Dealing With Complexity, Chaos and Change Through Organizational Learning

Dealing with Complexity, Chaos and Change
Through Organizational Learning
Instructor: Russ Linden
Over the long run, superior performance depends on superior learning.”

-- Peter Senge, leader of the learning organization movement
About Russ Linden
Russ Linden is a management consultant who specializes in organizational change methods. Since 1980, he
has helped government, non-profit and private-sector organizations develop leadership, foster innovation, and
improve organizational performance. He is an adjunct faculty member at the University of Virginia, University
of Maryland, and the Federal Executive Institute. He writes a column on management innovations for The
Virginia Review, where he serves as Contributing Management Editor, and has produced national
videoconferences on re-engineering and on the human side of change.
Russ’ current teaching and consulting interests include the human side of change, systems thinking and
learning organization principles, re-engineering for seamless service, customer-focused organizations,
strategic thinking and planning. He has published numerous articles, and his first book, From Vision to
Reality: Strategies of Successful Innovators in Government, came out in 1990. His next book, Seamless
Government: A Practical Guide to Re-engineering in the Public Sector (Jossey-Bass, 1994), was excerpted in
the May, 1995 issue of Governing Magazine. His most recent book, Working Across Boundaries: Making
Collaboration Work in Government and Nonprofit Organizations, was published in 2002. It was a finalist for
the best book on nonprofit management in 2002. His clients have included the National Geographic Society,
Departments of the Navy and Army, Health Data Services, Inc., U.S. Customs Service, U.S. Dept. of State,
Metro Information Services, Inc., Government of the Cayman Islands, U.S. Information Agency, FBI
Academy, U.S. Dept. Of Education, two state attorneys general and over four dozen state, local government,
and non-profit agencies. Several local governments are redesigning their organizations using the principles in
his book, Seamless Government.
Before beginning his full-time practice, Russ was a Senior Faculty Member at the Federal Executive Institute.
He served as the Director of Executive Programs at the University of Virginia's Center for Public Service,
taught at the UVa McIntire School of Commerce, and managed in the human services field for seven years.
Russ Linden's bachelor's and master's degrees are from the University of Michigan. His Ph.D. is from the
University of Virginia. He lives in Charlottesville, VA with his wife and two children. He is on the web at:
www.russlinden.com.
Copyright (c) 2003 Russ Linden
Table
Tableof
ofContents
Contents
Organizational Learning: Why? 6
Organizational Learning: What? 8
Workshop Objectives 10
Example of Organizational Learning: FEMA 11
Practices of Organizations That Learn and Adapt Well 16
Practice 1: Understand, communicate the “Main Thing” 17
Practice 2: Create alignment by giving everyone a “line of sight” 26

Table
Tableof
ofContents
Contents
Practice 3: Utilize multiple perspectives to gain a systems understanding 33
Practice 4: Defer to expertise 44
Practice 5: Maintain fluid communications across permeable boundaries 51
Practice 6: Support continual training, learning and practice 62
Appendix A: Five Leadership Skills That Foster Learning 70
Appendix B: 9 Requirements for Organizational Change 71
Appendix C: Partnering Workshops 72
References and Resources 74

A Challenging Environment -- Some Examples
 The Marines’ new challenge: fighting in urban settings.
 Internal Revenue Service -- caught in the financial and

political cross fire.

Why Organizational Learning? The “C” Words
 Complexity: Situations that are difficult to understand, have

considerable ambiguity and uncertainty, and often have no
“solutions,” only options and tradeoffs
 Chaos: Seemingly random events that have an underlying

pattern (which is difficult to discern)
 Change: turbulent environments in which the future is

difficult to predict or control
“The illiterate of the 21st century will not be the individual who
cannot read and write, but the one who cannot learn, unlearn,
and relearn.” -- Futurist Alvin Toffler

The “C” Words -- Some examples
Examples of complexity, chaos and change facing federal agencies today: a

starter list ...
world-wide epidemics -- AIDS, SARS

urban sprawl -- balancing demands for growth with environmental protection
fighting terrorism (while protecting civil liberties)
gaining boarder security (without harming economic activity)
information security (while dealing with privacy concerns)
attracting/retaining quality employees (in an age of competitive sourcing)
dealing with rising (and often competing) customer expectations (with stable or declining resources)
continually changing senior leadership priorities

Organizational Learning -- What?
 In learning organizations, people are encouraged to
reflect as they act, share lessons learned and other key

information, so that they (and their customers) can
easily access the best thinking of the entire organization.
Put more simply: In a learning organization, when

one of us gets smarter, we all can get smarter.

