La
piramide del senso
Enterprise Development: Creating Shared Meaning through Pyramid Building by Prasad Kaipa, Chris Newham and Russ Volckmann The article
describes a methodology, pyramid building, and its uses in enterprises
for systems thinking, developing shared meaning and aligning people,
processes and strategy. The challenges of finding agreement and alignment
in complex, polarized, high tension environments are explored, together
with illustrations of how this tool was applied in a variety of organizations.
We intend this methodology to increase capacity for generating clear,
integrated and creative solutions in enterprises facing the challenges
of complex, uncertain, ambiguous and polarized circumstances. Consider the following
two scenarios.
An executive team in a
Fortune 100 company was at a crossroads. There were many opportunities
in front of them and many obstacles to overcome. Competitors were
right on their heels. The right choice could take the company over
the top, while a wrong decision could bring about a major disaster.
The executive team's conversation about the future was like those
of many other teams all over the world. Tempers were flaring and nobody
was listening. At last, they came up with a solution that they could
all `live with' and justify to shareholders. So the decision they
made was not meaningful or exciting to themselves, let alone to the
rest of the organization. Nevertheless, they allowed a sigh of relief,
fully knowing that what they agreed upon is less than optimal. At
some level, this group knew that the outcome could only be a continuation
of the past, rather than a step into the future.
In contrast, the Emerging
Markets Training group of a large automobile company was going through
a start-up process with a similar circumstances. There was tension
and uncertainty in the group. They could not make major decisions,
but had to live with those their executives made. They had to cut
costs while providing quality service, focus on short term gains while
designing long term strategies, and organize globally to serve clients
while being close enough to listen, learn and change based on shifts
emerging from corporate headquarters.
To accomplish these multiple
and seemingly contradictory objectives, the group used an approach
that brought simultaneous focus to their competencies and those of
their clients. They generated shared meaning in the process, and used
the structure they designed to clarify and enhance their understanding
of their clients, their own work and each other. They successfully
took a highly complex, ambiguous and uncertain business challenge
replete with polarities, and made it manageable. In the end, there
was a deeper understanding, a clear process to engage with the clients
and a design to do their job easier. The group members even became
much more effective in working with one another. The process they
went through involved building pyramids.
Pyramid building is about
creating an issue related three dimensional structure that helps visualize
interdependencies and tensions in complex situations. Pyramids, or
in this case tetrahedrons, are geometrical objects which have four
corners and four faces interconnected through six edges. Each face
is connected with each other and each corner is connected through
edges to every other corner. In effect, the tetrahedron allows for
a visual representation of complexity in organizations. The process
for building the tetrahedron fosters a systemic perspective and understanding
of the implications of any scenario in a more complete and meaningful
way.
Systems thinking is essential
for working with complexity in organizations. Rapid change is coupled
with our growing awareness of complex systems that relate leadership
to business strategies, customers, technology, and employees in a
ever shifting cultural, social, economic and political environment.
Systems thinking in groups is required for alignment with vision,
goals, challenges arising from change. In fact, wherever the authors
work, we hear about the need for alignment of methodologies, people
and structures and an integrated perspective from which to act. Such
actions are needed, we predict, to produce sustainable growth, satisfied
and committed customers, and creative and productive employees designing
innovative products and services.
In over four years of
using this approach in a wide variety of contexts and for a wide variety
of purposes, our clients have found it to be of critical importance
in confronting complexity and integrating diverse perspectives. Organizations
and groups are using the process to think systemically, to explore
ideas and build alignment, to surface and explore differences, to
communicate and share understanding, to focus efforts, to design strategies
and to evaluate results. The pyramid approach, we are finding, allows
us to develop a shared, transformed view of the enterprise and, from
that new perspective, create its future.
In a less chaotic, predictable
market place once we came up with a good, usable product, its life
time was in years and decades. We just had to make sure that we produced
high quality, low cost products that fit the needs of our customers.
On the other hand, the current context changes very quickly and the
Internet and other factors have really made the market place very
interconnected and global. The product life cycle is shrinking every
day as demonstrated by Netscape's release of a new version of their
Internet browser (Netscape Navigator) every quarter or so. If they
fail to do this, Microsoft might take away their market share very
quickly! In such a fast paced environment Netscape can predict neither
what will happen in the market place nor how well their browser will
be accepted.
To apply our best thinking
to such situations we use analysis. Simulations help us anticipate
outcomes. Simulations and scenario planning activities have been of
great help to many companies. Computer-based tools are helping executives
and managers alike to simulate and understand feedback loops and causal
implications of their decisions and give them an opportunity to compress
time and simulate a scenario to predict its results and make adjustments.
