports people to achieve “cognitive stability” and manage their anxiety by developing shared beliefs and thereby building consistency and predictability into their world (Schein, 1994) and providing a language through which to describe it (Silvester, Anderson, & Patterson, 1999). Culture meets the needs of individuals by creating social connection and cohesion, as well as creating outcomes for the wider group in a way that accesses prior learning. At a more visible level, culture prescribes forms of behaviour that are acceptable in a given circumstance and in this way culture acts to confirm or otherwise the legitimacy on new or proposed arrangements within the organisation (Burnes & James, 1996). Schein (1994) takes this further by saying that culture “defines for us what to pay attention to, what things mean, how to react emotionally to what is going on, and what actions to take in various kinds of situations” (p. 22). The author also relates the stabilising influence of culture to the
104 idea of “patterning”. The patterns of a culture include the rituals, climate, values and specific behaviours that act to integrate and create sense of coherent whole. Therefore in consideration of the importance of culture in determining organisational achievements, along with the recognition that culture is socially constructed, it follows that a valuable source of workplace data would be that concerning the organisation’s cultural style. However, given that culture tends to operate in an implicit manner, developing an understanding of cultural style requires a mode of inquiry that taps into this implicit data and describes it according to a suitable framework. For this reason, a survey process that focussed on collection of data about cultural norms and expectations was chosen to engage the workforce in definition of the strategic priorities. 6.3.2 A cultural model: The Organizational Culture Inventory The data collection process involved the application of a standardised diagnostic tool. The tool selected for was the Organisational Culture Inventory (OCI) researched and developed by Robert A. Cooke and J. Clayton Lafferty and supplied by Human Synergistics (NZ) Ltd. This tool provided a means of gathering data about the employee’s subjective view of the workplace in a way that could be quantified and, through normative processing, presented in a graphical form. The OCI describes 12 thinking and behavioural styles that relate to individual performance within an organisational setting. The underlying premise of the OCI is that the behaviours expected within a workplace are indicative of what is required for organisational members to be successful and are therefore indicative of the underlying cultural values and beliefs. The model takes a cognitive view of culture defining it as: “the ways of thinking, behaving and believing that members of the social unit have in common” (Cooke & Rousseau, , p.123). The OCI’s 12 styles are grouped into three categories: constructive styles,
105 passive/defensive styles and aggressive/defensive styles (Cooke & Burback, ; Cooke & Hartman, ; Cooke & Rousseau, ; Szumal, 1998). 1. Constructive styles: These styles, as the name indicates, are associated with effective organisational and individual outcomes. a. Achievement style: Characterized by ability to perform, accomplish goals and meet targets. Goals are self-set, realistic and pursued with enthusiasm. b. Self-actualisation style: Characterizes organisations which place a high value on creative tasks and achievement of high standards of quality. In such cultures it is important that tasks are enjoyable and that task accomplishment is accompanied by personal growth. c. Humanistic-Encouraging style: Characterizes organisations that encourage a participative, supportive and person-centred environment and where individuals welcome the support of others in achieving organisational tasks. d. Affiliative style: Such organisations place a high value on teamwork and the development of effective interpersonal relationships as a means to achieving organisational tasks. 2. Passive/Defensive styles: Such styles are believed to arise as a response of oppressive management practices and systems where people find that to fit in they are required to “keep a low profile”. a. Approval style: Associated with a culture where conflict is avoided and difference in opinion kept to a minimum. Organisational members seek to be liked and tend not to act except under the approval of others.
106 b. Conventional style: Characterises organisations that tend to be conservative and value the status quo. There is usually a high level of bureaucratic control in such cultures and people are encouraged to conform to what is expected. c. Dependent style: Describes a culture that tends to be hierarchically driven and non-participatory. Decision-making and responsibility tends to be centralised and organisational members avoid initiative and seek permission before acting. d. Avoidance style: Describes organisations that tend to have a “blame” orientation for mistakes together with a lack of recognition for achievement. Organisational members tend not to take responsibility for their actions, or deflect responsibility onto someone or some-thing else. 3. Aggressive/Defensive styles: a. Oppositional style: Such cultures tend to be negative and unwelcoming of new and novel ideas. Organisational members tend to be argumentative, hard to impress and as a first response, tend to be overly critical of the ideas of others. b. Power style: Describes organisations that place high value on hierarchical authority and use coercion and control to achieve organisational tasks. c. Competitive style: Such organisations tend to place a high value on winning and on the appearance of success. Often organisational members are encouraged to compete with each other in order to gain approval and reward.