Examples of Organizations That Manage These
Challenges Well
 FEMA
 U.S. Marines
 NAVAIR Manned Flight Simulator
 “High Reliability Organizations”
 Basketball, soccer, hockey teams
 FEI
Workshop Objectives
 Understand why organizational learning can be a powerful

method for dealing with complexity, chaos and change,
 Learn six management practices that will help you deal with
complex and chaotic environments,
 Apply the above to your organization, and
 Leave with specific actions you/your associates can take

Example of Organizational Learning: FEMA
Prior to James Lee Witt taking over in 1993, FEMA was in terrible shape. It was seen as
• Rigid, not customer friendly

• Unable to communicate across internal stovepipes
• Terrible in managing external relationships with state and local units
• A place to send people who supported the president’s campaign (but lacked
management skills)
• Unable to perform its basic mission
• An agency that the president and others circumvented
 Sen. Hollings famously called it “The biggest group of bureaucratic jackasses ever
assembled in one place at one time in the history of USA!”
 When Witt left in 2001, the agency had been transformed into a model of internal and
external collaboration, learning, and high performance. And almost all of Witt’s changes
have continued under the new administration.

FEMA (cont.)
Key Actions:
1. Witt worked hard on Congressional relations with both parties. He cut a deal with Sen.
Mikulski: if he made fundamental changes in FEMA, she wouldn’t try to close it down. He
also maintained his good relationship with the President.
2. Witt: instituted a new business model of “all hazards” -- everyone would be deployed to any
hazard (nobody would work only on earthquakes, tornadoes, floods or hurricanes). At
multiple meetings he explained reasons for the change.
3. To support the new model, he abolished the old stovepipe structure (offices of flood,
hurricanes, tornadoes, etc.), and replaced them with operational directorates that would
respond to any emergency. This was done with significant input from employees.
4. To emphasize the reality that FEMA had to change, and to reinforce his “all hazards” model,
Witt rotated all FEMA SESers to different offices one Friday afternoon in 1993.

FEMA (cont.)
• Some of the SESers were given offices they had publicly bad mouthed in the past (!)
• Some (who showed little interest or talent for the new approach) were given
assignments usually reserved for managers of lower grades (GM 14-15)
• Some 14s-15s who had demonstrated competence and a desire to collaborate were
given offices that SESers had been running
• Witt made it clear he would rotate people again in the future, and he did
5. Witt provided extensive cross training to many employees, which reinforced the
all-hazards model and gave them skills to handle their broader responsibilities
6. Witt also emphasized customer service. He did this by:

• talking about it at all-hands meetings
• doing in-depth research on what customers most needed from FEMA during an
emergency (their #1 need was to know that “someone at FEMA cares about me”)
• communicating customer feedback and expectations to the staff
• creating three telecommunications centers that back up each other, so that callers
don’t have long waits or busy signals during emergencies

FEMA (cont.)
7. He took a proactive/prevention role. Through active partnerships with public,

private and nonprofit groups, FEMA helped communities reduce the effects of
disasters that occurred. One significant example: “Project Impact,” in which
FEMA partnered with local communities to do risk and vulnerability
assessments, and conduct risk-reduction activities.
8. Creation of a an ad hoc structure that operates only in emergencies: matrix teams

made up of staff from most of the operational units. These teams train
throughout the year, their members know each other’s roles, and deploy very
quickly during emergencies. Every employee has a key role to play during
emergencies.

FEMA -- The Results
 Significantly improved customer service -- time to process payments to disaster

victims fell significantly, far less red tape, improved customer satisfaction
 Some managers voluntarily left, and some were encouraged to do so
 Most of those who stayed came to believe in the new approach -- it fosters
knowledge sharing and collaboration across units
 The new FEMA administrator (from a different administration and political party)
maintained almost all elements of this new model when he took over in 2001

6 Practices of Organizations That Learn and Adapt
to Complexity, Chaos, Change
 Understand, communicate the “main thing” that is central to

success
 Create alignment around the main thing by giving everyone a “line

of sight”
 Utilize multiple perspectives to gain a systems understanding
 Defer to expertise
 Maintain fluid communications across permeable boundaries
 Support continual training, learning and practice

Practice 1: Understand, communicate the “main
thing”
Organizations that thrive on complexity are willing to change

virtually everything, except what’s at their core:
 3M: “Thou shalt not kill a new product idea”
 Nordstrom: Service to the customer above all else
 The principal’s mantra at an inner city public school: “teach them to read!”
 High reliability organizations (aircraft carriers, hospital ER’s, nuclear power

plants): Safe operations
 Marines: have an end state, commander’s intent, “main effort”
 FEMA: “We all work on all hazards.”

Practice 1: Understand, communicate the main
thing
As the authors of Built to Last pointed out, organizations

that clearly identify their main thing -- a core value,
purpose, or operating principle -- have done very well
over time, even in chaotic, complex and changing
environments. They are willing to change almost
anything, but they protect what’s at their core.
“The main thing is to keep the main thing, the main

thing!”
-- former Netscape CEO Jim Barksdale

Practice 1: Understand, communicate the main
thing
“We are in a race to win over the people. What

have you and your element done today to
contribute to victory?”
-- sign in office of Gen. David Petraeus, who heads the

U.S. military operations in most of northern Iraq

Example of identifying the main thing: The NAVAIR
Manned Flight Simulator (MFS)
 MFS produces and operates simulators, helping pilots and

engineers “fly” aircraft in simulated conditions to learn how the new
features on the aircraft work in real conditions.
 The MFS environment became more turbulent in the 1990s; it grew,

changed, needed a way to help everyone remain focused.
 MFS leaders identified its main thing: “simulation builds

confidence.” They are in the confidence-building business.
 MFS leaders continually orient, train, and communicate with all

personnel about their contributions to its main thing.
 They’re focusing the organization around the main thing, and

achieving improved customer satisfaction (see following pages).

