Organizational Network Alignment Kent Myers, PhD Science Applications International Corp.
-
Upload
alec-crossley -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of Organizational Network Alignment Kent Myers, PhD Science Applications International Corp.
Organizational Network Alignment
Kent Myers, PhDScience Applications International Corp.
Slack Robust
Weak Brittle
Potential
High
Low
PerformanceLow HighAligned
AlertAgile
Adaptive
DirectedAlertAgile
Adaptive
PEOPLE
FORMAL ORGANIZATION
CULTURE
CRITICAL TASKS
STRATEGY
ENVIRONMENT
1
2a
2b
3
4
5
6
7 8
0
Others(influence)
Wholes(appreciation)
Self(control)
Three reflections
Unpacking the Network Link: Sub-Links
• 0t – Accurate perception of and support for other’s intention
• 1t – Effective incorporation of partner role and transactions
(repeat for each network pair)
Strategy
Critical tasksA
Str
ateg
y
Crit
ical
tas
ks
B
0t1t
Role Forces
Change Forces
Moving
Toward
Moving
Away
Lagging
Leading
A partner’s state
Three classes of expectations define: - a containment region for an organization- a position of maximum alignment
Local roleGlobal role
Local change
Global change
Contribution
Relationship
Interaction Forces
The network’s state
Unpacking the Network Link: Forces
Am I aligning with B?
Am I aligning with A?
Am I aligning with the
network?
Am I aligning with the
network?
Do I think B is aligning with me?
Do I think A is aligning with me?
A B
Is the relationship
aligned?
Measuring the Network Link: Questions
Measuring the Network Relationship: Indexes
ContributionIndex
NodeIndex
NetworkIndex
RelationshipIndex
PositionalIndex
ChangeIndex
Reputation in network
Overall score forthe network
Overall score for one organization
Capacity & motivation for change
Achievement level (in view of each partner)
Effort level (each partner views other and self)
• Appropriate tension, not ‘maximum’ alignment
• Non-discrepant viewpoints of situation
• Weakness not concentrated in a factor
• Weakness not excessive in an indicator
• Alignment seeking
• Better on weighted factors
Measuring the Network Relationship: Criteria
Org
aniz
atio
n E
xecu
tive
Gro
up
Org
aniz
atio
n S
take
hold
ers
Sur
vey
and
Inte
rvie
w S
taff
Con
sulti
ng S
taff
Nav
y P
roje
ct
Lead
ersh
ip
Issue schedule and expectations
Acknowledge & grant sanction
Introduce project &
obtain sanction
Issue survey invitation &
link
Complete survey
Schedule supplemental
interviews
Grant Interview
Gather data
Prepare hypotheses and models
Participate in issues
workshop
Prepare recommendations
& grounded models
Arrive at decision package
Incorporate results
Tasker
Compendium
DiscussionQuestions
Context & Valuation
ConsultantConclusions
Action Memo
Sensing Interpretation Decision
A Network Alignment Assessment Project
NAVSEA
NAVMAC
NAVSUP
NAVAIR
SPAWAR
Logistics
Manning
Training
Maint.
Support Nodes
CNSF Pillars
Ships
OPNAV
BUPERS
A Surface Enterprise domain,recast as 6 nodes of an organizational network
Factors Relationship
(interpretation & indicators) Node Contribution (interpretation & indicators)
The relationship is orderly and governed.
A is responsible and ordered. Directed
There is mutual understanding of how our relationship is managed. (j4)
There are people in charge on both sides who can govern the relationship and solve problems. (j5)
Neither party attempts to perform work that the other should be performing. (j6)
A's contribution to the relationship with my organization is of good quality. (p1)
A doesn't neglect its part of the work or leave it unfinished. (p2)
A seldom disrupts work processes, beyond what may be necessary. (p3)
A doesn't impose excessive bureaucracy or supervision. (p4)
Both parties are aware of what is going on and what to do.