107 d. Perfectionist style: Describes a culture where hard work, perfectionism and perseverance are valued and often goals are unachievable. Mistakes are discouraged and people tend to work long hours in order to keep on top of all tasks. The 12 styles are depicted on a circular graph, a circumplex, with those styles related to people-orientation clustered on the right hand side of the graph, and those styles related to task-orientation clustered on the left. Styles related to satisfaction are clustered at the top of the circumplex and security related styles at the bottom of the graph. The principles behind the OCI tool are aligned to the notions of culture previously discussed. The OCI seeks to make explicit the ways of doing and being within the workplace that tend to be out of conscious awareness and generally taken for granted, except perhaps for new members whose level of consciousness is raised whilst they adjust to new behavioural expectations. Although behaviours in themselves are not necessarily reflective of the deeper levels of culture, behavioural expectations are based on what is reinforced and practiced within the workplace environment, and these expectations are ultimately underpinned by assumptions and beliefs about what is valid. In this way, by focussing on behavioural expectations, those who engage in the OCI survey process can reflect these expectations, even if they themselves do not always choose to behave this way. The OCI also emphasises the role that leaders play in reinforcing specific ways of thinking and behaving and therefore are largely responsible for creating behavioural expectations based on deep cultural assumptions. The model also recognizes that systems and processes are the manifestations of deep cultural assumptions, and that such systems also reinforce and stabilise culture.
108 The OCI tool has been widely used in a variety of public and private sector organisations and Cooke and Rousseau suggests that: “the OCI can be used to clarify the desired direction of culture change and motivate members to accept and participate in change” (p. 152). One published report (Sharkey, 1999) utilised the OCI as a primary survey instrument, which provided data used to design an intensive leadership development program for 70 managers. The hypothesis of concern was: “leadership development will positively impact the culture of an organization over a 15 month period” (Sharkey, 1999, p30). Although the work did not find support for the hypothesis, as the culture measured by the OCI did not change significantly, there was some qualitative and quantitative evidence of an improvement in leadership effectiveness. The author argues that over a greater period of time such improvement would be more likely to be evidence in the OCI measure because if leaders are setting improved standards of behaviour, such behaviours will eventually become expected. 6.3.3 Survey design The OCI survey was planned with the aim of 100% participation. In consideration of the desire to capture context specific data, 27 supplementary survey questions were also included in the survey. These questions were structured around the salient issues of the Kembla Laboratory within a changing corporate context, with particular emphasis on the qualities and capabilities of the group’s leaders. It was believed at the start of the work that gathering workforce perceptions of leadership capability would help guide the leadership development process. 6.3.3.1
“Actual” culture survey
The process of survey implementation was important because it had to model a more desired management style. Surveys were completed in natural workgroups. Each group was
109 assembled and given a brief introduction by the Kembla Laboratory Manager. This was important to set the scene and create the connection back to the development needs of the KL. Most importantly it also demonstrated the commitment of laboratory management to the process and set expectations of those who participated, that development action would follow. With the loss of some participation due to absence from the workplace over the period of the survey, an 88% response rate was achieved. 6.3.3.2 “Preferred” culture survey The preferred culture survey was conducted soon after the actual culture survey. Participants were selected from a cross section of the organisation, stratified on the basis of organisational level and workgroup. Most participants were randomly selected with the exception of the leadership team, who where all were asked to participate. The end result was a preferred culture defined with a sample size of n=27. 6.3.4 Results of cultural diagnosis In all cases, raw survey data was normed against a research database consisting of Australian, New Zealand and US industry data. Norming ensured that extensions beyond the 50th percentile were interpreted as indicating dominant norms, which were more dominant than in most other organisations that had utilised the OCI. The extensive nature of the research database, backed up by the subjective validation of the results against real workplace experience, lent support for the notion that the OCI accurately represented what was implicit and expected within the Kembla Laboratory. Such evidence is provided in more detail in what follows.