Understand, communicate the main thing: The
NAVAIR Manned Flight Simulator
 There are many ways to

focus people on the main thing.
Here’s one model to try:

Understand, communicate the main thing: The
NAVAIR Manned Flight Simulator
 This model can help you manage and lead using a systems point of
view. The factors are interrelated; a change in any one of them will
ripple through the organization. This model can help you predict, and
manage the ripples.
 Using this model, managers and staff can also keep the organization
aligned around its main thing.
 They use a variation of this model at the Manned Flight Simulator;

employees there report that it helps them focus on their main thing, and
that it reminds them of the need to keep all factors in mind when
changing any one of them.

The NAVAIR Manned Flight Simulator business
model (as shown on their business card)

The Manned Flight Simulator business model (as
shown on their business card)

Practice 1: Understand,
communicate the main thing
Exercise:
1. What’s your organization’s “main thing?” What is at its core --

purpose, function, value, operating principle -- that is essential to its
success and cannot be compromised?
2. How do you communicate the main thing to your direct reports

and associates? What else could you do to communicate it?

Practice 2: Create alignment around the main thing
by giving everyone a “line of sight”
 “Line of sight” means the employee:
A. Sees how the organization works as a system, and
B. Knows how her work contributes to it.

by giving everyone a line of sight
 Line of sight matters. Without it …
• Employees operate in a vacuum

• They see no connection between their work and the end
product/end user
• They often grow apathetic, play bureaucratic games
• There’s no sense of meaning or purpose in their work

 Methods:
• Use process mapping
• Track and post performance, to make

it visible
• Use short and long-term job rotations
• Experience the work process from the customer’s point of view/get

prompt customer feedback
• Observe the product or end result the organization is in business to

achieve (e.g., at NASA, staff at all levels, and their families, are
invited to witness the launches)
Some other action items to create a line of sight:
1. Bring some staff to your agency’s senior management meetings, so they see the
bigger picture.
2. Invite end users to meet directly with your staff. Ask them to describe for the staff:
A. What they expect from your unit,

B. What they do with what you provide them, and
C. Any gaps that they perceive, between what they expect and what they get from you.
Help the staff and the end users discuss these perceptions, so that they learn more
about the other’s reality. If appropriate, negotiate a Service Level Agreement (“SLA”)
between your unit and specific customer groups.
3. Co-locate certain units whose work is closely interrelated.
4. Rotate the convening role for your staff meetings: enable others to take on broader
responsibilities.
5. Help staff get quick feedback on the results of their work, so they can manage with
near real-time information.
Method
Methodto
tocreate
createaaline
lineof
ofsight:
sight: Job
Jobrotations
rotations
 Be sure everyone understands the purpose

 Some rotational assignments are short-term (e.g., 6 months),
others are longer (2-3 years in the intelligence community)
 Start with volunteers (so it’s not seen as punitive)
 To raise the importance, invite people to bid for the opportunity
to have rotational assignments
 Make it an expectation that people share what they learned from
their rotations
 Make it in people’s career interest to seek rotations; give
preference in promotions to those with several rotations

Method
Methodto
tocreate
createaaline
lineof
ofsight:
sight:Co-location
Co-location
 The “50-10 Rule:” Those who work within 50’ of each other are 10
times more likely to interact each week, than those who work further
away
 Co-location can help breakdown stereotypes that groups have of one

another
 Co-locations are especially powerful when they include integrating

some of the work
 When physical co-location is impractical, some organizations use

advanced IT to create “virtual teams” that share knowledge and
communicate frequently on common projects

Exercise:
1. What has helped you gain a line of sight when you worked at a
lower organizational level?
2. What are 2-3 things you and your associates could start doing, in
the near term, to help subordinates gain a greater line of sight?

Practice 3: Utilize multiple perspectives
In high reliability orgs. like aircraft carriers and nuclear

power plants, management tends to be hierarchical. But when a
problem occurs, those with different kinds of technical expertise
quickly gather to analyze the issue and offer input.
Dealing with complex and chaotic situations requires multiple

perspectives; no one person can handle them alone.
To fully utilize multiple perspectives often requires changes in

organizational structure and culture.
"It takes variety to control variety."

-- Karl Weick, Kathleen Sutcliffe, in Managing the Unexpected

 At FEMA, they ensure a variety of perspectives through the

use of matrix teams that are deployed to disasters. The
teams include people with different technical backgrounds.
 FEMA also calls on several thousand “reservists,”

individuals with expertise who train with FEMA staff and
are called upon for specific emergencies. They bring a
fresh perspective because they have some distance from
FEMA.

