Management discipline offers a myriad of ways to deal with problems within an organization. A keen manager will attest that not all problems are unique, and there exist repeating patterns in business, termed archetypes. A systems approach to problem-solving renders most workers inept at perceiving these patterns, which, if correctly addressed, simplify seemingly complex management problems. My organization experiences two common archetypes: limits to growth and shifting the burden, which can halt by recognizing the reinforcing circle of growth in the former and delivering a fundamental response to the latter.
The foremost archetype my organization suffers from is limited to growth. Senge frames this generic pattern as the plateau experienced in a business when attempting to instill growth rather than eliminating the factors that hinder it (2006). Managers tend to reinforce the improvement process, which initially yields positive results, but gradually deteriorates in performance. Additionally, my organization suffers from shift-the-burden structures which have severed the manager-employee relationship. Specifically, the pattern is attributed to companies that exert efforts to solve symptomatic problems rather than addressing the core problem (Senge, 2006). This failure to recognize the pattern generates well-intended solutions, creating a reinforcing circle that only births periodic crises.
My company largely deals with aircraft equipment maintenance, specifically avionics instruments within the cockpit. The chief engineer recently introduced a policy that requires workers to clock into work an hour early on weekdays and dedicate twelve hours on-site over the weekend. The format initially yielded results and caused an uptick in equipment turnover and improved client feedback. Nonetheless, after a month, the quality of work deteriorated and adversely impacted employee retention since workers applied to rival companies. Fiscal results from the mid-year report fueled the manager to institute an even harsher policy minimizing employee holiday periods, which eventually led to company closure.
Shift-the-burden structures are a familiar concept in my avionics company. The presence of an overbearing lead engineer has led to a catastrophic lack of skills transfer within the company. In demonstrating utter lack in the hired interns, the avionics engineer prefers to calibrate instruments personally and oversees the equipment room personally. Thus, the senior members cannot share their experience with recent hires, which created a skills vacuum upon the retirement of two lead technicians. Despite the chief engineer’s intervention and offer of his expertise, his eventual help led to a staff crisis since the company could not handle technical tasks from local clients.
One solution that would potentially address the limits of growth patterns resides in applying energy equal to the results the company produces. After realizing the amplifying process, a keen manager should anticipate good results at the beginning that correspond to the level of input. However, amplified efforts should not match the deteriorating results, instead, the manager should find other strategies that might boost performance (Senge, 2006). This solution was hard to implement in my company because the manager did not attempt any other strategies and increasingly kept directing his efforts into making people work more hours.
Regarding shift-the-burden structures, a fundamental response is the most effective approach. Instead of focusing the company’s energies on addressing the symptomatic results through palliative solutions, a keen manager will address the core management issue (Senge, 2006). Implementing this solution in my organization proved difficult because management insisted on treating newly hired workers with suspicion rather than promoting a skill-sharing culture. Accepting the diminished level of experience from new workers will help the chief engineer pair each with an experienced technician, thus ensuring the company remains profitable.
In conclusion, organizational structures have repeating patterns that yield experienced workers. Recognizing and addressing these patterns breaks down complex management problems into manageable tasks. Two archetypes my organization has dealt with are a constant shifting of burden between management and workers and limits to the overall company growth. To achieve leverage, workers need a systemic approach to problem-solving that addresses the core problems and breaks down any amplifying circles of improvement.
Reference
Senge, P. M. (2006). Nature’s Templates: Identifying the Patterns. In The fifth discipline (1st ed., Vol. 1, pp. 92–112). Essay, Random House Business.