A is aware of self, others, shared situations. Alert
The two parties have a common operating picture of the domain. (j1)
Both parties agree on facts and status concerning shared work. (j2)
The necessary expertise exists on both sides. (j3)
A clearly understands its obligations to the relationship. (p5)
A appears to be encouraged and rewarded for working well with my organization. (p6)
A keeps us informed; they rarely create surprises and misunderstandings. (p8)
A understands our perspective on situations. (p9)
Factors Relationship
(interpretation & indicators) Node Contribution (interpretation & indicators)
In the normal course of business, both parties adjust to each other and to the shared situation.
A responds when needed. Agile
Neither party neglects or avoids tasks that are important to the shared effort. (j7)
Both parties resolve disagreements and misunderstandings before they become chronic or repetitive. (j8)
Individuals form the two organizations know each other and have developed trust. (j9)
A values our opinions about their performance. (p10)
A takes initiative when needed; we don't have to push them. (p11)
When A makes a mistake, I am confident in their ability to fix it. (p12)
A is able to make ad hoc adjustments when needed or requested. (p13)
Successful change and innovation occurs within shared areas of responsibility.
A changes as needed. Adaptive
The relationship between the two organizations changes over time and is not stuck in ways that no longer make sense. (j10)
Both parties learn and create new opportunities by participating in this relationship. (j11)
A has adapted over time in ways the benefit us and keep pace with our own changes. (p14)
When A initiates changes that affect us, they keep us informed and work with us to adjust. (p15)
Web survey
Likert Scale Questions
Free text responses
Interview strategiesSTART WITH PERSONAL EXPERIENCES OF SUCCESS Often, nobody has ever asked. Establishes an open, creative, participative posture. Examples:- When have you felt most energized in your role, here or elsewhere? - What is the most significant change, innovation, or transition you were a part of.- What relationships or project teams have worked especially well together, in terms of serving,
adapting well, leading others in needed change.
WHAT’S WORKING TODAY Ask about strengths; they will supply the constraintsConsider what somebody else said that you are genuinely uncertain aboutAsk about what they know, and you can often connect it back to broader alignment issuesFocus on cycles, evolutions, innovations they can discuss in the form of a storyOld timers have useful perspectives on larger external factors
POSITIVE POSSIBILITIES Examples:- What are the major opportunities.- Assume you have transformed in a way that makes sense, and tell the story- If you could change your network in any way three ways, what do you do, what’s the impact.
Shore's View Ship's View Ship contribution Relationship Relationship Shore contribution Agree? Indicator Factor Indicator Factor Factor Indicator Factor Indicator Agree?
Directed x 4.0 3.60 3.7 3.67 3.43 3.1 managed 3.33 3.7 quality
3.5 3.7 3.9 people to govern 3.5 no neglect
3.4 3.6 3.3 poaching 3.1 no disruption
3.5 3.0 no bureaucracy
Alert 3.6 3.43 3.7 3.70 3.07 2.8 common picture 3.13 3.2 obligations
↓ 3.5 3.6 2.9 agree on facts 2.9 encouraged
3.2 3.8 3.5 expertise 3.4 keeps us informed
3.4 3.0 understands us
Agile 3.6 3.65 3.6 3.63 3.40 3.5 no neglect 3.10 2.9 value feeback
3.4 3.7 3.4 resolve disputes 2.9 has initiative
3.8 3.6 3.3 trusted persons 3.3 fixes mistakes
3.8 3.3 ↓ adjusts
Adaptive 3.6 3.60 3.6 3.65 3.20 3.3 not stuck 3.30 3.3 paces with us
3.6 3.7 3.1 learn 3.3 helps us change
Relation-to-the-whole indexes
DRAFT
Leading
Disengaged
Leading
( Enterprise Position Index)
( Change Index)
Lagging Lagging
DisengagedEngaged Engaged
Shore Ship
Directed
Delivery works
Alert Unrewarded network contribution
Uncertain awareness of intent
Poor situational awareness
Agile
Lack of initiative
Fix after the fact
Adaptive
Complacency about options
7 conclusions located in ‘alignment space’Network Relationship Nodeas a whole pairs alone
Conclusion #4: Good network behavior is unrewarded
Data
Implications
Factor: Alert Extent: CommunityFactor: Alert Extent: Community
• The network needs to change the way its participants are evaluated and rewarded. Shift from inward emphasis to an emphasis on balance with outward Enterprise interests.