 Utilizing multiple perspectives can be threatening to

managers. It helps to use structured methods that elicit
different points of view (e.g., After Action Reviews), with clear
ground rules about no retribution.
 It’s also important to foster a culture that supports divergent

perspectives. Marines are trained to lead, and part of their
training is to insist that subordinates are free to disagree (until
the decision is made).
 Another way to gain multiple perspectives: bring in outsiders

with no vested interest who review and critique your plans
and operations.

Practice 3: Utilize multiple perspectives:
Sometimes, you have to insist on it
Management theorist Peter Drucker tells the story of a senior financial

committee meeting at General Motors. Alfred Sloan, GM’s CEO, asked
each of the executives on the committee for their comments on a
proposal they had heard. Each of the 10 members gave a strong
positive reaction. Sloan, too, said he approved of the proposal. Then he
surprised the group:
“Since there are 11 votes in favor, and none against … we’ll table this
proposal until next month’s meeting. If we only see the positives in the
idea,and nobody sees any potential downside, we haven’t thought it
through clearly.”
Sometimes, leaders have to insist on counter views, in order to hear

multiple perspectives.
A simple tool for eliciting multiple perspectives:

+
Ask your associates to identify the potential strengths and weaknesses of

a given proposal; ask them to list some questions they have about the
proposal. This helps avoid groupthink, and gets people’s views on the
table.

Exercise:
Whatever approach you use to gain multiple perspectives, this is a
leadership task. Most subordinates won’t offer differing views until
they’re convinced their leaders want to hear them.
How do you/can you ensure that your team provides a diverse set of
perspectives on complex, chaotic problems?
How can you get candid views from those outside your organization,
when need be?

A tool for using multiple perspectives: The Four Frames
 Structural frame
 Human resource frame
 Political frame
 Symbolic frame

Exercise for the Four Frames
Think back to the last time you took a new job.
A. What were the key steps you took in your first 2-3 months?
B. Did those steps reflect one or two of the four frames?
C. In general: which frames do you use least? Which do you want to

use more or better?

Another way to utilize multiple perspectives:
Partner with your customers and key stakeholders
 That’s what FEMA does when it works with communities to do risk/vulnerability

assessments, and take risk reduction actions.
 That’s how the MFS office designs flight simulators: in partnership with pilots
and engineers who will use them.
 That’s what some agencies do when they’re getting publicly beaten up by

special interest groups. Today, the Army Corps of Engineers has an active
partnership with the Nature Conservancy; which is charting river flows, restoring
wildlife habitats, and conducting experiments around 13 of the nation’s dams
managed by the Corps, in an active partnership between the two.

To utilize multiple perspectives, partner with your
customers and key stakeholders
Three ways to partner with customers and stakeholders on

your products, programs and services:
1. Planning -- getting their active involvement in determining

what and how the products and services are delivered,
2. Implementation -- helping them do some of the work you used

to do for them, for themselves (e.g., self service), and
3. Evaluation -- working with you to assess the effectiveness and

quality of your work, helping you find opportunities for change

Partnering Workshops: A method for partnering
with your customers and key stakeholders
These are 1-3 day sessions that include leaders of the

organizations trying to form a partnership. An outside
consultant helps the participants exchange information on
their expectations for the project: goals, time table, roles, how
to deal with conflicts, etc.
The workshop helps create common objectives for the project.

Equally important, it fosters open and trusting relationships,
and an ability to find win-win solutions.
See Appendix C for more on Partnering Workshops.

Practice 4: Defer to expertise
In high reliability organizations, there are often three distinct

cultures.
1. During normal operations, the culture is hierarchical.
2. When the operational tempo moves into high gear, it becomes

very flat: ad hoc teams form, those closest to the issue are
expected to diagnose and take action on it, and if mistakes are
made the emphasis is on learning, not blame.
3. During crises, a third culture appears: if the problem/crisis has

occurred before, the organization has prepared for it and goes
into its crisis action mode (with defined roles, clear SOPs, etc.).

Practice 4: One example of deference to expertise:
Aircraft Carriers
During daily operations, the roles are clear and communications are
largely hierarchical.
When planes start taking off and landing, there’s no time for
hierarchy. A rich level of lateral communications occurs (radio,
phone, hand signals), and this info helps them spot mistakes before
they cause damage.
When crises occur, the crew follows

carefully-rehearsed procedures; each
member has a pre-assigned role.

Practice 4: The importance of deferring to expertise
“The
“TheMarine
MarineCorps
Corpshas
hasaalong
longtradition
traditionof
ofdistributing
distributingbattlefield
battlefield
authority
authorityto
toits
itslowest
lowestlevel
levelmanagement
management… …for
foraasimple
simplereason:
reason:high-
high-
risk,
risk,high-speed
high-speed…assaults
…assaultstend
tendtotobe
beunforgiving
unforgivingon onbureaucratic
bureaucratic......
management
managementstyles.”
styles.”Freedman,
Freedman,Corps
CorpsBusiness,
Business,p. p.35.
35.

