December 10, 2004

You are currently browsing the daily archive for December 10, 2004.

I got this via email as a member of a yahoo group focused on Shoshana Zuboff’s concept of the support economy.

Michael Wolff of ki-work.com has been thinking about organizations, knowledge work, customer service, distributed newtorks and offshoring.

Here’s his email:

Following Tom Peters offshoring manifesto in which he says that off-

shoring is here to stay and he lists 20 “hard truths” in support of

the view in Changethis.com (www.changethis.com/7.OffShoringManifesto),

Graham Douglas challenged us to respond with our ki work offshoring

manifesto.

Drawing heavily on TSE thinking, we submit a draft for your

comments. Our position is that while we accept the inevitablity of

off-shoring, especially in manufacturing and to some extent in IT,

we do not see this as appropriate for knowledge work. New

organisational structures are required. The following is our 19

point manifesto. We are allowing Tom Peters to win by having more

points!

the challenge

in the emergent knowledge economy, the mechanistic command and

control organisational model that was suitable for manufacturing

goods and location-dependent services is clearly not working for

services that are delivered via IT and telecoms.

these services are being undertaken in contact and admin centres,

which are, essentially, knowledge factories. Based on transaction

economics, the goal is to optimise the cost and productivity of

every transaction, without full regard for the impact on customers

and workers. As a result:

- there is a growing chasm between companies and their customers,

illustrated by the decline in customer loyalty

- workers are becoming increasingly less fulfilled in their work, as

reflected in the growing levels of staff turnover

- in the banking sector, insider crime rates are soaring as more and

more short term staff are employed

there is a progressive breakdown in trust between companies and

their customers and workers. With the growth in offshoring, the gap

between the company and its customers widens further. The

relationship between the company and its onshore employees is also

further stressed.

with growing dissatisfaction from both customers and employees, the

risks posed by applying an outmoded organisational model with a

narrow focus on minimising the cost per transaction are compounded,

leading eventually to serious negative outcomes for all stakeholders.

to meet this challenge, ki work proposes a radical restructuring of

the conventional organisational model, in favour of one that

recognises and is based on the value of a company’s relationships,

both with its customers and its workers.

