Challenges of system design and optimization
Co-authored with Dr. Johanna Anzengruber
This is article 4 of 6 in the Organization Capability series. The first article, Organization capability: The missing piece connecting organization design and the operating model, introduced the series. The second article, Resolving confusion about organization design, the operating model, and organization capability, defined the three domains. The third article, The operating model and organization design strengths and weaknesses, compared those two key parts of the organizational system.
Challenges of system design and optimization
The limitations of the organization design are one example of the more general problem of system design and optimization. You can’t perfectly design all parts of a system at the outset: because systems are complex, dynamic and messy. It is too hard to figure out all the details up front because we can’t predict all the conditions ahead of time. So the design and optimization have to be addressed sequentially: design upfront, followed by optimization afterwards, while the work is underway. A robust optimization process should include ongoing sensing and a thoughtful approach to tweaking each component: the operating model, organization design, and organization capability.
When designing an organizational system:
The role of organizational (or system) design versus what happens in practice is a lot like the first step in designing a building. The architect creates the blueprint, which is just like the organization design. Once the blueprint is created, the contractor has to build it, and an interior designer has to figure out how to make everything work within the structure.
Recommended by LinkedIn
The architect will specify a lot of details which often turn out to be off the mark. Some of the architect’s design decisions will inaccurate because conditions in the real world of construction are never as simple and clear cut as the blueprints assume they will be. There could be shortages of certain materials or their prices end up increasing beyond the originally planned budget, necessitating changes.
The architect also has to make assumptions about the conditions at the building site, which have to be verified and, if needed, adjusted by the engineer. For example, the soil conditions might require a different approach to shoring up the foundation of the building, which in turn changes some of the structure’s design elements. So it is impossible to know what all the details of the final structure will be until after it is built under real world conditions. This is why the architectural building blueprint is analogous to the organization design, including details about high-level decision rights, matrix design, and lateral integrating structures.
The other source of uncertainty is that architects cannot fully know ahead of time exactly how the people would prefer to use the space. Once the shell of the building is complete, only then can final design decisions be made. What are the limitations of each part of the building, in terms of the range of uses they can be put to? For example, the plumbing may have to be routed differently than originally designed, changing the location of bathrooms, kitchens and dining areas. Where should all the walls be located exactly? To what use will each room be put? Will there be a closet added within a room? Do some rooms require greater sound proofing in the walls, floor and ceiling? Where are reinforcements in the walls and ceiling needed to secure built-in cabinetry and heavier lighting fixtures or electronic equipment? These are all decisions that can’t be specified completely ahead of time, and which are addressed once the basic structure is built.
After the blueprint is set at the outset, the interior designer and contractor optimize the design created by the architect, once the initial structure is in place. The equivalent work in organizations is everything that follows the design of the high-level decision rights, matrix design and lateral integrating structures: getting it all to work together as seamlessly as possible in practice. Which means spending a lot of time and effort on work processes and rewards.
For more details and a deeper dive into this topic, please join us for the workshop Optimizing Capability to Drive Business Performance in Chicago November 7-9, 2023.
Strategic HR, Learning & People Analytics, Op Modeller and Data Strategist, interested in the Future of Work
1yYes, Alec! I wish people would acknowledge when they don't know the difference between an operating model and business model!!
VP People & Culture
1yLoving this series so far Alec Levenson, a lot of what you put so well in words is resonating with my lived experiences! Looking forward to the final 2 parts. Putting others in copy Sophy Pern Kevin Power Harry Malcolm Steven Shrago Nuala Williams Ahsiya Mencin, Ph.D.
ADNOC GROUP- Talent Management
1yThis article serves as a significant note to business leaders aiming for perfection right from the start. Establishing organizational systems and procedures is a step-by-step journey that begins with design, followed by ongoing testing, evaluation, implementation, and constant refinement.
Founder & CEO @Taaeen || Accelerating Business Growth || Human Capital Transformation Expert II Strategy Consultant II Serial Entrepreneur II Talent Enabler II Keynote Speaker
1ySherin Nabahin (Associate CIPD) nice article and please check the comments of Dave Ulrich 👌🏼
People Experience Strategist | Board Advisor
1ySome very good comments from others in this thread. Alec Levenson, having read through the series of articles and some of the comments, I think I have a grasp of what your approach is. However, it is not sinking in for me what the major distinctions are in Operating Model vs Org Capabilities. I think I understand them when I see examples. I’ve tended to view Org Capabilities as technical and maybe even social processes that are uniquely embedded in the company to create services or products that a customer is willing to pay for. What I’ve been using is a framework called the Business Model Canvas (BMC) that captures the major activities of the company, required resources,and participants. And, if I recall correctly, the unique capabilities are contained in the canvas. I want to acknowledge the original authors of the BMC, Osterwalder & Pigneur, for their excellent book Business Model Generation that was my training ground for strategy + business model development. ISO QM systems use a framework similar to the BMC to depict at a high level the major company processes. I participated in Alexander Osterwalder’s first workshops on the BMC. To this day, seminal learning experience. Look forward to upcoming articles Alec Levenson.