Defer to expertise: How to deal with the question of
accountability?
A key issue: how can managers defer to expertise during

problems and crises, given that they are still responsible and
accountable for the outcomes? There are several answers:
1. The Marines handle this by giving local commanders and their

troops this guidance related to their missions:
The end state: how they want the situation to end up

The commander’s intent: the broader goals that the unit’s actions will support
The main effort: if the mission is part of several related missions, the “main
effort” is the most critical one
The rules of engagement: the boundaries within which they can operate

accountability? (cont.)
2. Another approach: continually train and practice.
In general, the higher the stakes, the greater emphasis an

organization places on continual training and practice --The
Marines, who operate in very high-stakes environment, excel
in the area of continual training/practice. See Section 6 for
more.
3. Share your thinking about decisions with staff. They’ll

understand the organization as you do, and know how you
would respond in most situations.

accountability? (cont.)
4. Practice shared leadership: give everyone an opportunity

to lead the group in certain situations. A good example: the
Orpheus Chamber Orchestra - it plays with no conductor, and
the members take turns providing leadership.
Shared leadership reduces the gap between leader and associates,

because everyone has some of the responsibility for leading on an
ongoing basis. When chaos or crises hit, the team is prepared.

Practice 4: Defer to expertise
Exercise:
1. What are some situations in which you currently defer decisions

to those with greater expertise?
2. What are some situations in which you could defer decisions, but
don’t?
3. What could you do to defer in these situations?

Practice 5: Maintain fluid communications across
permeable boundaries
“At
“AtGeneral
GeneralElectric,
Electric,weweregard
regardhoarding
hoardingof
ofknowledge
knowledgeas
asan
anethical
ethical
violation!”
violation!”
----Steve
SteveKerr,
Kerr,former
formerChief
ChiefLearning
LearningOfficer,
Officer,GE
GE
“Plans
“Plansare
arenothing;
nothing;planning
planningis
iseverything.”
everything.”
--Prussian
Prussiangeneral
generalHelmuth
Helmuthvon
vonMoltke
Moltke

 For groups to learn together and deal with chaos and

complexity, fluid communications are imperative:
• there’s not usually enough time to rely on the hierarchy

• complex and chaotic situations require the best thinking of
the group, not the power of one senior leader
• organizations that maintain fluid communications look like
good basketball teams: most of their important
communications occur during play, as they constantly adjust
to the changing environment

Practice 5: When the stakes are high, fluid
communications across permeable boundaries are
especially important
The night before the Challenger disaster of Jan. 28, 1986, a teleconference took place among 34 people at three locations. The
purpose: decide whether to launch the next morning. This was unusual; in the past, launch decisions were discussed at face-face
meetings of NASA managers and its contractors.
Many engineers at Morton Thiokol recommended against launching. NASA managers weren’t happy to hear that, and weren’t
persuaded by by the data and analysis Thiokol put forward. Some angrily challenged Thiokol’s conclusions. One manager, Larry
Mulloy said hotly, “When do you want me to launch, Thiokol, next April?”
Midway through the teleconference, senior people at Thiokol held an off-line discussion. They came back to the call, said they had
re-examined their data, and reversed the engineers’ no-launch recommendation. A NASA manager then asked, “does anybody
have anything more to say?” Nobody spoke up. The Challenger was launched the next morning, and the crew perished.
“With only voice cues, NASA did not have visual data such as facial expressions that might have given them fuller information
about just how worried Thiokol engineers were …” Weick and Sutcliffe, Managing the Unexpected,
Unexpected, p. 168.

permeable boundaries -- Some methods:
 Use the rumor mill -- check in with associates at regular staff

meetings and ask what rumors are going around. This gives
managers a quick check on the pulse of the organization, allows
them to correct misunderstandings, and offers a low-risk way for
employees to check out concerns.
A good way to open up the discussion is to ask, “What rumors are

you hearing lately?”

permeable boundaries -- Some methods:
 Hold issue-oriented staff meetings; one person presents a current

or approaching challenge, and peers ask questions, offer insights.
The objective is peer-peer learning.
 Employee a classic (but still underused) management method:

Managing by wandering around (MBWA). Take one hour/week,
drop in on 3-4 units, ask about their current projects, what’s going
well, where they might want outside assistance. The first few
times people may be skeptical and defensive; once they know
you’re there to learn, they start to open up and everyone gains.

Method:
Method: After
AfterAction
ActionReviews
Reviews
Purpose:
To help employees think systematically about their important initiatives; to ensure that everyone can learn
from others’ learning
U.S Army agencies try to capture and export knowledge after important activities and projects. The method
used for this purpose is called an After Action Review (check the Army’s lessons learned home page, at
http://call.army.mil/call.htm, for more).
Method:
During or after an activity - a conference, a project team developing a new system, a military exercise or
actual intervention - those responsible for it write an After Action Review. The report should be kept simple.
These categories are sometimes used:
Key Steps in the After Action Review Process
1. What was the objective of the activity?
2. What actually happened? (describe the events as they occurred)
3. If the objective wasn’t achieved, why not?
Copyright (c)and
4. What have we learned? (What are the implications, 2003 Russ Linden
lessons learned?)
5. Take actions. (Learning doesn’t take place without action. What will be different now?)
6. Share this with others who could benefit.
After Action Reviews can also be put into a database, which allows others quick access to
the knowledge and lessons learned.
Benefits from After Action Reviews

