I picked up the Complete MBA for Dummies a couple of weeks ago, curious as to whether one could actually get a Complete MBA through reading a 414-page (including the index) book. While I can’t answer that question, I was struck by the first chapter. They said that the thing each organization needs to be prepared for, to expect, to relish, is… (drum roll please)…

The Prospect, the Countenance, the Reality of Change.

It was, to say the least, very confirming.

The truth of it, in these days, with the rapidity of change, the complete turnover of technology (where did the analog system go?), most businesses, non-profits, and everyone else are aware of the need to be prepared for change.

And yet, we still have trouble adjusting for change, building for it, preparing for it. Oh, maybe at the beginning of an organization’s life, when everything is being created, it is easier. Structures are malleable, and people are open. But, as Terry Taylor says…

Nothing Fails Like Success.

Success breeds satisfaction, rigidity. And while we don’t need to imitate Mao with a Cultural Revolution (aka purge) every 10 years, we do need to keep the learning curve fresh for ourselves. Keeping the Learning Curve – essentially, the ability to innovate, fresh is one of the key reasons that so many large organizations have attempted to create smaller entrepreneurial organizations within.

So, how can you design an organization so it is fully ready to surf the wave of change?

How can you ready your people? How can you predict curves and swoops of change, and take advantage of it through strategy and precise action?

The Reconfigurable Organization:

A fantastic book, Designing Dynamic Organizations, suggests the Reconfigurable Organization as a strategy. It says that there are five components to organizational design, and how you handle each of them will directly impact your ability to maneuver change – and have negative consequences if you fail to do so.

The five components of organizational design:

1. Strategy – The strategy for the organization must be integrated into the organizational design. The direction of the company – its goals, its vision, the reality of the economy, environment, and market must all inform how an organization is designed.
2. Structure - The authors refer to the structure as the home, the body of the organization. How functions are organized, and how roles are defined, will have a subtle and not-so-subtle impact on how energy in the organization is channeled, how work is accomplished, and on the focus of the organization.
3. Processes and Lateral Capability - Specialization of function, while it has its obvious strengths, naturally creates boundaries and barriers to collaboration. This can be overcome by looking at the interpersonal communication networks, informal and formal, the technological networks, and by specifically naming integrative roles that, as the authors point out, form the “glue” of the organization.
4. Reward Systems - How people are rewarded signifies how the organization measures success. What types of results and behaviors is the organization looking for? How can it encourage those by what it measures, incentivizes, and discourages?
5. People Practices – Depending on what the organization needs, the skills, competencies, and resources of its people could significantly change. How you are selecting, developing, and what you are giving feedback on should evolve in tandem with the how the organization evolves.

The authors make the point that if any of these pieces do not reflect the organization’s current needs, it could lead to confusion, friction(inability to execute), gridlock (no collaboration), internal competition, and low performance. Any of these problems sound familiar?

Their solution? The Reconfigurable Organization – an organization that by its very design is ready to change and evolve with the organization’s needs; that encourages collaboration and execution. They point out -

If change is constant, why not design the organization to be constantly and quickly changeable?

The Reconfigurable Organization is characterized by…

• Active Leadership
• Knowledge Management
• Learning
• Flexibility
• Integration
• Employee Commitment
• Change Readiness

Designing Dynamic Organizations walks you through the process of organizational re-design, discussing everything from focus groups to the design process. They are thorough, accessible, and really intending the group for leaders and practitioners, pointing out that top leaders and HR Directors will find this very useful. It is the best book I have found on looking at how an organization can be designed to meet the needs of its most fundamental asset – its people.

How Ready for Change is Your Organization?

How you lead is important. In our classes, we define leadership as “The ability to get results while inspiring trust.” Here are two strategies for making your change process yield results while inspiring trust.

1. Be a strong leader. Strength. A word of many interpretations. When I think of strength, I think of the ancient Chinese proverb – the best general is the one who never goes to war. In this change initiative, you must find the way to be insistent, inspiring, passionate, and enthusiastic, and at the same time, keep a balance with listening to others’ perceptions, even if you don’t agree with them.

Sustainability is only achievable with the help of many, and ultimately, with the individual behavior change of every one of your stake holders. You must keep your focus on integrating true sustainability – which means, get ready for the unpredictable impact of letting other people “in” on the process. You must be so good, that like the good general, you need never fight for what you believe, and instead, find ways to attract others to your cause.

Which brings me to my next point.

