Archive Page 3

Power Distance

Published August 12, 2008 Power Leave a Comment
Tags:

 

“The attempt to combine wisdom and power has only rarely been successful and then only for a short while.” –Albert Einstein

Let’s talk about power.

Each of us has power.  We have it in our jobs, our communities, our families, and even in our social networks.  The reality, though, is that some individuals have a large amount of power as a result of their position in an organization or a group.  The extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organizations expect and accept that power is distributed unequally is called Power Distance. 

In some cultures, such as Austria, Canada, and New Zealand, Power Distance is small, meaning that the cultural expectation is that issues are resolved and policies are implemented in a more consultative collaborative manner.  Significantly less attention is paid to hierarchical positions or titles in societies with small power distances.

Conversely, some societies are very autocratic and have a large power distance.  Simply, this means that those individuals in subordinate roles have accepted the fact that others above them in position or stature have a great deal of power over their lives.  They typically neither expect or demand that their opinions be heard prior to the making of a decision.

Organizations and Corporations can be classified using the same criteria.  For example, the Military is a good example of an organization with a large power distance.  A General has significant control over the actions of a Private, and the Private recognizes it.  On the other side of the spectrum, a church group might have a smaller power distance with senior members of the church often looking to the overall membership and the approval of key influential individuals outside of the leadership group to accomplish certain initiatives. 

Power distance is another part of the organizational culture and one that is not often considered.  Individuals who go into a small power distance culture and assume an autocratic, directive style will quickly find themselves struggling to keep above water.  They will be viewed as uncooperative and difficult by a relationship-centric group.  Similarly, a manager who fails to recognize a large power distance culture, may be perceived as weak and lacking the leadership to be successful. 

Gerard Hofstede writes about these types of issues in several of his books Culture’s Consequences and Cultures and Organizations. 

Consider your own organization.  Is is a small or large power distance culture?  What approaches might be successful?  What might be counter-productive?

Next time we’ll talk about informal and formal power.  In the meantime, I’d love to hear your thoughts on the topic.

Uncertainty Also Comes From Change

Published August 1, 2008 change Leave a Comment

 

 

In his book On Becoming a Leader, Warren Bennis cites Kurt Lewin on change (Bennis, 2003).  Lewin is actually considered by many as the father of social psychology and one of the initial voices in what is now commonly referred to as Organizational Development (OD) (Greathouse, 1997).  The quote cited by Bennis reads, “If you want to truly understand something, try to change it” (p. 133).  This quote is particularly poignant when one considers what exactly Lewin is saying. 

 

Change often makes people uncomfortable.  It requires individuals to adjust to a new environment, a new process, a new paradigm, or even a new leader.  The new change may even necessitate an individual or group to behave in a different manner than was previously the case.  What is critical to understand is that in order to effectively manage change, a leader must understand what the current state is and what the desired outcomes are.  More importantly, a leader must understand the degree to which the proposed changes will impact an operation or group.  For example, a change in a computer system may be a logical decision.  The current system may be antiquated or even unsupported by the manufacturer.  From a pure business standpoint, the change to a new and different system makes absolute sense.  What oftentimes is forgotten is the degree to which individuals and groups will be impacted by the change.  A new system will require additional training for the employees.  In addition, to make the change there will need to be a detailed analysis of all the capabilities of the current system and the degree to which a new system will impact those functions and processes.  Will the end user or customer be impacted by the change?  How does the employee currently interact with the system?  What downtime will a system change cause for the customer?  These are just a few examples of the questions that needs to be fully considered and understood prior to the change.  What started as a simple logical business decision could impact individual’s careers, the number of employees necessary to complete a specific process, and even the consumer’s perception of the organization. 

 

Consider a smaller example as well.  A computer system is a large change, however even something as common as a change of a team or department leader must be considered thoroughly.  For example, the loyalty of the team to the current leader, the perception of the new leader, the loss of the knowledge and experience of the leader, and the processes implemented by the leader all must be understood.  A high performing team that loses a key leader, even under positive circumstances suffers a significant and sometimes irreversible loss. 

 

Regardless of what is being changed, once a change takes effect, it often acts in a domino effect impacting many areas.  To fully mitigate the risk associated with change, it is incumbent upon leaders to fully understand the current state of what is actually being changed.  Even with the most detailed of analysis, unintended outcomes will surface that further expand the scope of the change.  This is the reality that Lewin was communicating in his simple yet profound statement.

 

 

References

 

Bennis, W. (2003).  On becoming a leader. New York: Basic Books

 

Greathouse, J (1997).  Kurt lewin. Retrieved July 31, 2008 from http://www.muskingum.edu/~psych/psycweb/history/lewin.htm

Uncertainty Avoidance

Published July 29, 2008 change 2 Comments

So let’s talk about uncertainty.