1. Focus is on learning, not blame.
2. The structure is simple.
3. It breaks the hierarchical barriers, gets everyone on the same page, with no fear.
4. It encourages reflection in the process of action, so that both learning and improved performance take place.
5. It helps people push back against the “tyranny of the immediate.”
6. It provides a record that others can analyze, add to, and use.
“The Army has perfected a remarkably efficient process (After Action

Reviews) for correcting its mistakes and sustaining its successes.”
- David Garvin, Harvard Business School
and author of a case study on the AAR
Method:
Method: Best
Best Practices
PracticesDatabases
Databases
 Who has a world-class system for training employees to be

customer focused?
 What organizations have superior 1-800 service?
 Who’s done an exceptional job at integrating their information
systems?
 And … how do they do it? And whom do we call for more
information?
 Best practices databases answer such questions.

Best Practices Databases - Natural Resources
Example
Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management staff collaborate

closely in many parts of the country, sharing staff, resources,
training, space, even managers.
They have documented their successes in their “Effective Practices

Directory,” listing specific practices, how they were achieved,
obstacles encountered and how they were overcome, and contacts
for more information.

Best Practices Databases - Ford Motor Example
Ford Motor requires each manufacturing manager to improve

productivity 5% annually. To help them do that, Ford created an
Internet-based database called Best Practices Replication System.
When plants make productivity improvements, they document how

they did it on the database (in text, pictures, video, etc.), and
include information on vendors and tools used in the process
improvement. Every manager is expected to use any information
that’s applicable.

Exercise:
What can you and your associates do to create more permeable

boundaries, and increase information flow in your organization:
A. During “normal” periods of operations?
B: When dealing with chaotic situations, and with the unexpected?

Practice 6: Support continual training, learning and
practice
 We’re filled with knowledge about management:

• 1,700 business books published/year
• over $60 billion spent/year on corporate training
• 80,000 MBAs graduate each year
 If we know so much, why are there so many poorly-run

organizations?
One reason: too much training is separated from doing. Studies show
that up to 70% of workplace learning is informal (observing others, reflecting
on our own experiences), but most training ignores that; it doesn’t integrate
knowing with doing.*
* Source: The Knowing-Doing Gap, by Pfeffer and Sutton.

Practice 6: How to support continual training,
learning and practice: Integrate learning with the
work.
 Most workplace learning takes place in the context of action. It’s

not that experience is necessarily the best teacher; reflecting on
experience is the best teacher.
 Most of the highly effective training and learning activities have a

heavy dose of action, in a setting that helps people learn from
their experiences, such as
• being given “stretch objectives”
• having rotational assignments
• serving on cross-functional teams
 One Lesson: Integrate learning with work.
“If you do it, then you will know.” - David Sun, Kingston Technology
learning and practice: Have people teach what they
know.
 A second lesson: have people teach what they know.
One of the most powerful ways to learn is to put managers and others into
teaching roles. Most professionals learn best when they must teach
others.
Teaching can be done in many ways:
• formal classroom teaching

• informal teaching through mentor programs
• writing up and publishing lessons learned papers
• leading orientation sessions for new employees

learning and practice: Provide “knowledge
templates”
 A third lesson: help people develop knowledge templates.
There are no SOPs for many of the situations encountered in

complex environments. Thus, the best training includes exposing
people to a large number of scenarios, so that the brain learns to
recognize patterns and apply them as analogies in new situations.
The Marines excel at this. Their training schools continually put

Marines into situations requiring leadership and decision making. As
they debrief their actions, they develop “knowledge templates” that
can be adapted and applied to future challenges.
“The way you get a shared vision is through a shared experience.”

- Col. Robert E. Lee (no relation), director of one of the Marine
Corps officer training programs
learning and practice: Discuss near misses
 A fourth lesson: regularly discuss near misses.
Organizations that deal with complexity well often discuss near

misses -- opportunities for junior and senior people to talk openly
about activities that almost resulted in failure or catastrophes. These
situations are ripe for learning, but are usually ignored. It often helps
to hold the discussions without managers in the room, to ensure
candor. Then have someone write up and disseminate the key points.
“Humans are notoriously bad monitors of systems that rarely fail …

Near misses … should sound organizational alarms.”
Scott A. Snook, author of Friendly Fire

Practice 6: To support continual training, learning
and practice: Make creative use of stories
 A final lesson from learning organizations: they make good use

of stories to help people learn key lessons.
Stories connect with almost everyone. They convey the leader’s

principles without being heavy handed. They “pull” people in (we all
love a good story), and most people remember stories far longer
than facts, numbers, or detailed procedures. And they require
people to do some thinking in order to apply the story appropriately.
“We train for certainty and educate for uncertainty.”
- Col. Richard Barry, director of Marine Corps

Amphibious Warfare School.
Practice 6: Support continual training, learning and
practice
Exercise:
1. What have been the most powerful learning moments in your career?
2. Which of the lessons just listed would you like to use (more) in your
organization:
- Integrate learning with action