110 6.3.4.1 Actual Culture Survey: March 2000 The survey highlighted the dominant characteristics of the Kembla Laboratory culture, as experienced by the majority of Kembla Laboratory employees. The dominant style in terms of cultural expectations was associated with the groups tendency to oppose change in favour of stability and predictability (oppositional style, 75th – 90th percentile) (see Appendix A for the circumplex graph). Group members were most secure during periods of stability, and tended to be overt in their opposition to new and different approaches or ideas. This was coupled with the less dominant style of avoidance which tended to manifest in a passive approach to the workplace (avoidance style, 75th percentile). When under pressure, people tended to ‘bunker down’ and get on with their jobs, passively avoiding engagement in issues of change. It is notable that both these dominant styles are associated with maintaining a sense of security. Less dominant styles, but nonetheless important to this group’s context were the styles associated with conventionality and perfectionism (Both 50th – 75th percentile). This group tended to approach tasks by using tried and true methods, and looked for accuracy and precision in their work. Much emphasis was given to technical excellence and the creation of a stable and predictable process. This is not an unexpected outcome for an analytical laboratory. However the implication of these styles was that experimentation and risk taking were minimal, and perfectionistic standards meant that significant effort was given to being “right” even when this meant avoiding accountability for error. 6.3.4.2 Evidence of Sub-cultures The survey data was analysed to explore the nature of sub-cultures within the dominant culture. Two examples are described primarily because they illustrate how different workgroups tended to exhibit different cultural norms. Moreover, anecdotally it confirmed
111 that different workgroup leader style influenced the development of cultural expectations. This is of significance to this work because it informed and strengthened the idea that cultural development would require the development of leadership capability if new and more effective expectations were to be reinforced. These two examples provide an excellent way of illustrating this issue. Based on this analysis and my direct experience with both of the workgroups represented by these circumplexes, my proposition is that the sub-cultures represent a manifestation of the power structures within each group, tenure within the broader Kembla Laboratory culture, and the leader’s preferred style. This can be illustrated by examining each sub-culture in turn. 6.3.4.2.1
Interpretation of Sub-culture A Circumplex
From an observer perspective, sub-culture A was a workgroup that provided technical support in a way that tended to value and recognize technical excellence and individual effort (see Appendix B for the circumplex graph). This was particularly evident in the highly competitive orientation (competitive style 75-90th percentile), which was more concerned with individual achievement and the appearance of success. They were also a group that espoused values of mateship, however there was a tendency for members to “stir” each other up, a behaviour that tended to censor and limit open communication because of fear of social retribution. The group operated in a background of dominant power structures, suspicion of management and largely unresolved conflict. The group saw themselves as customer focussed and prided themselves on their rapport with their customers and their ability to respond to their customer’s needs. When faced with pressure to change from within the Kembla Laboratory, they tended to be more cynical and untrusting of the motives of those who were supporting the change. All of these characteristics are reflected in the OCI circumplex for this group.
112 6.3.4.2.2
Interpretation of sub-culture B Circumplex
From an observer perspective, sub-culture B was a team based, customer focussed workgroup with a heavy reliance on sharing responsibility to get the work done and to ensure the safety of each other in the process (see Appendix C for the circumplex graph). Thus decisions and planning were highly participatory, and the group demonstrated a willingness to become involved in general workplace issues. They actively demonstrated leadership in resolution of issues and tended to be flexible to change. Sub-culture B had joined the Kembla Laboratory in 1999 and most of the members had experienced limited exposure to the broader Kembla Laboratory culture. The constructive environment was encouraged and demonstrably reinforced by the group’s leader. Their constructive orientation was supported in the technical aspects of their work by a willingness to challenge new ideas (oppositional style), and a desire to persevere and get the work done right (perfectionistic style). Although this group was not free of problems or issues, it generally represented a good place to work. 6.3.4.3 Preferred Culture Survey March 2000 The preferred culture circumplex indicated a desire for a constructive culture, dominated by the styles that supported workplace satisfaction, achievement and a balance between task and people orientation (see Appendix D for the circumplex graph). Essentially the preferred culture, that which was deemed by the respondents to represent a culture that would support future success, was envisaged as one in which people were (a) supported in their work (humanistic-encouraging style, 90th percentile), (b) encouraged to excel and develop (selfactualizing style, 90th percentile), (c) focussed on achieving self-set strategically important goals (achievement style, 75th percentile) and, (d) engaged in effective workteams (affilitative style, 75th percentile). The preferred culture was also one in which it would be
