|
Peter Cochrane's Hard Drive 1999 Reorganising non-stop EVEN in the heyday of ancient Rome, people working in large organisations recorded their frustration at the apparently unnecessary need to keep reorganising. Today, reorganisation appears to be endemic and almost continuous. If a modern company or institution is not reorganising it is almost certain that it has recently completed the process, or more likely, is contemplating doing it again. What is happening? In any dynamic system with very low communication and decision delays, the natural mode is chaotic and volatile. As a result, management teams find themselves continually trying to cope with problems on the scale of sudden tidal waves. But no amount of reshaping along traditional lines will cure the problems. The old and well-established ways of organising and working will only service a problematic mode for a short period, then the same, or very similar, problems will return with a vengeance. In a nutshell, this is epitomised by a general formula that sees the Mean Time Between Decisions >> Mean Time Between Surprises. In this space we see large organisations forming committees, study groups, and calling in the consultants while some small start-up eats their lunch. They just cannot get organised fast enough to react in time, and it is the corporate glue of layered bureaucracy that gums up the works. In its worst manifestation, and depending on the technology acceleration scale of the sector and the organisation, we find another general formula at work, with the Mean Time Between Managers >> or = or << Mean Time Between Reorganisations. What is not generally recognised is the futility of reorganising on the basis of past management practices and structures. Any relief from chaotic and rapid change will, at best, be fleeting, and the cycle of stressful reorganisation will have to be repeated continuously. But as has been observed since ancient times, this is a wonderful mechanism for demoralising a workforce. And it is all down to the speed of bits. The faster we communicate, the faster we can manufacture and produce goods and services, create and destroy markets and change society. Today we are witnessing an accelerating rate of change in our commerce and society that is lagging behind the actual change possible with the technology available. IT is dragging us in its wake, and unless we strive to understand and accept the implications we will continue to stumble and stagger from one expensive reorganisation to the next. In an era of rapid change, the biggest threat is those who fail to understand and adapt. If individual managers and decision-makers fail to grasp the implications of IT and the new habits and practices invoked by rapid communication, they automatically become a liability. In past societies, when change was much slower, such people might have been seen as old and wise. But those times have long gone, and such people will have to be by-passed for the greater good. The good news is, it will all happen automatically and by the hand of the technological dissenters themselves. Their own inaction will ultimately see them frozen out. The only question is: how much damage will they inflict in the intervening period? Peter Cochrane holds the Collier Chair for the Public Understanding of Science & Technology at the University of Bristol. His home page is: |
Telegraph Group Limited endeavours to ensure that the information is correct but does not accept any liability for error or omission.
Users are permitted to copy some material for their personal use, but may not republish any substantial part of the data either on another website or as part of any commercial service without the prior written permission of Telegraph Group Limited.