- Help people learn by having them teach
- Give people experience in different scenarios, so they develop “knowledge templates”
- Organize candid, safe discussions of “near misses”
- Use stories to convey the key principles and messages you want associates to learn

Assessing Potential Change
*
E
*
A
F S
E Y
A
S
I
B H
I A
R
L
D
I LOW HIGH
T
Y
* IMPACT
*Impact:: On external customers, on staff, on performance, on costs, etc.
**Feasibility: The ease and/or speed of implementation
Appendix A. Five Leadership Skills That Foster
Learning
1. Developing intellectual curiosity - What do you find intriguing? What can you learn from
others’ views?
2. Asking open questions. Can you ask others truly open (not leading) questions, without
trying to make a point?
3. Maintaining non-defensive reactions. When someone disagrees or criticizes, do you seek

more data and reflect on it, rather than defend your position or yourself, or attack?
4. Examining assumptions. Do you make your assumptions explicit, examine them to see if
they’re valid, and invite others to do the same?
5. “Slow down the game.” High performing athletes do this. It helps them see the ball, the
playing field, the competition. When you’re feeling pressed with too many demands,
do you know how to focus on the “vital few” that really matter? Can you slow down
your game?

Appendix B: Nine Requirements for Starting, and
Maintaining Major Organizational Change
1. There is an important business-related problem or need driving the change
2. Organizational leaders are communicating the need for change in a simple,
clear way
3. There is an emphasis on continual, two-way communications throughout the change.
4. A senior manager with creditability and clout is designated the executive sponsor for
the change, and has a strong team whose time is dedicated to the change effort.
5. Key internal and external stakeholders are involved.
6. There is a game plan that addresses the need for change, the goals, guiding principles,
key elements in the change, timetable and responsibilities, communications strategy,
methods for shaping realistic expectations, involvement of key stakeholders.
7. The change team generates some “early wins”.
8. There are many informal organizational leaders who are enthusiastic about the change.
9. The change is consolidated in the culture to create a sense of inevitability.

Appendix
AppendixC:
C:Partnering
PartneringWorkshops
Workshops
Partnering workshops have been used by a variety of government and private-sector organizations since
the 1980’s. This method helps organizations that are frequently in conflict, to develop common goals and
win-win relationships. Its most frequent use is in the construction industry.
The Partnering Process
• Prepare for it – educate your organization

• Educate the other organization(s)
• Gain commitment from senior management
• Identify partnering champions (or leaders)
• Prepare for the partnering workshop
• Conduct the partnering workshop. This may last from one to three days. The deliverables from the
workshop include:
− Partnering charter. This is a formal agreement among the partners, in which they spell out their
mutual goals, objectives, time lines, roles, etc. Some common partnering goals for construction
projects, for instance, are:
› Complete the project so that it meets the design intent

› Complete the project without litigation
› Achieve savings of $_________
› Finish the project ___ days ahead of schedule
› Suffer no lost time by promoting a safe job site
› Ensure fair treatment for all parties
› Solve problems at the lowest possible management level

Appendix
AppendixC:
C:Partnering
PartneringWorkshops
Workshops
– Conflict resolution process to be used.

– Evaluation process - when project will be evaluated, criteria to be used.
• Periodic evaluation
• Celebrate successes
Sample Partnering Workshop Agenda
Day 1: Day 2:
a.m. a.m.
Introductions Learning about individual differences: Myers-Briggs

Overview to partnering Type Indicator
Overview to the Project Profile of each teams’ Myers-Briggs styles
Experiential exercise: “Win as much as you can.” Conflict management exercise
p.m. p.m.
Debrief exercise Develop project charter, including conflict-

Discussion of win-win possibilities for the project management norms and project goals, timeline,
roles, communications channels, evaluation
Identification of each organization's previous methods, etc.
experience in partnerships
Each participant signs the charter
Discussion of project goals
Review of the session, prepare for first steps
Adjourn
References and Resources
This reference list isn’t meant to be an inclusive one. Rather, it provides a number of
well-reviewed listings for the major topics of organizational learning and systems
thinking.
“Building a Learning Organization,” by David A. Garvin. Harvard Management Review, July-August, 1993,
pp. 78-91.
Building The Learning Organization, by Michael Marquardt. McGraw Hill, 1996
Built to Last: Successful habits of Visionary Companies, by Collins and Porras. HarperBusiness, 1994.
Corps Business: The 30 Management Principles of the U.S. Marines, by David Freedman. HarperCollins,
2000.
Friendly Fire: The Accidental Shootdown of U.S. Black Hawks Over Northern Iraq, by Scott A. Snook.
Princeton University Press, 2000.
Good to Great, by Jim Collins. HarperCollins, 2001.
Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Nations, by Thomas A. Stewart. Doubleday, 1997.
Managing On The Edge, by Richard Tanner Pascale. Simon and Schuster, 1990.
Managing the Unexpected: Assuring High Performance in an Age of Complexity, by Weick and Sutcliffe.
John Wiley & Sons, 2001.
Reasoning, Learning, and Action: Individual and Organizational, by Chris Argyris. Jossey-Bass, 1982.
Reframing Organizations 2nd edition, by Lee Bolman and Terrence Deal. Jossey Bass Publishers, 1997.
Copyright (c) in2003

