Archives for posts with tag: books

Images of Organisation (Morgan 1995)

Back in 2005, I read Gareth Morgan’s “Images of Organization”. I’ve thought about it many times since and it came up in a recent conversation so I thought I’d write about it here.

Essentially it comes down to the fact that you can view organisations from many different perspectives, gaining insights each time you switch your views, as it were. These views can be broadly categorised in three ways: Unitary, Pluralist and Radical.

Unitary views

This metaphor looks at the organisation as a machine or a living organism. Everybody plays their part. People inside the system are like cogs or cells: resources to be deployed to the greater cause. Dissent is a bad word. Opposition is even worse. The guy (or gal) at the top makes all the decisions, everyone else implements. Value is correllated in the long term to perceived contribution and merit. Strong weight is put on subjects such as “mission statements”, “goals”, “objectives” and “achievement” as instruments to succeed. It’s a simple, clear, classical view of organisations that emphasises loyalty, and as such it has a lot to recommend it. George Bush or the late Pope John Paul II, to me, would exemplify unitary leaders. Other names readily come to mind.

Pluralist views

The pluralist view puts more emphasis on the fact that an organisation is a collection of individuals and that common purpose is achieved through debate, negotiation and conflict. It’s much more tolerant of difference and believes that good ideas are forged from the furnace of active and intense discussion and argument. Pluralist views leave the door open for more socially or politically minded views of organisations: why individuals subsume themselves into a greater entity – what the costs are and what the benefits are. Democratic institutions such as parliaments are obvious examples of pluralist forums, but when you look at it, pluralism exists in most organisations: for instance, how agreement is achieved is a messy thing, often involving power-bases, politics and some behind the scenes in-fighting. Results can often be unpredictable. Pluralist leaders show more willingness to listen to others and have more tolerance for debate and alternative. As a result they can be seem somewhat weak, but great change has sometimes been achieved through the actions of pluralists.

Radical views

Radical views take an extreme approach to organisations. All the niceties are left behind, and the rancid whiff of death and disorder pushes growth and harmony out of the picture. The “instruments of domination” case is pure Marxism – it states that the bosses are out to get maximum output from resources for minimum input and that issues such as safety and employee welfare are just sideshows deflecting from the goal of profits through exploitation. Suspicion and conspiracy is everywhere. Every idea from management has a hidden agenda, involving the deprivation of the worker’s rights. “Common purpose” is replaced by “exploitation”.

The “psychic prisons” metaphor is even more fascinating. In this view, the organisation is like a Freudian nightmare, where all of the neuroses and flaws of the individuals involved are brought into the organisation, infecting the organisation like a virus. You are asked to seek out comfort blankets, purposeless routines, methods for punishment and ridicule (often unconsciously applied). Alliances and enmities are seen as a mother / father thing. Whether you agree with it or not, this particular viewpoint – the organisation as a deranged basket-case – has to be one of the most eye-opening ways of looking at any organisation. In class, when we started talking about it, some cases came to light in all the organisations that we worked in that were truly stunning: examples of people getting upset over the smallest things, of pettyness, of madness in the true sense of the word.

None of the views are particularly better than another: I’m not trying to say that unitary views are bad – they all have their merits and downsides. What is more important to emphasise is that there are many ways of looking at the same thing and that great insights can be gained from taking the time to look differently at your place of work.

Anyhow, it’s a good book. Unusually for a business book, it is very readible with a lot of humour. Well worth checking out if you have the time to spare.

Nick Hornby is one of a small number of novelists whose books I thoroughly enjoy reading. He posesses a unique ability to extract humanity and humour out of some of the most difficult situations and to create recognisable, real life characters that the reader warms to, irrespective of what they have done.

A Long Way Down - Nick Hornby

This book, a sort of Breakfast Club for the suicidally depressed, is no exception. I was sucked into the storyline pretty much from the start, despite its weighty subject. Four people with nothing in common, apart from a desire to end their lives, find themselves on the top floor of a well-known jumping off point in South London. Instead of queuing up on the ledge in single file they descend via the stairwell and embark on a series of madcap escapades involving tabloid headlines, an angel visitation conspiracy, a holiday in Tenerife and a riotous meeting in Starbucks.

Each section in the book is written from the viewpoint of one of the main characters. You step inside their heads, as it were. The “star” of the book is Martin Sharp, a former chat-show host very much down on his luck, particularly after having slept with a fifteen-year old girl and ending up in prison as a result. He finds his match in Jess, an eighteen year old foul-mouthed rebel who has alienated herself from everyone around her as she speaks without bothering to inform her brain first. Then there’s Maureen, a middle-aged carer who has lost 20 years of her life nursing her seriously disabled son. Finally there’s JJ, a washed-up American musician, who resorts to lying when asked to explain why he wanted to jump because his reason seems so banal compared to everyone else’s. I got the impression that the author had the greatest degree of sympathy for this character.