113 necessary to be able to maintain a critical orientation around the work (oppositional, 75th percentile) and a high regard for doing the work accurately and precisely (perfectionistic style, 50th percentile). When this circumplex is compared with the actual culture cricumplex, it is notable that through this data the employees of Kembla Laboratory as key stakeholders made it very clear that a successful future from their perspective must support people in their achievement more effectively than it currently did. It is notable that when compared to other preferred culture data based on the Human Synergistcs International research database, preferred culture circumplex’s tend to be similar irrespective of industry or geography. One could surmise from a purely human perspective, that people tend to share a view of what an ‘ideal’ workplace environment should nurture, as described through the OCI model. Such an ideal is found in motivational theory, where at the pinnacle of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, self actualization is identified as the basic human desire to realize potential (Hjelle & Ziegler, 1992). Lower in the hierarchy, although no less important, is the need for self-esteem which is associated with achievement and recognition, and lower again are those needs associated with social connection, belonging and affiliation. 6.3.5 Strategic development priorities: The cultural “gaps” As intended through the application of the current reality/desired future model, this data supported the identification of developmental ‘gaps’. Knowledge of these gaps informed the developmental priorities in this work. More specifically they guided the development of the leadership team since in most cases closing the gaps required the modelling and reinforcement of different cultural expectations. Although this is discussed in more detail in later chapters, the developmental gaps are listed in Table 6.1.
114 Table 6.1: Cultural gaps identified by comparing actual and preferred cultural expectations Need to strengthen…
Need to pull back on…
Give positive rewards to others
Tendency toward fitting into the “mould”
Involving subordinates in decisions affecting them Capacity to resolve conflicts constructively Enjoyment of work Encouraging people to think in unique and independent ways
and not “rocking the boat” Avoiding responsibility for errors due to blamed orientation Making “popular” rather then necessary decisions Avoiding engagement when things get tough Playing “politics” to gain influence and build a power base Competing rather than cooperating Opposing things indirectly Setting unrealistically high goals
6.3.6 Measures of the outcomes of culture A key part of the OCI survey process was the collection of data associated with employee perceptions about issues such as workplace satisfaction, role clarity, role conflict and customer service. Since these encompass two of the ultimate aims of this work, namely to improve both workplace satisfaction and customer satisfaction, they provided an important measure from which understanding was developed.
115 6.3.6.1 Satisfaction The majority of respondents (approx 60%) reported moderate to low levels of satisfaction as members of the organisation. Most respondents (approx 60%) greatly expected to be with the organisation two years from the time of the survey, however around 62% or respondents were moderately, slightly or not at all willing to recommend the Kembla Laboratory as a good place to work. 6.3.6.2 Role clarity & role conflict In terms of role clarity, most respondents (approx 58%) reported that they were very clear about what was expected of them in their role, however approximately 35% of respondents experienced mixed messages in their roles to a great or very great extent. In terms of role conflict, it was notable that around 40% of respondents felt that they did not ‘fit’ comfortably within the Kembla Laboratory organisation to a great or very great extent. However, most respondents (approx 72%) reported that to a moderate or less extent their jobs did not demand them to think differently than they would prefer, indicating a reasonable level of person-role matching. 6.3.6.3 Customer service Respondents reported that the ability of the Kembla Laboratory to match changing customer needs was somewhat limited, with approximately 37% supporting this proposition to a great or very great extent. Most (approx 70%) believed that the Kembla Laboratory would get repeat business, although this may be more a reflection of their internal status than of commercial forces. Around half the respondents reported that the Kembla Laboratory had a reputation for superior customer service to a great or very great extent.
116 6.3.7 Concluding comments There was little doubt that such a process was capable of providing valuable data to focus our development efforts. I experienced a strong intuitive connection between what the results indicated in terms of the OCI model and my own insights into the patterns and practices inherent within our culture. This same intuitive connection was experienced by others as they too came to understand the results. Perhaps the most significant aspect of this data was that it tapped into deeply implicit beliefs and provided a means by which such intangible aspects of organisational reality could be described and understood. This model created the potential for common language and understanding. In addition, the data was confronting and disconfirming in nature - it raised to a conscious level those aspects of organisational life that were largely undiscussable but which were recognized as forces capable of holding the group back. The application of the OCI model provided a means by which we could hone in on specific cultural patterns and explore ways in which such patterning impacted workplace outcomes. The data thus provided insight into key issues associated with the purpose and aims of this work, namely the honing of strategic focus and recognition of the complex contextual nature of the work. 6.3.8 Epilogue As noted, this model provided a means by which the work outcomes could be evaluated. To this end the OCI survey was used to perform a re-test in June 2002 some 26 months after the survey described here. The outcomes of this re-test provide compelling evidence of the effectiveness of the developmental approach taken which was in itself significantly informed by these results. The re-test data and associated analysis is provided in later chapters.