ki work manifesto

1.   ki work is an innovative organisational structure facilitating

collaborative and transactional interactions between workers and

customers, mediated by IT and telecoms

2.   ki work supports the large scale distribution of interactive,

collaborative decision-making and transaction processing – typically

contact centre, admin and knowledge-intensive applications

3.   ki work is a cost-competitive, socially responsible and

sustainable alternative to offshoring

4.   ki work is a self-organising, adaptive, non-linear, and complex

social network. This entails a radical realignment in working

relationships, from the dominant competitive to the emergent

collaborative mode of consciousness – from collaborating to compete

to competing to collaborate

5.   ki work supports the balanced creation of financial,

relationship, social and environmental capital, enabling a quantum

shift from transaction to relationship economics

6.   ki work minimises organisational and infrastructure overheads,

and maximises process efficiency, enabling ki workers to earn most

of the total interaction value by keeping costs low

7.   ki work is a purpose-centred and principle-based community -

the common purpose that all members share is to realise the power of

collaborative networking on an equitable basis for all members and

to create and share financial, relationship, social and

environmental capital

8.   ki work and its members are custodians, not owners of capital -

the shared intellectual property belongs to the ki work commons

9.   ki work is a collaborative organisational layer that

interconnects workers both inside and outside conventional

organisations, focused on cross-functional and customer-focused

processes across permeable organisational boundaries

10.  ki work recognises that each collaborative and transactional

interaction between two or more individuals supporting a business

process is unique, exceptional and potentially transformational

11. in the ki work network, the centre of the organisational

universe is the interaction between two or more individuals, whether

they are ki workers or not. This enables organisations to build

trust with both customers and workers, compounding the growth in

relationship capital. This in turn results in massively increased

productivity, flexibility and adaptability

12.  in the ki work model every interaction is an opportunity to

share information, knowledge, emotion, wisdom and transformational

opportunities, providing ki workers a path to self-actualisation

through the sustainable development of self-knowledge and

authenticity through the development of deep working relationships

13.  in the emergent knowledge economy, knowledge and its means of

transfer are abundant - what are scarce and have value are deep

relationships

14.  purpose-centred collaborative networks are massively scalable

and accelerate the development of relationship capital, following

Reed’s law of exponential growth on the value of networks

15.  the ki work relationship model is responsive and empowering,

shifting from the traditional employer/employee and customer/service

provider relationship in favour of peer-to-peer and mutual

interdependence

16.  empowered workers are more than capable (with the appropriate

environment and training) to manage themselves, to agree outcomes

with other team members, and to deliver those outcomes, even when

working from home. This self-organisation contributes to the low

cost of the ki work model

17.  people flourish, grow, succeed, and are more fulfilled when

part of a supportive community with shared purpose, values and

goals, and where their contribution makes a difference

18.  when part of a community of practice, the potential for

collaborative learning, creating and sharing new knowledge, and

finding innovative solutions, rises exponentially

19.  ki work supports an integral home and community-centric

approach to work-life balance.

… over on Gaping Void, I noticed either a blog ad or a new type of link, over to what looks like a blog, more than a site.

SlackerManager.com - Paving The Path Of Least Resistance, So You Don’t Trip And Fall

Blogging meets Dilbert in the Post-9/11 Era ?

The tag line makes sense when you read it, almost. But then, I found myself thinking … if it’s the path of least resistance, who cares if you fall … you’ll probably roll into something even less resistant, and it might be fun - warm, wet, soft, easy on the touch … whatever.

I’ll look around, and see what it has to say. I am so very jaded about workplace stuff … witty observations, more prescriptions and nostrums about high performance, and engagement, and execution, and leadership, and bottom-up managing upward, and authenticity, and hot groups, and innovation, and creativity.

I believe I have a good reason for being jaded. This domain was my career focus for 20 years, and a passion for most of those 20 years (and arguably, when thinking and writing about wirearchy, the sociology of technology, and the dynamics of intercognilinked communications … it still may be). I have boxes and boxes of books in my storage lockers on self-directed teams, role and power negotiations in the workplace, organizational design, organizational change and development, spirituality at work, leadership, the future of organizations. I’ve been a presenter about issues such as organizational effectiveness, work design, and the “workplace of the future” at national and international conferences in three or four countries.

From a cynical point of view, I could say that the more there has been an emphasis on performance and competition, the more it has been an excuse for many (most ?) organizations to become more darwinian, meaner if not leaner, more conservative and risk-averse, and more narrow, more rigid … even though one wcould argue that the demands of our current environment make it necessary, critical even, that organizations become more cooperative and collaborative, educated players-with-risk, and seeking to engrain flexibility as a way of life, a central defining factor of culture.

I am jealous, in a way, of the people in their early ’20’s through to mid-to-late 30’s, in that they at least get to be realistic, sardonic, sarcastic, intelligent, and so on “slackers” because it’s at least evident in 2004 that life is more often than not NOT the monotonic, black and white, heterosexual couple, two kids and a house fairy tale, the work-your-way-up-the-ladder for 20 years and you’ll be alright beliefs. Sure, those scenarios still unfold for many people in different ways or via different paths, but at least we don’t pretend as much about that area of life any more. We do pretend about lots of other stuff, though … you can probably pick just as many areas as me.

On the other hand, I imagine that there are many 20-something to 30-somethings out there that think I must be nuts or out of touch with their lives, given that there’s still so much of the old-school, established institutions mindset still in power … and no doubt many of them have a very harried, difficult set of circumstances to navigate and manage. For them I have a lot of empathy, and I still sometimes feel a responsibility to keep pushing for more openness in organizational/workplace areas and issues. Work and making one’s contributions are central aspects of peoples’ lives, and there’s an inherent, ongoing struggle between the demands made on organizations by the rules of the commercial/business game, and the demands made on individuals - physically, psychologically and emotionally - by organizations in order to succeed at the business game.

I can often understand why intelligent people become slackers, or why the “slacker ethic” as I understand it, exists … why encourage this system by getting empassioned about corporate performance when the system is badly out of whack, and not doing you any favours ?