Organizational Behavior Advisor/Strategist Teaching Organizations to Communicate Across Generational and Cultural Differences Advising Companies on HR Strategies: Assessment, Management, and Facilitation Reporting the Cost/ Benefit Analysis of HR Efforts and Fails Assisting HR Software Companies with Organizational Behavior Tenets Making … Continue reading
Dr. Nancy Southern, a long time mentor of mine, has been bringing successful innovation and systems change to academia and commerce for some time. I was happy that she had time to share with us recently in her New Mexico environment. Though modest, she is involved in projects as diverse as corporate culture change and advancing and improving relationships in culturally rich and diverse community groups. Already an inspiring individual change maker, she claims that this area, its people, and the burgeoning innovative milieu inspire her.
Within a two-hour drive we experienced skiing, art, Native American and new Mexican culture, haute cuisine, millennial start-ups, and some of the friendliest people you’ll ever meet. This area with its excellent airport may be the new best place to live. The landscape is spectacular and varied: alpine mountain forests and blooming deserts; perfect for outdoor types, social meet ups and relaxation, and down the road is the ever awe-inspiring VLA.
Dr. Shawn Michael Nichols
Systems Impact on the Organization
"It is very important for any leader is to realize that your people are what make you successful — or unsuccessful," he told Business Insider. "Anytime I have a team that's struggling, I first look at the leader directly. Your team is a reflection of you." Mat Ishbia
This negative habit is so entrenched in our ideas of Leadership because the CEO feels required to make decisive, innovative plans to revive an organization. The new CEO or manager plans to initiate some groundbreaking changes without consulting the “ground troops” because disruption is the name of the change game.
Not surprisingly for the rest of the group, the new endeavor does not go well at first (or ever), as the leader never sought a buy-in by the participants. The ground troops are after all, the ones who will implement the plan on the ground. This is a historical fail. Lost battles and wars are based on this blindness. Not seeing what is happening on the ground, the leader is unable to tailor their directives to the real market and the players who will make it happen. The troops sit on their hands and wait for the crash.
In the end, the leader feels sabotaged or ignored and the ground troops see yet another failed attempt by management to be a real leader. Neither entity takes responsibility and apathy becomes more entrenched.
Some organizations have made a serious attempt to overcome this impaired vision but find their group wrapped up in deadening “consensus loops.” Too many ideas and opinions can swamp attempts at strategic thinking. Regression to authority again becomes the response.
Certain organizations appoint a small group of “experts” who prepare a plan in conjunction with the C Suite. The evolving plan is circulated for iterative comments and critique. The best groups hold individuals who do not comment accountable – no opinion is wrong but a lack of one is considered unprofessional. In this way, the endeavor is well tailored through a series of pro-and-con loops long before it is implemented. Turn over is reduced and critique and a well-considered buy-in becomes the standard.