Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL

managers, who sincerely believed that the structure of their organization is absolutely correct
because ‘it is typical’ or because ‘everything is clear’, which usually meant ‘clear who should report
to whom’. What was unclear was how it all worked together. Actually, it worked in the way that it
worked, in a deep shadow outside the leader’s view.
The obvious advantage of the informal part of a real structure is that it appears as a natural
process and can never be so stupid, like some formal structural decisions are. I would say it is an
organic process that stems from the situation, and is therefore more likely to be relevant to the
particular situation. The informal structure evolves as the result of a lot accidental events and
substructural elements, which combine together with previously existing structural (although
informal) relations and become self-supportive because the organization cannot cope without
them. Of course, such a self-emerging part of the structure within a formal organization may not be
focused on the organizational mission and goals; this may create severe challenges, unless
management is qualified enough to see and fix it.
Complexity and stereotypes
Steven Levy defines complex systems in the following way: ‘A complex system is one whose
component parts interact with sufficient intricacy and they cannot be predicted by standard linear
equations; so many variables are at work in the system that its overall behaviour can only be
understood as an emergent consequence of the holistic sum of all the myriad behaviours
embedded within’. Chris Langston follows with saying that: ‘A system ... emerges from the
interaction of individual units ... The units are driven by local rules, and are not globally
coordinated. Adaptive actors are in large degree guided by local interests and have limited
understanding of the ‘big picture’ ... They interact in some fashion, be it through language,
hormones, or simple reactions to the presence of another. Because of the dynamic interaction of
these individuals, a system emerges. The system is not, of necessity, deliberately created; it may,
and very often does, just happen. The individuals may know what they are supposed to organize,
as would be the case within human systems, and in this sense it is deliberate. However, they may
not remember why or how the organization first occurred or why the given organizational structure
was chosen over other possible forms.’ (quotations are from R.Marion, 1999) This ‘white spot in
the memory’ is not surprising. They cannot ‘remember why’, if there was ‘no why’ - just a random
search that accidentally brought a sufficiently viable structure to satisfy the existing conditions.
Then the structure tends to self-preserve, which is natural.
If the structure was initially designed as a kind of rational decision – then it may be remembered as
rational. However, it remains rational only as long as all conditions that were taken in account to
evaluate rationality are sill the same. If not – then not
47