The Age of Unstructure
Networking in the information age will make it virtually impossible to sustain the boundaries, narrow institutional or disciplinary paradigms, beliefts, myths and social constructios common in today’s independent bureaucracies. Every issue will present opportunities to develop new responses that are more effective than in the past. The network, both internal and external, is the means.
The table to the right summarizes the dialogue on destructuring of our organizations, a process that has gone on for almost three decades. The most successful corporations and non-profits exemplify this new more flexible approach and culture. Government generally does not.
The contemporary leader or manager must revisit and rethink almost every business process to remove barriers to flexibility and innovation. Regardless of where a team member fits on a chart, the effective organization will encourage and facilitate cross-function interaction; build temporary, interdisciplinary teams; add external expertise and experience to every major project team. Project and network managers will be awarded the same status and compensation as functional administrators.
The central responsibility of the leader will be to engineer and facilitate a series of related workstyle shifts as the workplace enters the ‘age of unstructure’. See table below.
Emerging Paradigms
Said one paradigm to another: “Shift Happens!.
Our current generation of leaders was raised in a unique era in western history, one that is in all probability over. The assumptions that are in ingrained in most of us are a liability; and must be shaken, altered forever if we are to rethink and vision our way toward a more sustainable 21st century model.
Our plans, strategies and decisions must be couched in an understanding of the current socio-institutional evolution. Literally, every foundation that we have taken for granted is shifting. The old is giving way to the new on a daily basis.
The challenge of course, is that we are providing leadership to stakeholders and communities who fall into three clear categories:
- those that understand and embrace the changes that are taking place and want their leaders to move the new agenda forward
- those that are aware of the (impending) shifts but reluctant to respond until some sort of ‘critical mass’ has developed, and
- those that cling to old ways of doing business, many nearing retirement and just not willing to personally invest in the degree of change and new skill development implied.
Our leaders are playing out their short term roles in the midst of a long term transition that will alter every aspect of economic, social and ecological life. Each element of the transition is inevitable, is proceeding or evolving at its own pace; and is championed by many, resisted by others. Those in key positions focus on the immediate and the tangible, often only vaguely aware of the fundamental values, beliefs, attitudes and social behaviours that underlie the debate about how we will use new technologies and opportunities to shape the future.
Increasingly, perceptive leaders with courage will champion that transition and utlize emerging values and beliefs as the criteria upon which alternatives, options and recommendations are judged.
In the meantime, we are simply muddling through together – managing from the middle while waiting for some sign of a tipping point. Both world views have representatives fighting for either the left or right side of the tables in this post. On a grand scale, we are witnessing the dysfunction in William Bridges ‘In Between Zone’. The old way is refusing to end; the new way has yet to fully emerge.
Transition Management Success Factors
Success factors to keep in mind when planning or working your way through a change process:
1. Clarify the CHANGE IMPERATIVE for your organization
Gaebler and Osborne argue that necessity is still the mother of invention. A sense of urgency, even crisis, is often required to get a change process kick started – often a financial or competitive crunch. An effective change leader must help the team understand that change is the imperative, not an option; that it is time to move past denial. At the same time, we must be clear about what has to be changed and what does not – both to protect organizational core strengths and to avoid feelings of being simply overwhelmed by too much change. 
2. Develop a CLEAR VISION of where you are going
People are not really afraid of change, but they are way of venturing into the unknown. A sense of direction or a specific target to aim for, crafted by key stakeholders, will not only remove a critical block but also motivate and inpsire action. If there is a working model, a successful example of the vision already in action, that can be kept in mind – even better.
3. Develop strategies that understand and address the FORCES OF CHANGE
The successful change process always involves a critical evaluation of the forces that can be used to facilitate and drive change, that will restrain or resist change, and those forces that act to simply maintain the status quo (Kurt Loewen’s Force Field Analysis). Past patterns of chage in the organization will also give clues. Analysis of known barriers (the coffee talk) is always fruitful. Each force must be addressed strategically; with measures taken to build on, overcome or circumnavigate the most important.
4. Support the HUMAN DIMENSIONS of change
Self-directed, proactive change can be relatively quick. But externally directed, reactive change is generally slow and painful – from both personal and organizational perspectives. The leadership team cannot afford to minimize or skip over feelings of shock, denial, anger, sadness, or even corporate depression that ultimately undermine change processes. Time and effort must be invested in working on the inevitable denial and resistance stages before the team can begin to focus on exploration and commitment.
5. Address the NEUTRAL or IN BETWEEN ZONE
William Bridges has clarified that change involves an ending, a period of repositioning and renewal, and a beginning. Each requires a unique set of management responses, but the middle period involves the highest risk and is often neglected. Most change processes falter when the old has been ‘shot down’, but the new has yet to be installed. The team must be creatively engaged in celebration of the ending, invention and planning during the in between zone, and supported as new ways of doing business gradually become the new routine. 
6. Provide adequate RESOURCING and support for the change process
Robert Kent notes that the key success factor has to do with the dedication of the resources necessary to install the change – financial, human, time and technology/equipment. Important change is not something that can be added to an already full plate; the process must be assigned some priority and put square in the middle of a change agent’s desk (not off the side). Dalzeill and Schoonover suggest that the human resources assigned must in combination include: the inventor, the entrepreneur, the expert, the manager and the sponsor. Gaebler and Osborne suggest that ‘outside resources’ are often required to find the additional expertise, objectivity and/or financial ability required.
7. The catalyst of TRUSTED LEADERSHIP
Change is an inside out process that inevitably starts with a committed person both demonstrating and leading the transition. This key individual is visionary and transformational; he or she inspires others to share the change leadership challenge. When all is said and done, the commitment and integrity of the process champion(s) is the fundamental success factor.
Change involves risk. For individuals and teams to willingly risk, they must trust those around them to be there when there are setbacks – to nurture and support them during the process. If the culture of the organization is not trust based, change is likely just a distant goal. Conversely, a change process can be an ideal time to development a trust foundation that will serve you well into the future.
