The Leadership Paradox Of Shared Purpose
Make individual group author appear
Comment Now
There is a paradox in how we see ourselves in a collaborative, cooperative world of work. This is a balance within each: our self-image, where we give attention, and what we consider priorities. On the organization side, this is also the balance of centralization versus decentralization, leading versus directing, uniformity versus uniqueness, and, supporting scale versus supporting context. Leadership,even theraison d’etreof an organization, focuses on setting and developing a sense of shared purpose. With the ebb of command-and-control approaches of management as described by management thought-leaders like Charlene Li, leaders who can build a strong sense of shared purpose are sought after.
But as I said there is a paradox: To develop Shared Purpose, to bring more people together towards collective goals, organizations need to develop more individualism and decentralization. How can one build collective mindsets and systems by purposely designing towards more decentralized individual models?Logically, this just seems a contradiction.
Geert Hofstede, one of the pioneers of modeling the cultural framework of organizations, defined one dimension, “Individualism versus Collectivism” as how much people’s self-image in an organization are oriented towards “I” or “We”. This impacts whom they care for and pay attention to in how they live or work. Shared Purpose by definition leans towards the “We” rather than the “I”.
You will see this same idea reappear in other works by Erin Meyer, FonsTrompenaarsand other thinkers on Purpose and organizational culture, and appears to be a universal truth. The point is to understand how people in the organization orient themselves. Would they do things that are better for those closest to them, or even just themselves? Would they be willing to help a greater goal? What and How much do they need to believe to do so? By nature of being in a group, there is a constant tension there. From my experience the larger the organization, the more significant the tension to workers and management.
nextpage
This is why the data from the Digital Workplace survey 2015 is so interesting. Jane McConnell, strategic advisor to large global organizations, shared some preliminary results from this latest version of her annual survey at Enterprise 2.0 Summit. This represents data from over 280 medium and large enterprises across 26 countries, and a broad range of industries.
Jane McConnell of NetJMC Strategy LLC
One of the study’s research agenda over the many years has been on how the workplace environment has been moving toward greater use of technology for communication and interaction. In the opening keynote of the event, however, I was a surprised how much the evolving story of Shared purpose was coming to light.
In past years, the survey looked at how social collaboration technologies are becoming part of the enterprise—from how communities are used to how organizations are encouraging their employees to adopt and use them. This year, it asked a key question: what can we observe about organizations who say they have a strong shared sense of organizational purpose, as compared to organizations who do not. The results highlight this paradox I described.
First of all, having a stronger sense of shared purpose reduces systemic frustrations people have with organizations. They are clearer on their priorities. They feel less pain in decision-making and internal politics.
Figure 1: Shared purpose lessens Systemic Frustrations in Organizations (source: Jane McConnell)
Most of the organizations who identified a stronger sense of shared purpose (see Figure 2) have very decentralized decision-making (50%) versus only 10% have very centralized processes. It suggests that those who stronger shared purpose sense favor decentralization over more command-and-control structures.
Figure 2. Stronger Shared purpose, Less Centralized Decision-making
(source: Jane McConnell)
People also feel that management is vocally active, supportive and participative, in organizations with stronger sense of purpose (Figure 3). The study highlights the significant difference—almost twice as much on average—as noticed by those with strong shared purpose versus weak. This appears almost regardless of where they are in the organization.
Figure 3. Stronger Shared purpose, More participatory management
(Source: Jane McConnell)
nextpage
Finally, another pattern that emerges out of the study is that organizations who say they feel stronger shared purpose are also more cross-communicative, as evidence by their significantly greater use of online communities and collaborative environments.
Figure 4. Stronger Shared purpose, Greater use of Online communities
(Source: Jane McConnel)
No doubt such approaches expand the quantity and variety of viewpoints and discussion. But the study shows some counter-intuitive results. Logically, more collaborative and connected organizations should lead to more consensus-based decision-making. However, if you notice in Figure 1, there is less frustration felt in decision-making. It suggests that seeking purpose is less about some leader creating and communicating a vision that everyone shares in. Rather it emphasizes in growing the elements that support people to consider for themselves what the vision should be.
The study offers insight into descriptive qualities in how shared purpose organizations work. These are not hard fast rules that in doing these you will get a shared purpose organization. More so this does not yet show how they became such shared purpose organizations. I believe that is something each organization can develop over time with the right leadership, but that does not prevent organizations from setting these qualities as destinations for their evolutionary path.
[Note: The Digital Workplace survey will be released towards the end of March, according to Jane McConnell, and should be well worth your time as a leader to see how companies are undergoing such a transformation.]
Rawn Shah is an independent analyst, advisor and speaker. He presented approaches to mapping culture in digital organizations at Enterprise 2.0 Summit 2015. He will also be at HR Tech Europe in London in March. You can reach him on LinkedIn or Twitter.