In just one minute, 243,000 photos will be uploaded to Facebook. One-hundred and forty four people will move to a new home. Approximately 136, 824, 00 pounds of carbon dioxide will be released into the atmosphere.
You are changing constantly and so is everything around you.
Larger organisations are essentially all about responding to and enacting changes on a massive scale. In the face of these dynamic environments, we set up support structures to ensure that change can occur as cleanly and efficiently as possible. Buildings go up. Bridges are built.
It’s essential that there are dedicated people to help remove all obstacles so that people can focus on the changes that count.
Think about the challenges of a Human Resource team. New people enter organisations every week. Employees leave.
Human Resources need to ensure this occurs as effectively as possible whilst trying to work out what type of person they want to enter and which ones they want to retain, train, and how to go about building all the qualities we want in people.
You may believe the best approach to bringing this stability and achieving long-term success is to control things centrally, like a mother ship or a queen bee. To ensure consistency and compliance, everything goes through a controlled decision-making group.
This approach may involve enforcing the policies and standards and having final say on all capability decisions. If you tend to believe that change needs to be controlled, then you may prefer this centralised approach.
Think about the trusty ol’ iPhone. What if Apple adopted a centralised approach managing their customers?
What if they found ways to penalise you if you didn’t use this phone? What if after purchasing the phone, they told you there was a series of mandatory training programs you will need to attend before you can switch it on?
This may seem odd, but it’s essentially what organisations do everyday when we occupy a more centralised approach to managing change.
In contrast, you may believe that change needs to be embraced and that you are better off letting people surf the waves rather than restricting them in the swimming pool. You may, instead, give people the swimming lessons and surf board, and allow them to tumble off the surfboard from time to time.
If you hold beliefs that people need freedom and autonomy, therefore, you may prefer a decentralised approach to providing support. That is, you are there to enable and influence rather than ensure compliance.
This approach more closely aligns with a ‘customer service’ approach to support where you are essentially there to help people.
Take a safety support function that desperately wants to lower injury rates. Their tendency may be to initiate more standards, procedures, rules, and audits. The importance of their goal, after all, is something we can’t deny.
What if, instead, they adopted a decentralised, customer-centric approach? They could, for example, build resilience and motivation, which could help maintain alertness and situation awareness. This approach also has the benefit of being more flexible to the inevitable changes that surround us.
The centralised approach is too easy. We mandate a new rule then shake our heads in disbelief when these important rules are ignored or bent.
Of course, simply responding mindlessly to customers can be risky. A doctor, for example, who simply orders an operation that a patient demands is not really looking after their customer.
For internal support services, responding quickly and efficiently to customers can also mean that lots of new changes occur that create confusion and may not align with the broader organisational goals.
Ultimately, it probably boils down to what a customer needs rather than what a customer wants.
And now we’ve reached the end of the blog, just reflect on how much has changed.
Mother ship, this is Dr Duck. How are we going to control all of this?
Last month, my colleague, Maurice Cristiano, and myself, conducted some research to find out some best practice thinking in regards to internal support services. The above is a bit of a summary of the views and advice of some experts we spoke to with a bit of my own interpretation and opinion mixed in.
We’d like to thank the following people for their insights. Please note that this blog does not necessarily reflect their views or the views of my workplace.
Marvin Oka – Behavioural Modeller, Keynote Speaker, Corporate Consultant
Dr Simon Moss – Senior Lecturer at Charles Darwin University
Peter Howell – Group Manager HR Operations at John Holland
Michael Ingpen – Business Analyst
Saiful Nasir – Lead Consultant – Business Process Management
Craig Roberton – Principal Consultant at RXP Services Ltd
Craig Skipsey – Evangelist at Responsive.org
Robert De Wet – Semi retired construction innovation and bid coach
Dr Fiona Kenvyn – Human Factors consultant
Chris Burton – Asia Pacific Learning Development Manager at TMS
Sara Pazell – Occupational Advisor: Human Factors & Ergonomics/Human Performance Technologist
Marigo Raftopoulos – CEO Strategic Innovation Lab