Competing Frameworks

In a recent post I suggested that when initially introduced, frameworks tend to address specific problems with limited scope. If they help successfully address the problem, over a period of time they evolve to address problems across a broader section of the organisation. As a result of this extension of scope, what can happen is […]

So, what’s a company for again?

What's a company for again?

Most companies advertise a statement of purpose, often on their websites, as a mission statement that describes how they provide a valuable service to a certain set of customers. But it is no secret that the way they are actually managed could be quite different. What keeps CEOs awake nights is not how much value […]

Organisational Learning and Mindfulness – The Connection

In the last two posts we explored learning (individual and organisational) and Relational Frame Theory (RFT), the explanation for mindfulness in psychology. This week we explore how learning and mindfulness might be related and the possible significance of the relationship for organisational effectiveness.

Organisational Learning and Mindfulness – Relational Frame Theory (RFT)

In our search for a relationship between organisational and individual learning and mindfulness, we now take a look at mindfulness from the perspective of a psychologist trained in the western tradition. Relational Frame Theory (RFT) attempts to explain the variety of human behaviour as the basis for therapeutic interventions. This introduction to RFT will place in a better position to understand how the different forms of learning can address ineffective behaviour in individuals and organisations.

Strategic versus Operational Perspectives

In the last post we looked at whether it would be appropriate to use strategic metrics in an operational conversation, concluding it could be. But that brings up another question. How does one distinguish a strategic conversation from an operational one? Let’s look a bit more closely at this topic.

Strategic versus Operational Conversations

A recent conversation on LinkedIn about the relationship between a strategic artefact and an operational conversation led to some interesting insights. The original question posed was whether or not it would be appropriate to use a Balanced Scorecard as part of the day-to-day operational conversation. There was general agreement that it would, but for not for what most people might think is the reason.

Design Thinking vs the Logic of Scientific Inquiry

We’ve now looked at two promising frameworks intended for organisations to understand and implement change: Design Thinking (DT) and the Logic of Scientific Inquiry (LOSI). Both acknowledge the complexity and human nature of organisations and both enable iterative learning as an approach for steering change. The instrumental, practical focus of DT appears to be very different from the theoretical focus of LOSI. In this post we compare the two to see what exactly the differences are, and whether they matter.

The ‘Logic of Scientific Inquiry’ as a Framework for Change

In the past two weeks we have been considering popular models and frameworks for organisational change, focusing on their ability to enable organisational learning. We didn’t find one that supports all the three requirements: an iterative process that supports the accumulation of knowledge, emphasis on cause-effect explanation and support for multiple modes of learning. This week let’s look at how well the framework sometimes known as the ‘scientific method’ supports the three learning requirements.

A couple of other models for change

Last week we identified some characteristics of organisational learning and checked to see if four well-known models for change consider these requirements. We concluded that none of them do. But readers suggested of a couple of frameworks that do seem to support at least some of these requirements. Let’s take a look.

Strategic Alignment and Models for Change

When dealing with change in organisations, most of us have some experience of unexpected outcomes. One way limit the scope of this unpredictability is the use of frameworks, which represent the insights and knowledge of those who built them. We’ve explored, compared and integrated a few frameworks over the past few weeks. Another way to deal with the unpredictability is to adopt a learning approach. Let’s look now at how we can do that and how some popular change management frameworks support this approach.

Economic Value Added and Business Performance Management

In the last couple of posts we compared the Business Performance Management (BPM) and Economic Value Added (EVA) frameworks with the Balanced Scorecard (BSc). There is no shortage of frameworks for improving organisational performance, so it might useful to see how they relate to each other. In this post we’ll consider the relationship between EVA and BPM.