Creating an Energized Organization White Paper


	White Paper
	Creating an Energized Organization: Aligning Strategy and Culture



Introduction Certainly any executive's goal is to create an organization where: customers continually rate their performance higher than competitors'. employees are aligned around key strategies, and both the near and long-term goals of the business have been internalized as a central driver of employee behavior achievement is a primary value throughout, and employees strive for excellence There's a strong adaptive ability to meet shifting market demands for most executives, getting the organization to this level of performance means launching a variety of improvement efforts intended to lift the business from where it is now to a never before achieved state of excellence. It takes a focused and energized organization to produce these outcomes. As managers know, creating this type of organization is an arduous and difficult journey, and the best laid plans for improvement and change often fail to generate the desired results. Disappointment with Improvement Strategies <Fortune 500 Survey Results Witness a recent survey of Fortune 500 executives on the success their companies have had improving key business processes. 1 At best, they were no more than moderately satisfied with the results and many reported complete dissatisfaction. While there was some variation based on the type of change, whether it had to do with new product or service development, customer service or supplier management, the results were generally the same; disappointing. For example, with improvement efforts in new product or service development: 7 percent were very satisfied with the effectiveness of the improvement, 5 percent very satisfied with the length of time it took to achieve effectiveness, 0 percent for length of time, and 7 percent for sustainability. When it comes to getting the right results from improvement efforts, there's obviously considerable room for "improvement." What Change Requires Working With and Working Against In any change effort, you need to know early on whether "what you want in the future matches what you have to work with and what you have to work against." 2 Implied in this phrase are two kinds of knowledge. One concerns markets, customers, service and competition. The other concerns the organization where one of the more salient elements you have to work with and against is the present culture. The degree of change required in your organization's direction will indicate how much energy has to be invested to reshape the culture and make the change succeed. The road that leads organizations to be something they have never been or for people to do things they haven't been able to do before is a hard journey. More than random contribution on the part of employees is required. Actions necessary for future success are likely to take the organization beyond present cultural boundaries and increase the level of challenge and risk. Understanding these cultural boundaries and what's involved in reframing them provides invaluable insight for developing the improvement strategy. Implementing Improvement Dynamic Forces…New Mental Models…and Reservations of Employees Implementing improvement requires constantly blending and mixing the dynamic forces that drive an organization. Understanding these dynamics, anticipating their consequences, and acting to accelerate, blunt, or redirect them is a complex task. The complexity is further compounded when companies engage in improvement efforts without viewing them as part of their strategic thinking. Assumptions as to what's involved in change often understate the difficulty and miscalculate the amount of energy, preparation, and time required. Without useful models, diagnosis may be inadequate and off the mark, leading to ill-fated plans. Improvement efforts often not only require readjusting the mental models that organization leaders and employees have, they also require substantially changing behavior. They require business leaders to manage energy in new ways and make difficult choices. Because these are often done in the public arenas of employee empowerment and involvement, they call for new forms of courage. Many within the organization have to make higher-risk decisions, requiring greater levels of personal development. Improvement efforts mean that cross-functional teamwork, innovation, and personal initiative become part of the defining terms of the organization. However, organization members may not be ready for these new-found responsibilities. For example, studies have shown that "two-thirds of the work force typically choose not to participate in organizational change efforts when provided the opportunity." 3 Perhaps this reluctance on the part of employees to participate is a result of individuals not reaching the necessary level of personal development, or because participation is seen as irrelevant to the truly important issues-the result of a defective leadership process. Regardless of the reason, such complexities cause many improvement efforts to fail to live up to expectations, lose direction and focus, and fall short of promised results. Gaining a Perspective Through the Eyes of Customers and Employees Every organization needs to continually ask itself "how are we doing?", "are we getting better?", and "are we going in the right direction?" Some potential sources of such insight to these basic questions are the customer, members of the organization, employees, and management. These groups offer different views and, when combined, create a powerful perspective suggesting the direction, action and tone of change. Implicit in the capacity to obtain answers to these questions is the ability to sense the environment; to be aware of the perceptions and experiences of customers and employees alike. Customers seek value, and they want to do business with value-producing organizations. Only organizations that are focused and energized can create