Seamless Government: A Practical Guide to Re-engineering the Russ
PublicLinden
Sector, by Russell Linden.
Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1994.
References and Resources (cont.)
Systems Thinking Basics – From Concepts to Causal Loops, by Anderson and Johnson. Pegasus
Communications, 1997.
“Teaching Smart People How to Learn,” by Chris Argyris. Havard Business Review, May-June, 1991.
The Boundaryless Organization Field Guide, by Ashkenas, Jich, Ulrich, and Paul-Chowdhury. Jossey Bass,
1999.
The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organizations, by Peter Senge.
Doubleday/Currency, 1990.
The Knowing-Doing Gap: How Smart Companies Turn Knowledge Into Action, by Jeffrey Pfeffer and Robert
I. Sutton. Harvard Business School Press, 2000.
The Knowledge Management Toolkit: Practical Techniques for Building a Knowledge Management System ,
by Amrit Tiwana. Prentice Hall, 2000.
“The Leader’s New Work: Building Learning Organizations,” by Peter M. Senge. Sloan Management
Review, Fall, 1990, pp. 7-23.
The Power of Alignment, by Labovitz and Rosansky. John Wiley & Sons, 1997.
“The Learning Organization Made Plain: An Interview with Peter Senge.” Training & Development Journal,
October, 1991, pp. 37-44.
“The Trickle-Down Effect: Policy Decisions, Risky Work, and the Challenger Tragedy,” by Diane Vaughan.
California Management Review, Vol. 39, No. 2, Winter, 1997, pp. 80-102,
The Wisdom of Teams, by Jon R. Katzenbach and Douglas K. Smith. HarperBusiness, 1993.
Working Across Boundaries: Making Collaboration Work in Government and Nonprofit Organizations. By
Russ Linden. Jossey Bass Publishers, 2002.
“Why Organizations Still Aren’t Learning.” Interview with Peter Senge. Training, September, 1999, pp. 40-
49.

Dealing With Complexity, Chaos and Change Through Organizational Learning

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Dealing With Complexity, Chaos and Change Through Organizational Learning

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dealing With Complexity, Chaos and Change Through Organizational Learning

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dealing with Complexity, Chaos and Change

Through Organizational Learning

Instructor: Russ Linden

Over the long run, superior performance depends on superior learning.”

Organizational Learning: Why? 6

Organizational Learning: What? 8

Example of Organizational Learning: FEMA 11

Practices of Organizations That Learn and Adapt Well 16

Practice 1: Understand, communicate the “Main Thing” 17

Practice 2: Create alignment by giving everyone a “line of sight” 26

Copyright (c) 2003 Russ Linden

Practice 3: Utilize multiple perspectives to gain a systems understanding 33

Practice 4: Defer to expertise 44

Practice 5: Maintain fluid communications across permeable boundaries 51

Practice 6: Support continual training, learning and practice 62

Appendix A: Five Leadership Skills That Foster Learning 70

Appendix B: 9 Requirements for Organizational Change 71

Appendix C: Partnering Workshops 72

References and Resources 74

Copyright (c) 2003 Russ Linden

 The Marines’ new challenge: fighting in urban settings.

 Internal Revenue Service -- caught in the financial and

Copyright (c) 2003 Russ Linden

 Complexity: Situations that are difficult to understand, have

 Chaos: Seemingly random events that have an underlying

 Change: turbulent environments in which the future is

Copyright (c) 2003 Russ Linden

Examples of complexity, chaos and change facing federal agencies today: a

world-wide epidemics -- AIDS, SARS

Copyright (c) 2003 Russ Linden

 In learning organizations, people are encouraged to

reflect as they act, share lessons learned and other key

Put more simply: In a learning organization, when

Copyright (c) 2003 Russ Linden

 NAVAIR Manned Flight Simulator

 “High Reliability Organizations”

 Basketball, soccer, hockey teams

 Understand why organizational learning can be a powerful

 Apply the above to your organization, and

 Leave with specific actions you/your associates can take

Copyright (c) 2003 Russ Linden

• Rigid, not customer friendly

Copyright (c) 2003 Russ Linden

Copyright (c) 2003 Russ Linden

6. Witt also emphasized customer service. He did this by:

Copyright (c) 2003 Russ Linden

7. He took a proactive/prevention role. Through active partnerships with public,

8. Creation of a an ad hoc structure that operates only in emergencies: matrix teams

Copyright (c) 2003 Russ Linden

 Significantly improved customer service -- time to process payments to disaster

 Some managers voluntarily left, and some were encouraged to do so

Copyright (c) 2003 Russ Linden

 Understand, communicate the “main thing” that is central to

 Create alignment around the main thing by giving everyone a “line

 Utilize multiple perspectives to gain a systems understanding

 Maintain fluid communications across permeable boundaries

 Support continual training, learning and practice

Organizations that thrive on complexity are willing to change