As discussed two weeks ago, an anti-pattern is a commonly occurring pattern for a problem solution that produces counter-effective results. One might at first consider anti-patterns paradoxical — certainly such "solutions" aren't solutions at all. But if we consider solutions that do solve the problem as stated, but which also produce negative results when we consider all consequences, the paradox resolves.
For example, consider the CFO who, to control costs, lowers the ceiling for petty cash expenditures to a level that happens to be 80% of the cost of processing purchase requisitions. Such a policy will certainly increase control of petty cash. But the overall cost to the enterprise rises, because of the cost of processing requisitions.
last time, we began examining the indicators and causes of the anti-pattern of excessively complex process architectures, which I call the Utility Pole anti-pattern. Let's continue.
- Stabilizers
- Senior managers sometimes complicate the problem when they execute reorganizations. They usually do reduce process complexity, but they usually don't eliminate the causes of regrowth of process complexity. Although each organizational adjustment cleans up some utility poles, those same poles are soon festooned again.
- Causes of process complexity probably reside beyond the reach of reorganization processes, because complexity always returns after reorgs. For example, when multiple functions are responsible for a given outcome, all involved feel obliged to define processes that ensure that outcome. Process redesigns that ignore this tendency cannot stem the regrowth of process complexity.
- Defenses and workarounds
- Causes of process complexity
probably reside beyond the
reach of reorganization
processes, because complexity
always returns after reorgs - Complicated control processes can be obstacles to accomplishing objectives in complex bureaucracies. One common solution is the entrepreneurial approach, which aims at evasion and circumvention of controls, using networking, situational awareness, and clever deceptions. Another, the exploitative approach, turns the processes of the bureaucracy into tools to accomplish the advocates' objectives. Both require sophisticated understanding of the control processes.
- Confound expectations. If you're known as a "rule-bender," the entrepreneurial approach is risky. If you're known for cleverly exploiting the rules, the entrepreneurial approach might be the better choice.
- Interventions
- People with risk management responsibility for projects can help limit process complexity by making its costs explicit in risk plans. Common risks that are rarely identified explicitly include: risk of delays due to confusion about compliance with requisition requirements; risk of schedule disruption due to conflicting claims for resources; risk of budget overruns due to technically ambiguous wording of contracts with suppliers arising from restrictions forbidding direct participation by technical people in contract negotiations.
- Risk managers can identify and budget for these and similar risks. Be selective. Focus on risks that have materialized in the past, and use data from those past incidents to justify projections.
The utility pole anti-pattern is usually an emergent problem. Fully addressing it will likely require action coordinated across the organization. First issue 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
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.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.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
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:
- Mitigating Outsourcing Risks: II
- Outsourcing internal processes exposes the organization to a special class of risks that are peculiar
to the outsourcing relationship. Here is Part II of a discussion of what some of those risks are and
what can we do about them.
- A Review of Performance Reviews: Blindsiding
- Ever learn of a complaint about you for the first time at your performance review? If so, you were blindsided.
Reviews can be painful. Here are some guidelines for making them a little fairer.
- The Myth of Difficult People
- Many books and Web sites offer advice for dealing with difficult people. There are indeed some difficult
people, but are they as numerous as these books and Web sites would have us believe? I think not.
- The Self-Explanation Effect
- In the learning context, self-explanation is the act of explaining to oneself what one is learning.
Self-explanation has been shown to increase the rate of acquiring mastery. The mystery is why we don't
structure knowledge work to exploit this phenomenon.
- Ten-Minute Training
- Despite decades of evolution of technology-assisted workplace learning, instructor-led classroom formats
remain the most popular and effective. Now perhaps videoconferencing can help to achieve that effectiveness
at lower cost.
See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness and Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming January 1: The Storming Puzzle: II
- For some task-oriented work groups, Tuckman's model of small group development doesn't seem to fit. Storming seems to be absent, or Storming never ends. To learn how this illusion forms, look closely at Satir's Change Model and at what we call a task-oriented work group. Available here and by RSS on January 1.
- And on January 8: The Storming Puzzle: III
- For some task-oriented work groups, Tuckman's model of small group development seems not to fit. Storming seems to be either absent or continuous. To learn how this illusion forms, look closely at the processes that can precipitate episodes of Storming in task-oriented work groups. Available here and by RSS on January 8.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.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 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Follow Rick
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed