The Utility Pole Anti-Pattern: I

The unmaintainable, unfathomable, undocumented rat's nests of wires that festoon some urban utility poles are a metaphor for the processes we find in some organizations. Just as the utility pole wires transmit information and power, so too do many organizational processes. Knowing how utility poles get so tangled might generate insights about tangled organizational processes, but we already know enough about organizational processes to suggest some causes and responses without studying utility poles.

Consider the process for introducing new products. Most large organizations have dedicated functions that address particular markets or market segments. And they have functions that handle legal issues, functions that allocate resources, functions that devise strategies, and so on. Often, introducing new products requires winning approvals and support from all these functions, which can sometimes require dealing with several different elements of each function. For example, the function that's responsible for the Widget market might have separate offices for Widget markets in Europe, the Americas, Africa, and Asia. (So far, I haven't seen a company with an Antarctican Widget Office, but the century is still young.)

If gaining approvals is complicated enough, the most valuable expertise of new product advocates isn't product knowledge or even marketing knowledge. Instead, it's knowledge about winning approvals — that is, knowing how the wires are strung from utility pole to utility pole.

What causes and maintains this anti-pattern? How can we work around it?

Indicators

One sign of this anti-pattern: getting something done requires that you either ask (and trust) an expert, or refer to some Web-based process manuals that are often out of date. Another sign: nobody really knows. Another: you begin by following the best available advice, and you discover twists, turns, and speed bumps that nobody knew about.

One of my As we divide our organizations
into smaller bits to make them
more manageable, coordinating
the bits gets more complicatedfavorite examples is the approval loop. To secure approval A, you first need to secure approval B. And to get approval B, you first need approval C. But before you can get approval C, you need approval A. I haven't yet seen a two-link chain, probably because it would be so obvious that people would have to fix it.

Causes

As we divide our organizations into smaller bits to make them more manageable, coordinating the bits gets more complicated, like the wires on utility poles. Because motivating organization-wide action requires the approval of all the bits, each organizational bit effectively has a veto.

Eliminating the veto by limiting the smaller organizational bits to advisory roles doesn't help much. The people to whom the bits report are generally so overloaded that coherent synthesis of conflicting advice from multiple sub-organizational elements is unreliable, even if these people are able to hear the smaller voices in their areas of responsibility.

We'll continue this exploration next time, looking for workarounds and interventions.  Next in this series  Top    Next Issue

Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:

High Falutin' Goofy Talk

Business speech and business writing are sometimes little more than high falutin' goofy talk, filled with pretentious, overused images and puff phrases of unknown meaning. Here are some phrases that are so common that we barely notice them.

Changing the Subject: I

Whether in small group discussions, large meetings, or chats between friends, changing the subject of the conversation can be constructive, mischievous, frustrating, creative, tension relieving, necessary, devious, or outright malicious. What techniques do we use to change the subject, and how can we cope with them?

Business Fads and Their Value

Fads in business come and go, like fads anywhere. In business, though, their effects can be so expensive that they threaten the enterprise. Still, the ideas and methods that become fads can have intrinsic value. Where does that value come from? Where does it go?

Embolalia and Stuff Like That: I

When we address others, we sometimes use filler — so-called automatic speech or embolalia — without thinking. Examples are "uh," "um," and "er," but there are more complex forms, too. Embolalia are usually harmless, if mildly annoying to some. But sometimes they can be damaging.

Ending Sidebars

We say that a sidebar is underway in a meeting when two or more meeting participants converse without having been recognized by the chair. Sidebars can be helpful, but they can also be disruptive. How can we end sidebars quickly and politely?

See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness and Workplace Politics for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming September 25: Planning Disappointments

When we plan projects, we make estimates of total costs and expected delivery dates. Often these estimates are so wrong — in the wrong direction — that we might as well be planning disappointments. Why is this? Available here and by RSS on September 25.

And on October 2: Start Anywhere

Group problem-solving sessions sometimes focus on where to begin, even when what we know about the problem is insufficient for making such decisions. In some cases, preliminary exploration of almost any aspect of the problem can be more helpful than debating what to explore. Available here and by RSS on October 2.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenmhXARWRMUvVyOdHlner@ChacxgDmtwOKrxnripPCoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info

Public seminars

The Race to the South Pole: Lessons in Leadership

On 14 December 1911, four men led by Roald Amundsen reached the South Pole. Thirty-five days later, Robert F. Scott and four others followed. Amundsen had won the race to the pole. Amundsen's party returned to base on 26 January 1912. Scott's party perished. As historical drama, why this happened is interesting enough. But to organizational leaders, business analysts, project sponsors, and project managers, the story is fascinating. We'll use the history of this event to explore lessons in leadership and its application to organizational efforts. A fascinating and refreshing look at leadership from the vantage point of history. Read more about this program.

Here's a date for this program:

• Baldwin-Wallace University, 275 Eastland Road, Berea, Ohio 44017: November 7, Kerzner Lecture Series/International Project Management Day, sponsored by Baldwin Wallace University and the Northeast Ohio Chapter of the Project Management Institute. Register now.
   

The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power

Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.

• A recording of a program presented June 29, 2017, Monthly Webinar, sponsored by Technobility Webinar Series. PMI members can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.