After seeing some recent posts by Hank Marquis, Matt Beran, and Roy Atkinson, I had a flashback that’s worth remembering.
Regardless of who coined the phrase “strategy eats culture for breakfast”, it reminded me that sometimes things just won’t work.
“AT&T had recently gone through the breakup of the Bell System and had also acquired NCR (another BUNCH company). There were so many huge business units competing for customer mindshare I got involved in a ‘OneAT&T’ initiative which was supposed to create a single face for customers.
This experience included shared expectation workshops, which were much like the dialog mapping I would come to see years later. Unfortunately, at the peak of our efforts another round of divestiture took place. In fact, we had all the AT&T business units on display at the Liberty Science Center for a ‘OneAT&T’ trade show when management basically pulled the plug.
It was another of many exposures I would have of big corporate deck-chair shuffling, and all the twisted behaviors that it spawns. At the time it was a view inside the enterprise I never had— up until then I was focused on external customers.
That initial exposure to Total Quality Management (TQM) began a fascination with this subject, and I would constantly find that there are always new ideas, new approaches and new methods.” – Rolling Uphill
Shared Expectations
Shared Expectation Workshops were designed to align different teams or stakeholders on goals, responsibilities, and performance outcomes. Through facilitated discussions, participants articulated and mapped expectations, identifying areas of alignment and potential gaps. These workshops helped define roles, service levels, and mechanisms for conflict resolution, fostering clear communication and collaboration.
The intended benefits included reducing misunderstandings, improving accountability, and establishing a shared vision for success. It should have enhanced trust and cooperation… but the end result was different.
Management Systems role in Unifying Culture
Of course, the role of leadership in shaping organizational culture and driving collaboration is critical. Leaders must model the desired behaviors, champion cross-functional initiatives, and create an environment that values teamwork and open communication.
This suggests that a management system focused on top-down directives and rigid hierarchies might hinder the development of a unified and collaborative culture. Conversely, a management system (such as USM) that empowers employees, encourages open communication, and promotes shared decision-making could contribute to a more unified culture.
I believe that the USM method provides a unified structure — ‘social circuitry’ if you prefer — for communication, information sharing, and workflow management, potentially streamlining interactions between departments and promoting transparency.
But of course, simply implementing USM without addressing the underlying cultural dynamics and leadership commitment is unlikely to yield the desired results. The success of USM, or any management system for that matter, depends on its alignment with the organization’s cultural goals and the leadership’s willingness to foster a collaborative environment.
Therefore, the management system is not the sole determinant of a unified culture. It serves as a tool that can either facilitate or hinder the development of a collaborative and integrated work environment, depending on its design and implementation.
Organizations aiming to cultivate a unified culture should consider how their management system supports or undermines their goals and be prepared to adapt their systems and leadership approaches accordingly.
Understanding how the USM method works would be a good start.
Sometimes it just won’t work…
In AT&T’s case, cultural incompatibility proved insurmountable. Developing culture takes time because it involves deeply ingrained behaviors, values, attitudes, and beliefs that guide how people work together and make decisions.
USM’s design is particularly well-suited for environments where cultural differences need to be harmonized, such as those with separation of duties or shared service centers. By providing a unified management system with standardized processes and workflows, USM enables organizations to create a consistent operational framework that transcends cultural divides.
Overall, USM’s unified approach can serve as a stabilizing force in complex environments, aligning diverse teams around a shared operational philosophy while allowing for cultural differences in execution details. This harmonization is crucial for achieving both efficiency and cultural inclusivity.
USM’s recursive nature and its emphasis on the separation of duties are powerful features that contribute significantly to harmonizing different cultures, especially in complex organizational setups like those with shared service centers or environments requiring strict role demarcations.
The recursive nature of USM means that its core principles and processes can be scaled and applied consistently across different organizational levels, from enterprise-wide management to smaller teams or departments. This recursive design creates a unifying framework that ensures alignment throughout the organization.
USM’s strong emphasis on the separation of duties is crucial for creating clarity and reducing risks in service management, especially in culturally diverse or multi-functional environments.
Together, USM’s recursive structure and its principles of separation of duties create a management system that is robust, adaptable, and culturally neutral. In essence, USM’s recursive nature and separation of duties principles ensure that cultural diversity becomes an asset rather than a challenge, promoting a cohesive yet flexible management environment.
Contact me for more information.