There are limitations
on what simulations can do. While there are times when we could create
boundary conditions and simulate a scenario that helps our understanding
and allow us to prepare for the future, we can get into trouble by
identifying causal relationships and repeatable patterns and trying
to apply them in future unpredictable circumstances. Mattel recently
had to recall their new `snack-time' doll that chewed up fingers and
hair of some unsuspecting children along with plastic carrots. Simulations
with selected groups did not reveal the contexts in which these disasters
would occur. They had to learn it by doing it.
In program and project
planning we predict the outcomes of new actions through a linear analysis.
Project management provides good tools that help teams and organizations
to develop and release products with limited surprises. But there
has long been a tension between linear project planning and the dynamics
of development. Resistance to project planning tools in software systems
development stemmed in part from a recognition that many aspects of
systems development are iterative, that is, nonlinear. It is difficult
to translate the linearity of most project planning tools to the organic,
dynamic processes of many programs and projects.
The global market place
and continued customer acceptance are neither predictable nor can
it be planned in advance. If an organization does not have a systemic
and dynamic view of its customers and their needs, its products and
the market place, it could end up in deep trouble. What can help us
navigate through a future of high complexity and low predictability?
Our discovery has been
that the pyramid building process allows for participants to include
each others' mental models and transcend these to build something
quite new. There are phases in which divergent group thought embraces
complexity, uncertainty, ambiguity and polarization, and phases of
convergent thought that makes the relationships between new ideas
quite explicit and brings about new learning. Our clients report that
the pyramid building process has created a new context for working
together, for communicating with openness and authenticity. They report
that building pyramids helps to link ideas and to look at the tensions
between them. The process breaks down road blocks to group learning
and gets creative juices flowing.
The pyramid building process
reliably ignites conversations that illuminate new paths for development.
In the next few paragraphs, we describe some examples in which pyramid
building has been used to deal with complexity.
At a Fortune 100 aerospace
company, we helped a training design team work together in ways they
could manage their complex task. To understand their customers better,
we built a pyramid simulating the current reality of their working
environment and culture and another including the highest vision that
they could hold that described a desired future. The team gained conceptual
clarity around where their clients are and where they could be. By
exploring the gap between the two, the design team experienced high
energy and shared vision. The process clarified which specific training
modules were critical to be included in their management development
program, one that continues to be successful in the company two years
after its introduction.
In building its mission,
the Indian software company Mastek used the pyramid building process.
They wanted their mission to be dynamic and also their pyramid (which
they called Mastek Prism) to be usable in day to day operations. In
building it, they first sought and received extensive input from their
700 employees over six months. Then they clarified the personal visions
of the management team and worked to identify a mission that `includes
and transcends' their personal visions and the employee input. From
their pyramid, they could see clearly how and why companies in the
information technology industry performed the way they do and how
and what they wanted to learn from companies like Microsoft, Xerox
PARC, Hewlett Packard and Apple. They use the pyramid to simulate
and understand characteristics of effective teams, to select members
who bring different skills and competencies to the team, as a tool
to engage with customers and in strategic planning processes to create
sub-strategies and measures of success. Miniatures of the "Mastek
Prism" were given to all their 700 employees and many of their customers.
Mastek found their prism to be deeply meaningful, and informative.
It helped them gain a holistic perspective by identifying new problems
and opportunities before they happened. This pyramid model was a useful
tool for them to think through their decisions and choices.
In another Fortune 100
manufacturing company, stimulating employee motivation was a high
priority. Procedures and measures were provided for division managers
to implement and evaluate empowerment in their organizations. In a
division where this prescription was unsuccessful and productivity
went down after the training programs, a plant manager brought other
plant managers and senior executives to a workshop where we facilitated
a process in which they discovered when they personally were most
empowered. They built a pyramid integrating their experiences both
in and outside of work. There were many `ahas' and insights into why
the current training program was not working and what they could do
to raise the productivity of their plants. They discovered that heart,
feeling of ownership, self-esteem, mutual trust and information sharing
are all essential.
Dr. Deming had begun to
integrate his management philosophy towards the end of his life through
the development of the system of profound knowledge. Unfortunately,
his ideas were insufficiently explained to be understood even by his
close followers. Dr. Al Viswanathan, a retired quality manager from
Boeing and a former president of The Deming User Group in Seattle
used pyramid technology to understand the deeper connections between
the components of profound knowledge and disseminate his learnings
to wider audiences. He creates a foundation for his audiences to explore
the relationships between the components of profound knowledge in
a systemic way. The participants create new meanings for themselves
and apply the principles of profound knowledge in their organizations.