117
6.4 Collection of customer data: The customer survey 6.4.1 Rationale Both literature and our own beliefs about customer management supported the idea of collecting data about customer perceptions. Customer satisfaction was central to the ‘virtuous cycle’ of success as depicted in the systems diagram in Figure 6.2. Customer perceptions are necessary to gauge customer satisfaction, an essential source of information for effective internal services (Gremler et al., 1995; Reynoso & Moores, 1995; Stauss, 1995), and to focus service development and closure of service gaps (Auty & Long, 1999; Vandermerwe & Gilbert, 1991). However collection of internal service perceptions is somewhat problematic because of the unique nature and dimensions of service equality in the internal service context (Gilbert, 2000; Marshall et al., 1998), and the lack of suitable measurement tools. It had been many years since a formalised survey had been undertaken by the Kembla Laboratory, and this lack of recent data was an obvious gap that needed to be rectified. Word of mouth recommendations
Good organisational outcomes
Customer satisfaction Minimise service gaps
Financial support
New services & equipment
Work volumes
Management support Lower services costs
Translate into service specs
New internal customers
Manage efficiency & costs
Understanding customer needs
Figure 6.2: The virtuous cycle of success for internal services
Positive outlook for employees
Builds commitment Creates development opportunities
118
6.4.2 Process A questionnaire style survey process was developed drawing on a modified version of the SERVQUAL questionnaire. This questionnaire has been applied in modified form to internal services contexts by others (Auty & Long, 1999; Chaston, 1994; Hirons et al., 1998; Reynoso & Moores, 1995). The questionnaire was structured in three parts: 1. The first part collected demographic data about the customer and how they utilise the services provided 2. The second part asked a mixture of open and closed questions about service perceptions in general, including satisfaction with complaint management 3. The third part sought ratings and rankings based on the five service quality dimensions of the SERVQUAL tool: a. Reliability, which concerned the ability to perform the promised service dependably, b. Responsiveness, which concerned the willingness of employees to help customers and provide prompt service, c. Assurance, which was concerned with knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to convey trust and confidence, d. Tangibles, which concerned the appearance of physical facilities, equipment, personal and communications materials, and
119 e. Empathy, which concerned the caring and individualised attention the employees provide to customers. Each dimension was represented in a number of questions that described attributes of the service. For example, one question relating to reliability was “Keeping customers informed about when work will be done”. The ratings intended to collect perceptions based on recent service experience, whereas the rankings intended to collect information about the relative importance of the dimensions of quality to different customer demographics. Ranking was done using a low-high scale (1-9), where for each dimension the respondent had to answer the question: “My desired service level is..”. The rating score was captured in a similar way with a low-high scale for the question: “My perception of (Kembla Laboratory) performance is..”. In total 23 questions were asked in this part covering a range of service attributes corresponding to the five service quality dimensions. The survey process was implemented in November 2000, which was late in the development program. The questionnaire was mailed to a total of 95 internal and selected external customers. The customers who were invited to participate were selected by the workgroup leaders based on the recency of services provided. In general terms, this selection was representative of the total customer base who were recent users of the Kembla Laboratory services and familiar enough with the service to complete the questionnaire. The 95 customers were notified of their selection and invited to participate by email prior to sending the questionnaires. 6.4.3 Results Of the 95 surveys, 50 completed surveys were returned representing a response rate of 52.6%.
