3 ms·

> Much as we might like to think of organizations as rational machines - the reality is that companies are social organizations and people interacting with peop

> Much as we might like to think of organizations as rational machines - the reality is that companies are social organizations and people interacting with people is the way decisions are made and how work gets done. My experience is largely opposite to this. I agree that we usually need to coordinate to take action in modern organizations, but this coordination is often a formality tacked onto the more meaningful individual work that preceded it. 1. Important decisions aren't made in a meeting unless at least one person has thought through the options beforehand and come prepared to explain the pros and cons of each and why their recommendation makes sense. 2. Work doesn't get done in a meeting unless prerequisite individual work was done beforehand. There has to be some thing to discuss in the meeting. An individual has to prepare that thing. Decisions can be made and work done with short, few, and informal meetings, but not without serious individual preparation and production.

steve1977 3y ago
I would agree with this. Most of the work gets done between interactions of people, not during those interactions.
bowsamic 3y ago
That is what they're saying. Your individual work is placed relative to the social organisation and the interactions therein. That isn't the complete opposite, it's the same thing. Have you ever tried working in a job where your boss just ignores you, no one cares what you do, and you're just getting paid anyway? Obviously, some people are intrinsically extremely motivated even with no contact for years, but many people, probably most, without any social organisation or interactions, will not manage to work, even if they want to. Even just the threat of not having anything done by the next meeting is a huge part of the "social organisations and people interacting with people" that "gets work done"
- civilized 3y ago
  It's too vague to know what it's saying. Much like the common experience of an hour long meeting that no one prepared for that doesn't go anywhere. I agree that your interpretation has some truth though.
groby_b 3y ago
> Important decisions aren't made in a meeting unless at least one person has thought through the options beforehand and come prepared to explain the pros and cons of each and why their recommendation makes sense. Uh, yes. If people do not come prepared to meetings, they are a giant waste of time. (Exception - pure "information radiator" meetings) Meetings are the point where you align different well-founded opinions, not where you find a solution. But that alignment is critical to getting work done efficiently. But note that OP didn't talk about meetings per se, just about people interacting. And in any group of people, the ultimate outcome in terms of work is always driven by interactions. If you don't collaborate, you can't build at group scope. How you collaborate depends on the group. Some groups have shared chat rooms. Some have meeting. Some angrily yell at each other. But it always shapes the work, and moves it in a defined direction. A group without social interaction is the work equivalent of Brownian motion.
- civilized 3y ago
  The OP says social interaction is "how work gets done". This is misleading unless we also add "and individual work is also how work gets done, in some ways to a much greater degree". If I were to say "individual heads-down focus is how work gets done" I would be rightly criticized, even though this is somewhat closer to the truth than what the OP says.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

steve1977 3y ago

I would agree with this. Most of the work gets done between interactions of people, not during those interactions.

bowsamic 3y ago

That is what they're saying. Your individual work is placed relative to the social organisation and the interactions therein. That isn't the complete opposite, it's the same thing. Have you ever tried working in a job where your boss just ignores you, no one cares what you do, and you're just getting paid anyway? Obviously, some people are intrinsically extremely motivated even with no contact for years, but many people, probably most, without any social organisation or interactions, will not manage to work, even if they want to. Even just the threat of not having anything done by the next meeting is a huge part of the "social organisations and people interacting with people" that "gets work done"

civilized 3y ago
It's too vague to know what it's saying. Much like the common experience of an hour long meeting that no one prepared for that doesn't go anywhere. I agree that your interpretation has some truth though.

groby_b 3y ago

> Important decisions aren't made in a meeting unless at least one person has thought through the options beforehand and come prepared to explain the pros and cons of each and why their recommendation makes sense. Uh, yes. If people do not come prepared to meetings, they are a giant waste of time. (Exception - pure "information radiator" meetings) Meetings are the point where you align different well-founded opinions, not where you find a solution. But that alignment is critical to getting work done efficiently. But note that OP didn't talk about meetings per se, just about people interacting. And in any group of people, the ultimate outcome in terms of work is always driven by interactions. If you don't collaborate, you can't build at group scope. How you collaborate depends on the group. Some groups have shared chat rooms. Some have meeting. Some angrily yell at each other. But it always shapes the work, and moves it in a defined direction. A group without social interaction is the work equivalent of Brownian motion.

civilized 3y ago
The OP says social interaction is "how work gets done". This is misleading unless we also add "and individual work is also how work gets done, in some ways to a much greater degree". If I were to say "individual heads-down focus is how work gets done" I would be rightly criticized, even though this is somewhat closer to the truth than what the OP says.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]