3 ms·

I'd go one step further. I have done research on "silos" and actually believe they form naturally, even virtually, and we should be looking how to take advanta

I'd go one step further. I have done research on "silos" and actually believe they form naturally, even virtually, and we should be looking how to take advantage of the natural tendencies and make them more effective rather than eradicate them because it sounds like a good thing to do. I'm not saying a return to pure tribalism here, but I am saying maybe realistic acknowledgement of tendencies and how to make those more effective/efficient and less problematic might be a good idea. In other words, turn a negative into a positive. Work with the tendencies with incremental improvement. There's another way of thinking about silos - call them organizational boundaries - and observe a complete shift in thought on the topic. Some might call this heretical thinking.

clcaev 5y ago
Boundaries, especially explicit ones with clear contracts, are healthy and enable innovation (via refactoring, automation, efficient onboarding, quality control). In the organizational recesses, hiding within unaccountable reporting, away from healthy boundaries, is where sociopaths grow most influential.
- sixdimensional 5y ago
  I think you bring up a good point. I do believe that, especially at large scale organizations with many suborganizations, the situation you describe can occur even more frequently. At the end of the day, we are all surrounded by different scales of organization, whether it be a small family unit, formal and informal networks, societal organizations and institutions, businesses, etc. There has to be a balance, because many organizations want flexibility, "democracy", the ability to change direction quickly, autonomy in suborganizations, etc. Yet, this must be balanced with the need for some kind of order against pure chaos or harmful organization actors (for instance). This implies some kind of governance, some kind of "ground rules" if you were, for things to function and be reasonably effective/efficient. I think this is where organizational culture truly matters. I do think culture can be encouraged, and norms and behaviors modeled, and sometimes even formally enforced, but ultimately the net governance that emerges at scale is a sum of the parts (i.e. the whole is greater). I do not know if, at the kind of organizational scale I'm talking about (many thousands of people or more), it is possible to govern everything with absolute precision and control. Rather, at scale, one can only model the desired outcomes, norms and behaviors, and/or set policy. Utimately what the organization is - all its boundaries and suborganizations and networks all the way up and down the scale of an organization - is determined by the sum of those who participate and represent the organization. It does leave holes where those with personal agendas or sociopathic tendencies (for example) may take hold. By all this, I mean to say that, I do not believe it is just in recesses where sociopaths grow most influential. I believe they grow wherever their influence has meaning and they have power/control. The only thing that can protect organizations against such behavior ultimately is the collective will of the members of the organization, at all levels of scale. The culture, and members of the organization are the ultimate tool for protecting the organization against such threats. Even with laws or policies, everything depends on enforcement. Enforcement also depends on culture, in addition to power and control. I believe though, that in the long run, everything depends on what culture allows, and only culture can stop sociopaths from being ultimately successful and protect organizations from such threats.

clcaev 5y ago

Boundaries, especially explicit ones with clear contracts, are healthy and enable innovation (via refactoring, automation, efficient onboarding, quality control). In the organizational recesses, hiding within unaccountable reporting, away from healthy boundaries, is where sociopaths grow most influential.

sixdimensional 5y ago
I think you bring up a good point. I do believe that, especially at large scale organizations with many suborganizations, the situation you describe can occur even more frequently. At the end of the day, we are all surrounded by different scales of organization, whether it be a small family unit, formal and informal networks, societal organizations and institutions, businesses, etc. There has to be a balance, because many organizations want flexibility, "democracy", the ability to change direction quickly, autonomy in suborganizations, etc. Yet, this must be balanced with the need for some kind of order against pure chaos or harmful organization actors (for instance). This implies some kind of governance, some kind of "ground rules" if you were, for things to function and be reasonably effective/efficient. I think this is where organizational culture truly matters. I do think culture can be encouraged, and norms and behaviors modeled, and sometimes even formally enforced, but ultimately the net governance that emerges at scale is a sum of the parts (i.e. the whole is greater). I do not know if, at the kind of organizational scale I'm talking about (many thousands of people or more), it is possible to govern everything with absolute precision and control. Rather, at scale, one can only model the desired outcomes, norms and behaviors, and/or set policy. Utimately what the organization is - all its boundaries and suborganizations and networks all the way up and down the scale of an organization - is determined by the sum of those who participate and represent the organization. It does leave holes where those with personal agendas or sociopathic tendencies (for example) may take hold. By all this, I mean to say that, I do not believe it is just in recesses where sociopaths grow most influential. I believe they grow wherever their influence has meaning and they have power/control. The only thing that can protect organizations against such behavior ultimately is the collective will of the members of the organization, at all levels of scale. The culture, and members of the organization are the ultimate tool for protecting the organization against such threats. Even with laws or policies, everything depends on enforcement. Enforcement also depends on culture, in addition to power and control. I believe though, that in the long run, everything depends on what culture allows, and only culture can stop sociopaths from being ultimately successful and protect organizations from such threats.