A post on the Power of Informal Groups
New Evidence of the Power of Informal Groups
Anyone who's been around organizations for very long knows that the formal "org chart" doesn't tell you much about how things really get done. And for years sociologists and other social scientists have studied informal networks and emergent groups in organizations to develop a better understanding of communication patterns, identify the "real" leaders, and sort out how work really gets done.
Maybe it isn't new, but now a couple of HP researchers have compiled some really intriguing data about informal groups and networks by doing the obvious - studying patterns of email traffic.
The study, reported recently in ComputerWorld, found that informal groups that developed around informal experts and communicated openly about a problem generally outperformed formal experts who were attacking the same issue.
Why am I not surprised? The troops always know who the "real" experts are; often they are far better informed than the managers who "anoint" the people THEY think are capable of getting the job done.
So why don't more organizations open up their problem-solving and tap the power of everyone who cares? I heard of one CEO who woke up to the power of inclusiveness one day and declared, "I just realized that 5,000 people are a whole lot smarter than 5" - the size of his executive committee. And when he created processes that enabled those 5,000 employees to toss their ideas and suggestions into the corporate crucible, the company's performance got a whole lot better.
Why do organizations seem so oblivious to the intelligence and expertise of so many of their members? Sure, it's messy and often time-consuming to get everyone involved - but the results are often astounding.
What if the collective intelligence (and energy) embodied in ongoing informal conversations across the entire organization could somehow be tapped to address pressing corporate challenges?
I'll bet we'd see some pretty astounding results if other CEO's were willing to do what Sam Palmisano at IBM has done several times now - hold a "jam session" intense dialogue with thousands of IBM'ers all over the world, all at the same time.
Think about that.
Anyone who's been around organizations for very long knows that the formal "org chart" doesn't tell you much about how things really get done. And for years sociologists and other social scientists have studied informal networks and emergent groups in organizations to develop a better understanding of communication patterns, identify the "real" leaders, and sort out how work really gets done.
Maybe it isn't new, but now a couple of HP researchers have compiled some really intriguing data about informal groups and networks by doing the obvious - studying patterns of email traffic.
The study, reported recently in ComputerWorld, found that informal groups that developed around informal experts and communicated openly about a problem generally outperformed formal experts who were attacking the same issue.
Why am I not surprised? The troops always know who the "real" experts are; often they are far better informed than the managers who "anoint" the people THEY think are capable of getting the job done.
So why don't more organizations open up their problem-solving and tap the power of everyone who cares? I heard of one CEO who woke up to the power of inclusiveness one day and declared, "I just realized that 5,000 people are a whole lot smarter than 5" - the size of his executive committee. And when he created processes that enabled those 5,000 employees to toss their ideas and suggestions into the corporate crucible, the company's performance got a whole lot better.
Why do organizations seem so oblivious to the intelligence and expertise of so many of their members? Sure, it's messy and often time-consuming to get everyone involved - but the results are often astounding.
What if the collective intelligence (and energy) embodied in ongoing informal conversations across the entire organization could somehow be tapped to address pressing corporate challenges?
I'll bet we'd see some pretty astounding results if other CEO's were willing to do what Sam Palmisano at IBM has done several times now - hold a "jam session" intense dialogue with thousands of IBM'ers all over the world, all at the same time.
Think about that.
You can find it here:
Hope it is of some use.
:-0
posted by Beyond Doctorate at 8:52 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home