3 ms·
Yeah. It's essentially creating a power vacuum. People don't work without structure, ad hoc structures develop. The conjecture is that this is a good thing,
by zeidrich 11y ago
Yeah. It's essentially creating a power vacuum.
People don't work without structure, ad hoc structures develop. The conjecture is that this is a good thing, that these ad hoc structures are more natural, and you will have natural leaders take lead where appropriate and this will be more effective.
But the issue is structure deals with quirks in human behavior. It deals with the emotional side of it, it deals with the cliquish, tribal nature of our default social behavior. You can put a highly productive, less social person into a position, give him a set of tasks to do, evaluate him fairly and see him produce. In doing this, you need an objective manager, you need a fair structure, and it works.
Without those things, the less social, highly productive person is easily sidelined. The person who takes leadership isn't given that position, they don't lead because they have been shown that they can motivate people to do great things, because nobody gives them that position. The people who get into leadership positions are those people who can convince other people to work with them on a personal level instead of on an organizational level. The really smart, less social person doesn't even get brought in to participate, and little power struggles happen between factions of people who want to be the person who directs the project, despite the fact that none of the people looking to do it might even be very good at doing it at all.
The real problem with traditional management structures is that it often breaks down to this sort of system to start with. Where the people building the systems aren't very good at it, and where they invite their buddies to be management because management pays the best, and they want to help their buddies out. It's because you have poor systems, and because you have the wrong people managing.
The issue with this is that rather than potentially falling short and missing the mark, they start with the worst of it.
- calinet6 11y ago> The real problem with traditional management structures is that it often breaks down to this sort of system to start with. This is exactly right. The traditional organization already falls prey to politics and games due to lack of good structure, not due to the idea of structure itself. You will get a system regardless of whether you intentionally create one or not. It's far better to get the one you intend and can develop, than an uncontrollable chaos.