Use graphic metaphors to communicate organizational change

Communication World, Dec, 1996 by Edward J. Cripe

You are the CEO or general manager of a major company, division or department. Something is not the way you want it to be, but you're not sure what the problem is. Financial results are OK, but you know they can be better. You are well-read, regularly scanning numerous business periodicals, newspapers and books. You know the latest theories, fads and practices of the so called "best" companies. You have used a number of bright consultants with a fair degree of success. You know that for starters you and your communication management team need to get a clearer picture of where you want to take your company and then get all of your employees to see and commit to your "picture."

So where do you start? Selecting a sound theoretical model or framework for organizational improvement that can be used throughout the entire process is a logical first step. An equally important, but usually overlooked second step, is to develop a plan and method to ensure employee understanding of the model and process. The key is to find a common sense framework to analyze and improve your organization's performance, and then communicate your plans in an easy-to-understand format. Creating a graphical metaphor that your entire team can relate to helps the team "see" your vision of what you want for your organization.

Assessment of the Organization's Systems

A basic organizational improvement model drawn from a number of sources is shown on page 37 (before applying a metaphor.) It views an organization as a system with inputs (Business Requirements) and outputs (Business Results). To identify if a problem exists, and the nature of the problem, you simply examine the "gap" between Business Requirements and Business Results listed at the top of the model. For example, if a corporation expects its operating divisions to produce earnings growth of 10 percent per year and your division increased its earnings by only 2 percent last year, there is an obvious gap.

Business requirements and the environment in which the business operates dictate the strategy that an organization develops. Broadly speaking, the strategy encompasses a number of elements that define the organization's reason for being. Included are the critical steps of clarifying the values, vision and mission of the organization.

Design of various "system" components follows. Embodied in the design process are both human and business elements that form a "sociotechnical" system. This would include such things as selecting and developing people who have the capability to perform the necessary tasks (human) and designing an information system that enables all employees to receive the information needed to do their jobs. Each system component has the potential to affect each of the other components. Therefore, the design of a high performing system requires a lot of patience, perseverance and skill. (Specific design and implementation approaches are discussed in the references cited at the end of this article.)

Strategy elements and system elements help to create or influence the culture of the organization. Essentially, culture is "the way things really operate" within the organization. A more comprehensive description of culture is the shared philosophies, ideologies, values, assumptions, beliefs, expectations, attitudes and norms that knit a community together.

All of these interrelated psychological qualities reveal a group's agreement, implicit or explicit, on how to approach decisions and problems. Culture is manifest in behavioral norms, hidden assumptions and human nature, each occurring at a different level of depth.

Collecting Data

The combination of strategy, systems and culture produce business results (the output). To determine the causes of gaps between actual results and requirements, data must be collected to identify issues that are affecting the organization's performance. The issues then are analyzed as a part of the system's cause-and-effect chain by backtracking through the model. For example, if the assessment process reveals that employees at all levels are confused or unclear about the organization's priorities (part of the culture), the first question to ask is: "What is the effect on business results?" The effect may be mediocre performance in several key areas. If a negative effect cannot be clearly identified, there is no need to devote time and energy to the issue.

Where a negative effect exists, the next question to ask is: Why? Why are employees confused? Going backward into the system, each design element must be assessed. It may be determined that one cause is that while the strategy emphasizes customer service, employees are really rewarded for cost control.

Questions that can be asked at each stage of the design process for any key results area, i.e. service quality, profitability, etc., include the following:

1. Is the result satisfactory?

2. Which cultural values, assumptions and behaviors influence the results?

3. Do decisions reflect knowledge, experience and a bias for action?