Crisis Management
The last few decades have been a challenging time for the UK's leaders. Many of their organisations were structured in line with 'Scientific Management' as espoused by two Americans, Frederick Taylor and Max Weber, around the turn of the C20th.
​
The hallmarks of Fred and Max's systems were hierarchies, sharply defined divisions of labour and a management elite that issued orders to supposedly passive, security-seeking labour. They, in turn, would be expected to perform their tasks exactly as defined and designed by management - seen as the (sole) thinkers and planners.
​
That was very much the way things were when I stepped on to the 'treadmill' back in the '60s. Today, thank heavens, better education, greater awareness of individual and collective rights plus a seismic shift in attitudes towards women at work has led to a radical change in the relationship between leaders and those they lead.
​
Nonetheless, continuing dissatisfaction in the workplace suggests that today's leaders are still failing to prepare their teams for changing social and behavioural demands.
​
But let's get real. Constant change is today’s 'status quo'. Yet it's a sad fact that, despite the pressing need to initiate change, many organisations will do so only in crisis. In fact, for many, crisis management is embedded in the organisation’s culture.
​
But don't be deceived. Today's leaders aren't 'sitting on their hands'. Quite the opposite. However, as they rush from crisis to crisis, many confuse activity for effectiveness. All too often, they see themselves as providers of solutions not as predictors of problems.
Yet the strategic consequences of accelerating change in all aspects of life are such that crisis management will no longer work (if ever it did).
​
Not only is the impact of change far greater, the timescales have telescoped. It's not unusual to find that entirely new waves of change are sweeping over organisations before they've reacted to the earlier catalyst for change.
​
I saw this 'up close and personal' in the NHS which had (and still has) an unbelievable propensity to start yet one more initiative (dreamt up in Westminster or NHS HQ in Leeds) before the latest one has had time to bed itself in. What's more, I rarely met anyone who had the faintest idea of what success would look like if/when we found it.
I'm convinced that the powers-that-be saw wholesale destabilisation as the best way to shift the ground from under the feet of those resisting change (especially the unions and professional bodies, e.g. doctors, teachers and lawyers).
Most of these so-called fresh initiatives created a catalyst for change rather than solutions to the underlying problems, i.e. change for change's sake.
Having been on the receiving end of several NHS initiatives, I question their rationale especially the thinking behind many hospital mergers; the contracting-out of support services and countless PFIs. And having helped create a Clinical Commissioning Group that placed the healthcare commissioning in the hands of GPs, I'd suggest that this 'initiative' was more about weakening the power base of hospital medics than about giving greater control to Primary Care.
So how do today's leaders convince others of the need for change and - assuming they are able to do so - how do they take their teams along with them?