A new business segment
was developing in a Fortune 100 tele-communications company. While
the overall business was laying off people, this segment was experiencing
exponential growth. The management wanted to assess the future and
create a strategic vision that built on the opportunities they were
seeing. After exploring their core competencies and strategic intent,
they built a pyramid which revealed the interdependencies between
products and services, employees, customers and profitability. The
division took these as four areas of focus for the following year.
Interdependent groups were established to understand and simulate
the opportunities and threats that arose from their vision.
The Secretary of Energy
and Petroleum Industry in a major third world country had retained
a consulting group to assess innovation in the energy industry in
that nation. When consultants interviewed over 500 engineers and scientists
during the pilot phase and came together to prepare a presentation
for their clients, the mass of information was found to be complex
and unwieldy. Implications were not clear, although their intent and
the model they used was quite adequate. We used a pyramid building
process to create an interpretive framework to understand and explain
the results of the pilot project. Executives and government representatives
were given 3D pyramid models and the participants clearly understood
the conditions under which innovation could thrive in their industry.
The next expanded phase is in progress and the consulting firm is
continuing to use and evolve the framework.
Athena has used the pyramid
building process four times in the development of management training
CD-ROMs, including an award winning CD-ROM for management development.
They brought together people from within their organization and from
outside to develop these programs. The pyramid building process was
very successful in helping these ad hoc groups gain focus and examine
their perspectives in a highly creative way. Also, the pyramid building
process was also used for organizing a recent book, Executive EQ:
Emotional Intelligence in Business by Robert Cooper and Ayman Sawaf.
Pyramids, or more accurately,
tetrahedrons have been built in twenty-six organizations, including
twelve corporations, and in five countries. We believe that this process
is all about having good, meaningful conversations that lead to coherent
and focused action in the face of complexity. When the risks are high
and choices are not clear the pyramid building process supports the
development of a whole systems perspective that is organic and fluid.
It supports not only the development of meaning among the participants,
but its evolution through dissemination and further conversations.
While the initial results
have been very encouraging, we have found the process to require coaching
and continued exploration to get the best out of the pyramid tool
and the process. When coaching accompanied pyramid building, the alignment
between people, their actions, processes and organizational structures
were more aligned than ever before.
Enterprises grow and develop
when a shared and holistic perspective is guiding their actions. When
that perspective emerges from the complexity and interdependency of
their tasks at hand, pyramid builders become aligned and integrated.
The three dimensional pyramid that encapsulates this perspective becomes
a living reference to all interested stakeholders and allows and invites
new kind of participation for collective action and meaningful reflection.
We really appreciate the
enthusiastic support, suggestions, and encourage-ment we received
when we interviewed our clients for this article. We especially want
to thank Al Viswanathan, Sudhakar Ram, R. Sundar, Tom Grant, Jon Peters,
Blake Emery, Ron Sandanato, Jim Broshar, Eldon McBride, and Robert
Cooper, in addition to J. M. Sampath and Kalpana Sampath, our Indian
partners, who documented the pyramid building process in Ford.
To be precise, we are
creating objects geometrically known as tetrahedrons, a pyramid with
a triangular base (see FIGURE 1 below).
APPENDIX
1: The Pyramid Building Process
Effective systems thinking
tools stimulate excitement and fun, because when hearts are involved
in conversations along with heads, commitment and depth are achieved.
We have found that pyramid builders delight in their discoveries,
and conversations easily develop to support collective learning and
build commitment to new action.
Figure 1: A tetrahedron has four corners, four faces and six edges. The pyramid, with its four corners, six edges, and four faces, is really a tetrahedron. The tetrahedron is the only geometrical solid in which each corner is directly connected to every other corner, and each face is directly connected to every other face. This property permits these features of the pyramid to represent sets of systematically dependent factors or variables. The generalized structure is made applicable to the group's issue by naming the cornerstones according to those four variables considered most important. The pyramid building process is one of repeatedly including and transcending the meanings of the cornerstone variables, first by naming the edges, then the faces, and finally the pyramid, all in a self-consistent fashion. In this way, the systematic dependencies between the original cornerstone variables are revealed. The meanings of the cornerstone variables become recontextualized by the new and interdependent edge and face variables, reliably shedding new light on the issue, and often fundamentally reframing it. The pyramid building process comprises a cycle. The cycle has the four steps of intention, exploration, transformation and diffusion.
Figure 3: The Enterprise Pyramid
|