{"id":850,"date":"2018-04-01T09:01:22","date_gmt":"2018-04-01T09:01:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nextculture-organizations.org\/culture-eats-structure-for-breakfast"},"modified":"2018-05-20T07:04:22","modified_gmt":"2018-05-20T07:04:22","slug":"culture-eats-structure-for-breakfast","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nextculture-organizations.org\/en\/culture-eats-structure-for-breakfast\/","title":{"rendered":"Culture Eats Structure for Breakfast"},"content":{"rendered":"

[et_pb_section admin_label=”section”]
\n[et_pb_row admin_label=”row”]
\n[et_pb_column type=”4_4″]
\n[et_pb_text admin_label=”Text”]
\nWithin the scope of the New Work Movement there is a topic that keeps popping up and brings up a question: How is it possible, to change a long time established hierarchical structure in a company and pave the way for a new kind of working and collaboration? Oftentimes people try to get new results in the known context which turns out to be difficult. Have you ever tried to get new results without actually changing your behavior or thinking patterns? Almost everybody has tried this at least once. However, the experience shows that this procedure doesn\u2019t work. Yet, although they should know it better, people keep trying it. To put it in the words of Albert Einstein: \u201eThe purest form of insanity is to leave everything as it is and hope at the same time that something will change.”<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The context determines what is possible<\/h3>\n

How is it possible then to get new results? In order to really get new results, it is essential to shift into a new context, which is no longer based on the usual behavior, the usual perspectives and the known conditions. Generally, the prevailing context determines what is possible. It is therefore important to use a new context in order to develop a new culture at least rudimentary so that the known cultural context in a company can become obsolete.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The question that comes up next is: Which culture \u2013 based on the context \u2013 prevails in the company?<\/p>\n

Most employees are used to company cultures that are based on hierarchies that work top down. The original purpose of the classical, hierarchical structure was to reduce complexity and create seeming security through control. The better processes and employees could be controlled \u2013 according to one of the hitherto assumptions \u2013 the better the company goals and results can be managed. This worked to a certain degree in the past. The problem today is that we live in a highly complex world that changes ever faster. The attempt to manage the increasing complexity using formerly known hierarchical structures more and more turns out to be a dead end.<\/p>\n

Complexity is the opposite of complicacy<\/h3>\n

Complexity describes the behavior of a system or model whose many components can interact in different ways with each other, that follow only local rules and to which instructions of higher levels are unknown. The term is a composition of the Latin preposition\u00a0cum<\/em>\u00a0\u201awith\u2018, or \u201atogether with\u2018, and\u00a0plectere<\/em>\u00a0\u201abraiding\u2018 or \u201aput together\u2018 in the sense of \u201ainterdependent\u2018, \u201ainterweaved\u2018. (Source: Wikipedia)<\/p>\n

When transferring this definition to the business world \u2013 most of the company structures are highly complex \u2013 this would mean that it is essential to use the complexity itself and support a collaboration and braiding of talents so that the qualities of each employee and the processes can fit together.<\/p>\n

However, many people connect complexity with complicacy. Yet complexity is the opposite of complicacy. Only when you try to understand complexity and control it with known hierarchical structures, it becomes complicated.<\/p>\n

A new possibility could be to not try to reduce complexity, but reduce complicacy. This is an approach that originates in a different context than the ordinary one. And exactly this requires a courageous skill that contradicts the usual business behavior. To reduce complicacy and use the complexity it is necessary that you are able to stand in and hold the not knowing.<\/p>\n

Complexity includes not knowing<\/h3>\n

To act out of not knowing means to actually have no idea how something goes. This aspect itself seems to be completely absurd, because in modern business life the focus is very much on control and security. The annual figures, the profit, the market share, everything is well planned. A manager who does not have answers to questions, abdicates controlling the employees and has no idea how a project is going to develop will soon be regarded as unprofessional and unfit to plead. So far it was actually absolutely necessary to have things under control, to know how things work, not take too much of a risk and be professional at any time.<\/p>\n

However, these aspects contradict evolution and thus the establishment of a new working culture. Evolution does not work with control, security, net and double bottom. Or did you think that the first sailors knew beforehand how their trip would go when they headed for the horizon in order to see, whether they would really drop off the flat Earth with their ship or whether the Earth would turn out to be round? Pioneers are ready to not know. People with the vision of a different kind of working serving both people and the Earth is possible, are ready to go first without knowing how it goes. In that case the vision is more important than \u201clooking good\u201d and be liked and accepted by everybody.<\/p>\n

Evolution comes out of not knowing. What does this exactly mean? If you have a brilliant, innovative idea how a new form of collaboration could work then you don\u2019t have to know yet how to realize it. It is not necessary to write down the milestones in a project plan beforehand, know all details or know how the idea or project would develop. Instead it is important that you commit to the vision. The decision and commitment come first. The rest will develop by itself step by step. The maxim is: \u201cTrust the Process!\u201d.<\/p>\n

Yet, to be able to stand in not knowing, there is also another important aspect: You have to be familiar with your fear and perceive it as neutral energy and information. With the belief that fear is negative and unprofessional, you will not leave your comfort zone and thus probably not ask necessary, dangerous questions, point out to drawbacks, try crazy ideas and realize your vision of a new way of working. Do you need courage to go forward? Yes, certainly! However, you might want to consider the following:<\/p>\n

Courage is not the lack of fear. Courage is the decision that something else is more important than fear.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Here is a specific example of the company Gutmann Aluminium Draht GmbH in Weissenburg, Germany (GAD) that went exactly this way:<\/p>\n

The transformation at GAD started (after a long, intensive preparation time) in 2015 with Paul Habbel being the CEO. He revolutionized the organization stepwise, after the employees of the company had the movie \u201cmy great working place\u201d and had commonly decided that they wanted to work as shown in the movie. They were inspired by the picture of a new company and working culture. During a\u00a0Day of Cultural Change,\u00a0<\/em>which the company sets up regularly and invites interested companies that want to learn from the Gutmann example, Paul Habbel shared: \u201eWe had no idea how it goes. We still have no idea today. The only thing we can do is do one step after the other and see what works and what doesn\u2019t work. Well at GAD a lot of things work by now in the sense of New Work, for example this:<\/p>\n