 

Not every culture has a high degree of tolerance for uncertainty.  Consider American culture and the degree to which we rely on Day Planners, Outlook, Blackberry, and other similar instruments all in an effort to structure our day.

 

By the way…I’m an Outlook guy.

 

Anyhow, in many cultures this is is far from the case.  The idea of planning out every moment of one’s life is an absurd notion in a number of cultures around the world. 

 

Essentially, Uncertainty Avoidance is the degree to which a society or culture establishes norms, processes and rituals to avoid uncertainty (Northouse 2007).  Similarly, this exists in organizational culture as well.  Think about Six Sigma as an example of a way an organization implements a process to avoid having an out desirable outcome.   Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) are yet another

 

Consider your own organization.  To what degree is uncertainty a part of the culture?  What measures are in place to avoid an unexpected outcome?  How does this define the culture?

 

All questions to think about in identifying what is important in your organization.

 

Reference

Northhouse, P.G. (2007). Leadership: theory and practice.  Thousand Oaks California: Sage Publications

 

 

Randy Pausch author of Last Lecture passes away today

Published July 25, 2008 Informative Leave a Comment
Randy Pausch

Randy Pausch

Randy Pausch, the Carnegie Mellon University computer scientist whose “last lecture” about facing terminal cancer became an Internet sensation and a best-selling book, died Friday. He was 47.

Pausch died at his home in Virginia, university spokeswoman Anne Watzman said. Pausch and his family moved there last fall to be closer to his wife’s relatives.

Pausch was diagnosed with incurable pancreatic cancer in September 2006. His popular last lecture at Carnegie Mellon in September 2007 garnered international attention and was viewed by millions on the Internet.

In it, Pausch celebrated living the life he had always dreamed of instead of concentrating on impending death.

“The lecture was for my kids, but if others are finding value in it, that is wonderful,” Pausch wrote on his Web site. “But rest assured; I’m hardly unique.”

I have attached a copy of the the transcript of the actual “Last Lecture” for you to download.  The book and the lecture which speak to living your dreams are very profound.

last-lecture

Understanding Organizational Culture

Published July 25, 2008 Culture 1 Comment
Organizational culture can be confusing

Organizational culture can be confusing

I find culture incredibly fascinating.  Whether we talk about geographical cultural differences or organizational cultural differences, the norms, values and rituals of a specific group has a significant impact on the people within.

But what exactly is culture?

Very early in my career a leader once said to me, “Our culture is Six-Sigma.”   Hmmm.

So what exactly is culture?  There are a number of definitions for it, however, the one I like the most comes from Peter Northouse in his book Leadership: Theory and Practice.  Northouse’s definition is that culture is “the learned beliefs, values, rules, norms, symbols, and traditions that are common to a group of people” (Northouse, 2007).  He further goes on to state that culture is shared, dynamic and transmitted to others (Northouse, 2007).

In short, culture is a way of life for a group…or an organization.

A definition is helpful, however, it doesn’t answer the question “What does it look like.”  Here is where Northouse really begins to drill down.  Culture is comprised of nine very distinct dimensions:

Term

Definition

Uncertainty Avoidance

Degree to which a society or culture establishes norms, processes and rituals to avoid uncertainty.

Power Distance

Degree to which members agree that power should be shared unequally.

Institutional Collectivism

Degree to which a an organization encourages or supports collective action.

In Group Collectivism

Degree to which the people within an organization or society expresses loyalty and pride within the organization.

Gender Egalitarianism

Degree to which an organization minimizes gender role differences and promotes gender equality.

Assertiveness

Degree to which aggressive behavior is supported

Future Orientation

Degree to which the group or organization plans for the future

Performance Orientation

Degree to which an organization encourages and rewards improved performance.

Humane Orientation

Degree to which a culture rewards and encourages treating people fairly and with dignity and respect

(Northouse, 2007)

So…is Six Sigma a culture?  No…at least when you look at it through the dimensions.  It may be a tool, process or system.  It may even be a part of the culture, but it is not the culture itself.  

We’ll talk about the dimensions more in subsequent posts.  In the meantime, look at culture through this new lens. 

Reference

Northhouse, P.G. (2007). Leadership: theory and practice.  Thousand Oaks California: Sage Publications

« Previous Page — Next Page »

 

July 2010
S M T W T F S
« Apr    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Blog Stats

  • 8,342 hits

Interesting Quote

Justice consists not in being neutral between right and wrong, but in finding out the right and upholding it, wherever found, against the wrong. --Theodore Roosevelt