120 All data was input into a database and subject to descriptive and statistical analysis. The summary ratings and rankings from the 23 service attributes were subject to a paired-t test analysis to test for the presence of significant differences, which are indicative of service gaps. Data analysis was also completed for each workgroup. In these cases, the paired-t test was applied to workgroup average rankings and ratings, and an F-test was applied to the same data as a measure of consistency of the service experience. Across the whole laboratory, significant gaps were identified for 14 of the 23 attributes, representing all five service quality dimensions. Extensive data analysis was done to separate data by customer role, laboratory workgroup, service quality dimensions. 6.4.4 Discussion 6.4.4.1 General trends The survey found that most customers (78%) saw the services provided as “value for money”, although many customers (44%) indicated that they were not in a position to compare the services provided by Kembla Laboratory with external commercial providers. As a general measure of satisfaction, most customers (74%) indicated that they would be willing to recommend the services of the laboratory to others. The positive perceptions of value, although favourable, reflected what would be expected in an internal service context since almost half of the customers were unable to compare the services received with the standards of commercial providers. This typifies the “captive customer” issue, although in this case the favourable perception of value was encouraging. 6.4.4.2 Service attribute performance Of the 23 service attributes measured, 14 were found to have significant gaps between the desired level of service (ranking) and the actual level of service delivered (rating). Bearing
121 in mind that these gaps were indicative of overall performance and that gaps at the workgroup level did vary from this, the 14 attributes of concern are identified in Table 6.2. Table 6.2: Service gap analysis Service quality dimension
Service attribute
Reliability
Providing services as agreed (eg costs, quality, timeliness) Dependability on handling customer service problems Performing services right first time Providing error free data
Responsiveness
Keeping customers informed about when the work will be done Prompt service and attention to customer enquiries Willingness to help customers and provide advice
Assurance
Employees who instil confidence in customers Employees who are consistently courteous Employees who have the knowledge to answer customer questions
Empathy
Having the customers best interests at heart Employees who understand the needs of their customers
122
Convenient access to the right people and services Tangibles
Data presented in a form that suits the customers needs and systems Employees who have a neat professional appearance Well presented, easy to read reports
6.4.4.3 Links with cultural survey results Notionally, the results of the customer survey were linked to the results of the cultural survey. Within the OCI questionnaire a total of 3 questions were related to customer service. Correlation data that was provided by Human Synergistics as part of the survey data analysis, indictated the following: 1. The dominant cultural style, oppositional, was not correlated with effective customer service. This style is characterized by challenging and criticism of new or different ideas or activities in an aggressive manner. Therefore this style tends to be one that discourages creativity and difference. Given that the dominant need of customers is process control data, delivered on a very frequent basis (> once per day), then this style is likely to support the provision of routine, consistent services but will not support the group’s ability to delight and exceed customer expectations. 2. The secondary style, avoidance, is weakly negatively correlated with effective customer service. This style is characterized by passive unwillingness to engage in
123 decision-making and change. The underlying premise is that avoidance ensures stability and circumvents anything that will upset the status quo. This style therefore opposes the kind of proactive and flexible delivery of service required to delight or exceed customer expectations, and arguably contributed to the service gaps identified in the survey. 3. The third most dominant style, conventional, is also weakly negatively correlated with effective customer service (for two of the three questions concerning customer service). This style is based on the premise that if work is done by the book, then there is less chance of error and of being in a position of blame. This style therefore impacts negatively on customer service particularly when innovative solutions are what is needed to delight. Although these styles vary in their effect on customer service, none of them exert a positive impact. Such a positive impact is only observed for the constructive cultural styles. This analysis therefore suggests that although the current reality is somewhat unsupportive of improvement in customer satisfaction, by adopting an appropriate developmental focus that supports a shift toward the preferred culture, a shift in customer service capability will also be supported. 6.4.4.4 Cultural style versus service attribute performance An interesting comparison was done using a combination of the data from the customer survey and contrasting with data from the cultural survey (OCI). This comparison demonstrates a relationship between culture and customer perceptions of performance. The comparison draws on the sub-cultures A and B previously discussed (see Appendices B and C). Analysis of the data highlighted an interaction between constructive cultural style and positive customer perception. To recap, sub-culture A was characterised by a tendency
124 toward security-oriented behaviours. They tended to be oppositional toward novel ideas and change efforts, and when faced with the need to change often adopted a passive avoidant stance and simply focussed on technical issues. This group also preferred doing things by the book, and tended to behave competitively toward each other, placing a high value on individual effort. In terms of how this style relates to effective customer service, as previously discussed, these dominant styles are either weakly negatively correlated (oppositional and conventional styles, p
