Beliefs, paradigms, et al. LO14432

Eugene Taurman (ilx@execpc.com)
Mon, 21 Jul 1997 08:31:22

Replying to LO14392 --

The paradigms by any name (mind set, beliefs or ?) are crucial to
behavior. and critical to the development of culture in any organization.
Everyone has a set of beliefs and that set of beliefs determine their
every action. It is those actions that cause 'company culture and what
people believe is important to their own success and the company success.
Each one modified a bit by that person's own set of paradigms.

These beliefs determine that persons actions and reactions to the events
around them.and their own definition of "the problem". So what? Well that
determines the questions the CEO and the supervisors ask. They determine
the agenda and reports that The Boss requests. That in turn determines how
the organization spends it's time. That is how culture is formed and the
reason that with in a company the attitudes have common threads about the
right way to behave in the organization.

The sad part is some managers have not taken time to consciously decide
what beliefs to have. They just happen whether we decide or not. That is
why have had so much emphasis on vision and missions so managers will
decide what to be and not just let it happen.

Years ago the unwritten mission of the US auto makers was "keep the line
running". At the same time Toyota "No car shall ever be returned for
warranty". The US vision was not written or posted but the subject
dominated he minds and actions of the management for years. The point I am
trying to make: It is crucial to consciously decide what is important to
success so the right paradigms dominate your questions and reactions.
Because even if a manager has never consciously decides there is a set of
beliefs driving his or behavior and the attitude of the employees.

That set of beliefs drives the consequence system in a company and tells
employees what is important to their own personal success. Each employee
decides what is necessary to drive his or her own success then adopts the
behavior required.

The consequence system is what we say 'thank you for' and 'reprimand for'
and 'reward for'. Most often it is not defined. It just happens.The irony
is that it exists whether or not managers decide to have a reward system.
Every day their questions and actions impact attitude and behavior. The
only choice a manager has, is to try and influence the consequence system
but most ignore it. Some fuss about what to give as a reward but the real
issue is not what to give, but what action and behaviors to say thank for.

I said most chose to ignore the informal consequence system. But many have
tried to adopt formal reward systems. Almost all reward systems have
caused behavior changes in big ways. Rarely have they impacted the
company favorably. Here I am thinking about wages incentives and
judgmental bonus systems. Kohns book is loaded with examples of poorer
performance. Also with examples of improved performance when the rewards
were tied directly to the company performance without management
intervention.

The paradigms or mind sets driving theses systems are the reason the
caused the wrong behavior. The boss's paradigm was people need a kick in
the butt, good people need a big reward. Those paradigms are flawed. So
the reward system did not work to improve the company but the reward
systems did and always cause behavior.

My two cents

Gene

At 01:25 AM 7/18/97 UT, you wrote:

>Malcolm,
>
>I think you raise an important issue. If there is indeed a hierarchy,
>then if we intervene at one level, which is basically what Morty has been
>elluding, then we create differences in other levels.
>
>The question is, what is the hierarchy, how are they defined or referred
>to and can we come to some sort of agreement that this hierarchy is not
>some artifact of some other form of understanding.
>
>mike jay

-- 

Eugene Taurman <ilx@execpc.com>

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>