• No-cost incentives are an under-utilized lever for implementing any change
• All of Shore’s partners scored the Encouragement/Reward item lower, some their lowest item (2.9). Shore’s self-assessment is consistent, though not strongly so.
• A telling story: “Nobody asked me to it or gives me any credit for it, but I guess that I am spending time to educate people in other organizations on how the system works.”
• Shore may be complacent in advancing its Enterprise relationships:– Fewer Shore respondents are interested in improving their
relationships, compared to the other partners (50% compared with 70%– Only 50% (including Shore) would reconstitute Shore as is if it were
eliminated
#1: Help staff learn how manning roles and processes interact and where there is tension
- Establish a working group under training leadership - Name processes associated with nodes; specify intersections
only- Overlay basic four budgetary processes and schedules- Develop role profiles, external distractors, remaining game
elements- Identify instances of misunderstanding, disagreement, surprise,
and ignorance that are often experienced by newcomers- Devise scenarios for use in tabletop simulation- Pilot tabletop simulation with 1-year staff and revise scenarios- Rerun for newcomers- Revise as single-user interactive simulation, also text version with
some reference materials (suitable for inclusion in start-up pack)
- Invite comments concerning improvements and updates
Resources: Part time work group, expert assistance for simulation training
Timing: 4 mo initial development, use as module in new course, create single user version after revision
• A memorable, compact experience of network interaction that accelerates job learning• Understand sources of conflict, including different motivations, roles, criteria,
schedules• Greater readiness to cooperate with other nodes and to change together
Action s Resources, Timing
Outcomes / Benefits
Some personal findings
• The network perspective is a distinctively different -- and increasingly important -- way to look at organizations
• Organizational potential is crucial, yet it is rarely isolated from performance or managed comprehensively
• Government and military organizations may have thought about it early this time, but commercial organizations are on the move.
back up
Labovitz Model
PROCESSES
PEOPLE
CUSTOMERS
STRATEGY
Culture?
Leadership?
“Main Thing”?
External Environment?
Tushman & O’Reilly Model
PEOPLE
FORMAL ORGANIZATION
CULTURE
CRITICAL TASKS
Environment
Strategy
Enterprise Position IndexRecognition as a player within the enterprise community.
Component Factor
Description
Domain Leadership
Whether considered advanced or lagging as a player in the domain community
Enterprise Leadership
Whether considered advanced or lagging as a player in the broader enterprise community
Maintenance of Relationships
Tendency to be proactive in tending to relationships
Priority of Relationships
Tendency to place relationships above requirements
Change IndexCapability and readiness for change in network relationships.
Component Factor
Description
Accommodation Mutual adjustment
Learning Mutual innovation and updating
Responsiveness Individual attentiveness and adjustment
Evolution Individual updating and leadership
Redesign Orientation
Willingness and interest in modifying relationships, to be either more or less complex
Node IndexExtent to which the node tends to be a successful player within its primary network.
Component Index Description
Self assessment of relationships
Our expectation of success with ongoing transactions under changing conditions
Partners’ assessment of relationships
Partner’s expectation of success with ongoing transactions under changing conditions
Self assessment of our contributions
In our judgment, the extent to which our organization increases the likelihood of successful ongoing transactions
Partner’s assessment of our contributions
In the judgment of our partners, the extent to which our organization increases the likelihood of successful ongoing transactions
Enterprise Standing Recognition as an important player within the enterprise community
Network Index
Network has well aligned partners, relative to other networks.
Component Factor Description
Average Node Index for Facilitators
Highly connected
Average Node Index for Regulators
Highly influential
Average Node Index for End Nodes
Less connected