Disjointed Kitsch

I was struck by Drucker’s thoughts on “Organizational Inertia”. Although it was pointed at “non-profits” and their inability to stop doing “anything” vs. “for-profits” and the market feedback that necessitates stopping unprofitable business, a certain amount of what he says can apply to all institutional processes either “for” or “non” profit and rings of the “Golden Hammer” syndrome.

In my line of work it is quite common to set up agreed upon processes for performing tasks when more than one department is involved. Often one department sets up the process for the other departments to follow, mainly because that department manages a critical resource that’s involved in the process. This in and of itself is not bad. It enables us to get the work done in a predictable manner. What happens, however, is that process become a “Golden Hammer” for the other departments. They will apply (and abuse) that process to any other task that comes along that looks like it should fit from their perspective. The managing department is never consulted as to the new application of the existing process. Hence, the ability of a “for-profit” intuition to stop using a successful process is not limited by market feedback (i.e. revenue). Only if that process impacts the bottom line does it become a concern (in a “for-profit” setting).

The missing element seems to be a “feedback” loop (which is what revenue is for a “for-profit”). Instead of applying the same process to new problems, a discussion should take place on the application of the existing process to a new situation with all interested parties. Certainly this will take longer than “just doing it”, but in the long run, the right system will be built or adapted for the right process and for the right reasons.