The continuous jump into each other’s thoughts is utterly convincing and often quite funny. In Maureen’s sections, all the swear-words are blanked out: for a short while I thought this was an American thing, owing to the fact that I bought the book in Chicago… Swearing by others in the group is often followed by “sorry, Maureen”. The degree of personal insult each person in the group has to endure is cringingly hilarious at times. In the end however, a bond of sorts forms amongst them, and each of them finds out a bit more about themselves.

So, yes, I would recommend this book. It’s full of warm, funny moments with a set of wonderfully complicated characters. It’s not so much a book about suicide as it is about keeping going.

And if this book is ever to be made into a movie, I’d love to see Colin Firth playing the role of Martin Sharp..

I’ve been reading my daughter the tale of Rumplestiltskin over the last day or so. Man, it’s wild! For anyone not familiar with the story, here it is in a nutshell.

A miller foolishly tells a king that his daughter can turn straw into gold.

The king gets interested, siezes the girl, locks her in a room full of straw and tells her upon pain of death, that all the straw needs to be turned into gold before dawn the next day.

An elf appears and for a small fee, offers to do the job. Offer is accepted and hey presto – the straw is converted into gold by the elf.

The king is impressed, but rather than let the poor girl go, he brings her to an even bigger room full of straw, and the nightmare for the girl continues for another few days, with the rooms getting bigger and bigger each time. Every time, the elf saves the day, but the poor girl is eventually obliged to promise her first-born child to him in return for a room full of gold.

Get, this: the girl then marries the king. It’s her reward no less.

She has a baby, the elf comes back looking for the kid, she refuses. The elf then proposes that if she can discover his name in 3 days, she can keep the kid. At the last minute she finds out that his name is Rumplestiltskin (a messenger hears him sing his name as he dances around his house), and when she tells him his name, the angry elf puts his foot through the floor before he leaves and is never seen again.

Now who exactly is the bad guy here? That king is a complete psychopath! I mean, imagine marrying someone who has just threatened to kill you if you can’t do something that should be impossible to do! And, like, what the hell is Rumplestiltskin doing, loudly singing his name outside when so much is at stake? Idiot.

So what was the moral of this tale? “The bigger the bastard you are, the greater the rewards”? “All men are bastards”? “Keep your father away from the drink, because he might say something really stupid”? Possibly all these are lessons to be gained from the story, but should we really be telling our kids this? 🙂

Still though, it makes a welcome change from “Prince Charming”…

The Wisdom of Crowds is an enlightening book, particularly at the beginning where he spells out his thesis: that, under certain defined conditions, the views of many can often trump the views of one single person, no matter how influential or how much of an expert that person may be.

The Wisdom of Crowds

The book justifies the opinion that forecasting and estimating are better performed by many people from different backgrounds instead of just a single elite. These types of problems, referred to as “cognition” problems, are commonplace – who is going to win the 3.40 at Newmarket, what will our sales be for the next quarter, when will the project be completed, etc.

He then tackles more complex problems, called “coordination” problems and “cooperation” problems, and arrives at a similar conclusion that, left unhindered, crowds of diverse people, acting independently, can arrive at an elegant solution to very complex problems.

In some ways, the book is nothing new. Adam Smith promoted the basic idea over 200 years ago when he talked about the “invisible hand” guiding the market and economists and politicians have been discussing this ever since. Surowiecki asserts that some of the rules of the free market have applications way beyond finance – the inner workings of the Google search engine and the Hollywood Stock Exchange (HSX) are examples that are mentioned.

But, you might be saying, what about stock-market bubbles, group-think, decision by committee, mass-hysteria, riots and all the things that one would attribute negatively to crowds? His view is that crowds work best when a highly diverse group of individuals are able to make independent choices with levels of influence minimised as much as possible. In this way the maximum amount of information can be gleaned from the environment and an aggregation process can then happen which may yield a good answer to the problem at hand. Influence and persuasion are seen as disrupting factors in this process.

If you are looking for a “how to” manual, then the book will be somewhat disappointing. For instance, many business managers face challenges in getting groups to come together to make good decisions. This book provides some tantalising evidence that group decision making is indeed superior, but the reader is left to figure out for themselves how to apply it to their own particular situation.

The book is very readible. It contains a large body of fascinating research material and conveys the conclusions elegantly.

When I went to the US three years ago, one thing that struck me when I went to book stores was the large number of conservative right-wing books on sale, decrying liberalism, promoting imperialism and calling for a return to old-fashioned Christian values.

I went into Barnes and Noble today for a wee stroll through the paperbacks and hardbacks and it suddenly hit me – where have they all gone? I counted about 20 books on sale, and about two were touting a conservative stance. The others were unflinchingly anti-Bush. I noticed two books apparently featuring Ann Coulter on the cover but on closer examination they were written by fierce opponents of her. Other books were taking aim at Bush, Cheney, the religious right, the Bush administration’s views on the religious right, Iraq, Katrina and US government policy. I even noticed a very critical book written by a Christian minister.

Man, the wave has truly crashed. With the congressional elections tomorrow it will be very interesting to see how it all turns out. I must profess to knowing very little about US politics, and my instinct tells me that the outcome might be somewhat more muted than might be expected, but if this was the UK or Ireland, the word “landslide” would be on everyone’s lips.