2. Let yourself – and the process – be influenced. Sustainability is a topic that people can be quite passionate about – whether you are for or against it. It has the aura of “righteousness” about it, and with that comes an almost super-glue strength attachment to one’s position.

I remember the time I got into a discussion with my highly conservative uncle at a family reunion about whether or not global warming existed. 45 minutes later, after the discussion had turned heated (there was a point in which our family were all standing by, ready to leap in to break us apart) we finally found common ground – he thought that straw bale buildings were “pretty cool;” and I conceded that yes, natural cycles of the earth were indeed contributing to global warming. (I couldn’t concede on his other points… but that’s another story.)

Its surprising what you can find if you allow yourself to be open to what the other is saying – even if it is someone who you, on the surface, so fully disagree with.

Next posting, we will continue with strategies for Leading your Change Process.

So, how do we get from the Double to the Triple?

We have to address the “people” part of the equation.

The “People” part is touted to be the hardest part of the equation. It is amorphous, fuzzy – you can see results, but have a hard time measuring them. And many organizations believe that you can’t manage what you can’t measure. But that’s another article.

Working “People” into your sustainability initiative begins with Process.

The most basic way to include People is to do just that – Include People! We talked about how you have to “see” differently in order to do sustainability well. In fact, you must look at the company from the top down, from the bottom up; from the inside out, from the outside in.

To do that, you have to engage your “stakeholders” – those people who hold a stake in the success of the company. This means – your employees. Your vendors. Your customers. Your yet-to-be customers. Your community – where your organization geographically sits. Your industry. Your government. All of those people who will be affected by the change.

So, where do you start?

Joseph McIntyre, who has been working with helping Farmers, Goverment, Activists and the Community work together on large, contentious projects (for example, water in environmentally impacted areas) says that the people who are best able to help start that process come from a surprising place.

Marketing.

Who else works through focus groups? Is constantly searching the news for trends? Is comfortable seeking input, and typically has natural people skills which build rapport? Our marketing folks.

Who else can be helpful in this process? Human Resources. Hired typically for their people skills, for their knowledge of law; hopefully their attunement to relationship can be a big boon in this process.

But really, what you want to do is to get input from the people who matter most. Here’s how your people can help:

- What do they think about sustainability? Do they think it is an important process for the organization to undertake?

- What do they see that could help the organization minimize its impact?

- Who, or what, are the key leverage points? What are the strengths of the organization that could be leveraged into new opportunities for the company? What relationships could be leveraged to create change for the company and the world?

These are all questions that it is vital for you to work with not just your supervisors or management team – but the “rank and file” staff.

Next post – I will discuss some specific strategies for making your change process work.

One useful term to discuss is the idea of the Triple Top Line.

Particularly over the last ten years, as practitioners and companies have started to put sustainability into practice, additions to the definition have also been added. A couple of years ago, a colleague Ed Quevedo (professor over at the Green MBA, and long-time consultant in this work) first introduced me to the term “Triple Top Line”. The idea of the triple top line is that there are opportunities as well as savings to be had in sustainability; that instead of only looking for efficiencies, we can actually find new products, we can redesign processes that actually increase value, not just efficiency. Very intriguing from a strategic point of view – CEOs can begin to set business direction by looking for “Triple Top Line” ideas.

For example: At the recent (May 2008) Sustainable Enterprise Conference, Autodesk talked about their process of sustainability. Three years ago, they actually started with marketing and sales, sponsoring a green event in New York. That led to looking at their own operations, seeking new efficiencies along the lines of energy and water.

And then their Product Development department joined in the fun. You see, they have a product called AutoCad that the vast majority of designers in the building industry AND the landscape industry use to design our physical landscape. And now those smart, creative software creators are innovating to make it easier for the incredible number of designers that use their product to design in congruence with the natural landscape, to incorporate passive solar and green elements.

An excellent example of a Triple Top Line Opportunity

Not only is this little story an incredible example of finding the unique leverage point that that organization is positioned to use, but it is also an interesting example of how a company looked for the top line opportunities first. On their website, their marketing department has done an excellent job of highlighting all of the exciting designers who are using AutoCad to “Innovate in Green.”

Triple Top Line is very exciting – it moves beyond the idea of sustainable development, beyond Triple Bottom Line, it finds more than the operations folks in an organization listening; you start to find marketing & sales, CEOs, and product development paying attention. Plus, it is a very positive term – lets look for opportunities for growth, not just cost-savings.

However, Top Line advocates have the same challenge that Bottom Line advocates have – they still get fuzzy when they think about the “People Part.”