Eine sonderbare These des Management-Gurus und verstorbenen Professors Sumantra Ghoshal in seinem Aufsatz:
„Want success? Change the smell of your workplace!“
Und wie verändern wir den Geruch einer „altbackenen Kirche“?
Nun, ein riesiges Problem, sagt Mister Ghoshai:So company after company is launching expensive, large scale, culture change program with the object of changing the mindset of their people. But then you ask: how likely is that? Can you really teach an old dog new tricks?
Was also tun? Er erzählt die Geschichte von einem Naturschutzgebiet, wo er wohnt. Wenn du den Wald betrittst, haut dich der Geruch so um, dass du irgendwie vitalisiert wirst, willst rennen, etwas werfen, einfach in Bewegung kommen, selbst wenn du vorher nur einen gemütlichen Spaziergang vorhattest… Völlig im Gegensatz dazu erlebt er seine Heimat Indien, dort wo seine Eltern wohnen ist im Juni über 40 Grad Hitze mit einer 95%gen Luftfeuchtigkeit.
Nun meint Ghoshai den Schlüssel gefunden zu haben. Jede menschliche Institution (Firma oder Kirche) hat auch so einen Geruch, der entweder vitalisiert oder lähmt und oder etwas dazwischen…
The reality is that you walk into a sales office, factory, head office and in the first fifteen to twenty minutes, you will get a smell. You will a get a smell in the quality of the hum. You will get a smell in the looks in people’s eyes. You will get a smell in how they walk about. That is the smell I am talking about — in most manufacturing facilities, not just in India.
Nun beschreibt er die eigentliche Krise einer Organisation (nicht die Finanzkrise!) sondern…
In companies, particularly in large companies, but I think it is present across the board, there is a pervasive disease called satisfactory underperformance. By the time the company is in a crisis, the problem is easy.The real problem is not when the company is in a crisis. The real problem is often a long period before the crisis, when the company is coasting along in a mode of ’satisfactory underperformance.‘
Was ist dieses geheimnisvolle „satisfactory underperformance.“ Er meint: Anstatt die Wahrheit zu sagen, dass eine Organisation nicht optimal läuft, rationalisiert man das Problem: Iss schon alles richtig so… Nurwenn dann die Gegenbewegung „stretch“ (Stretch is the antithesis of this. Stretch is trying to do more rather than less. It could be anyone’s efforts) durch die Mitglieder der Organisation aufgebaut wird, entwickelt sich eine inspirierende Spannung. Und die kommt nicht einfach so auf, sondern durch „Hingabe“:
Self-discipline is management by commitment. Self-discipline implies you do what you promise. If you promise a 14% reduction in inventory, you die to deliver that. If there is a meeting at nine, everybody is in the room at nine.
Die Firma „Intel“ hat so eine besonder Firmenkultur entwickelt, durch einen speziellen Focus auf „Konstruktive Kritik“: Du musst unter allen Umständen deine Perspektive einbringen!
Intel has a norm it calls ‚constructive confrontation‚, which is an extraordinarily polite and somewhat erroneous way of describing the processes of Intel. Here not only are you allowed to talk on any topic that affects you, you are obliged to express your views and argue for them as strongly as you can.
Zur Gleichen Zeit gelten aber die folgenden 2 Regeln:But at the same time, on the flip side of the norm, Intel says:
-
- 01 at the end of any meeting, a decision will be taken
- 02 at that point of time, agree or disagree, but commit
Das ganze System hat nur einen Zweck: Ich helfe dir, dass du es supergut schaffst, was du dir vornimmst…
Win by personal coaching, guidance, mentoring. Win by helping them gain access to the resources of the rest of the organisation that they may not have access to — but ultimately help them win.
Der Letzte Faktor ist eine Vertrauenskultur:
Finally, there is trust. Not just as the contractual, instrumental version of trust that says, „If you and I come to a deal, I trust you that you will keep your side of the deal.“ It is much more than that. Trust here says, „You know, we are a part of the same organisation and I trust you. I trust you enough to let go of you in the organisational trapeze.“
Und das macht den entscheidenden Unterschied eben aus:
At the end, the true source of competitive advantage today is not issues of scale or of technology. These have become preconditions. The real source of competitive advantage today is much more micro.It is those kinds of behaviors of individuals in the organisation that provide truly sustainable competitive advantage, where people, at the level of each individual, take initiative, collaborate, have self confidence, have commitments, to themselves, to their teams, to their unit, to their organisation.They have the ability to learn and for high quality execution. How do you get those people to do this?
Der Schlüssel ist das Gleichgewicht zwischen „stretch“ und „discipline“.
With stretch and without discipline, you just float up. Without stretch, just discipline over time becomes corrosive. But combine those two and the mutual tension between them leads to this magic of individual initiative, of entrepreneurship, right through the organisation.
Wie kommt es dazu, dass man sich gegenseitig wie von selbst unterstützt und wirklich zusammenarbeitet?
How do you get that quality of collaboration in a large, complex organisation? I believe, it is combination of Support on the one hand and trust on the other. How do you get learning? I think it is the tension between stretch and support.
Wie kommt es nun zu diesem typischen „innovativen Geruch“, der dann auch noch 30 Jahre lang bleiben soll?
I want to assert three things.
1. First, I believe, it is possible, certainly in medium and small-sized organisations, and even in very large organisations, to create that smell; and to protect it over a long period of time.
2. My second assertion is that is possible to do so in a reasonably short period of time.That is the real challenge before top management. True competitive advantage is the tremendous unused potential in our people. Our organisations are so constructed that most employees are asked to use 5% to 10% of their capacities at work. It is not a matter of hours or effort. It is the capacity.
3. My third assertion. I fundamentally believe that a significant part the challenge of management in India is to get a bigger market share of the missing 95% human capabilities. The real function of management is to make ordinary people produce extraordinary results.
Mein Fazit: Alles, was er hier beschreibt, wird durch die Natürliche Gemeinde-Entwicklung gefördert: 1. leidenschaftliche Spiritualität2. Gabenorientiert und bevollmächtigend die Menschen einsetzen3. zweckmäßige StrukturenErstaunlich ist der Focus auf den „human ressources“, aber es liegt letztlich alles am Menschen. Das sollten sich die Christen wohl sagen lassen …