sufficient value to retain customers over an extended period. A primary question for management, then, is how to create and sustain a value producing organization. What is it about an organization that enables it to be a value-producing entity, so that it can create and maintain a dominant position with its customers? A value-producing organization has the capacity to develop a symmetry in its relationship with customers; an alignment between two organizational units. It also successfully initiates improvement efforts that are constantly tuned to value enhancement. Included in this is the ability to adjust to the changing nature of value; any business that maintains the status quo, in fact, falls behind. Alignment External and Internal Leaders must concern themselves with two types of alignment. Externally, it's alignment with the customer. Internally, it's the alignment of resources, forces, and goals within the organization aimed at producing maximum output with minimum consumption. Externally, the customer defines what value is, and is not. To the extent that what an organization provides matches with what the customer wants, a value transaction occurs. Setting aside the limitation of a customer's ability to clearly define what they require, it is the concept of alignment that brings the value equation into balance. It's the "goodness of fit" or the match between "wanted" and "provided" that is key. Moving closer to the customer, forming a better fit or state of alignment is only possible to the degree that internal alignment exists. Without internal alignment there can be no true external alignment. Implicit in an internally aligned organization is a state where clarity of mission, vision, and values prevail. Internal alignment creates energy and inspiration. Conditions of trust and involvement stimulate a high level of individual responsibility and personal initiative. In an internally aligned setting the intent toward excellence in the quality of relationships and all that accompanies this construct is particularly high. Alignment for most organizations, whether external with the customer or internal among work units, represents an appreciable degree of change in direction. Shaping and managing the culture so it supports this change becomes increasingly important. Culture It's Pluralistic Nature Culture is an expression that suffers from a vague and loose set of definitions, often used conversationally to mean a myriad of things. Numerous business articles and papers refer to corporate culture in fairly simplistic ways, suggesting that it needs to be changed, without bothering to define what the "it" really is. The pluralistic nature of organization culture and the diffuse atmosphere it creates makes defining it, let alone changing it, a real challenge. However, the more comprehensive our understanding, the greater the likelihood we can factor in culture's impact on our organizations, and the greater the likelihood that leaders and others can anticipate its consequences. Some ways to think about it Here are some ways to think about culture and its implications. First - organization culture is an abstraction. Because it's an abstraction doesn't mean that it lacks enormous power in terms of impact on both employees and results. Just the opposite. Culture is an abstraction of the patterns for living and working in an organization. It's helpful to think of these patterns as an amalgamation of the customs, practices, values, and knowledge that lie within a business. Second - culture guides and directs the behavior of individual employees, yet in itself it is not behavior. Third - culture both creates and reflects. It shapes and forms the basis of behavior and relationships within the organization and at the same time is a manifestation of those very same dynamics. Fourth - the culture of an organization is learned directly and indirectly by its members. It is through the process of social integration that this occurs. A study that we conducted for a client makes this point. As part of an extensive effort to accelerate corporate change, the client launched a recruiting campaign for outside managers. Rath & Strong studied this "new talent optimization" process and found that although new hires (particularly males) found mentors very helpful, peers, rather than mentors, were the ones turned to for guidance and counsel in learning the politics of the organization; how to get work done, and how to command resources and influence decisions. So the "shadow" organization prevailed in inculcating new management talent into the ways and wherefores of operating behavior, and any expectations that senior management had of circumventing the old way was undermined. Fifth - the culture dictates the prevailing norms in a company and defines roles. The norms established by the culture are extremely powerful; when internalized they are the dictating rules or principles that direct employee behavior. Violating them or acting outside of them often brings sanctions, ridicule, suspicion or worse. Roles have both rights (status) and responsibilities (obligations), and it is essentially the culture which defines these. It is the cluster of these rights and responsibilities that creates a role. Lastly, employees, even though they share the same culture, often are unaware of it and likely cannot accurately describe what it is. Culture Versus Climate While organization culture and climate are related, they are different. Climate is more transient. Culture is more enduring. While climate examines employee expectations and highlights employee motivation, culture is more encompassing. Culture explains why things happen the way they do, mirroring the company's "rules of the road" while rendering a powerful influence on what a company can achieve and what it cannot. It has direct impact on attaining strategic objectives and whether management efforts at improvement succeed or fail. It provides an understanding of work behavior that is out of reach of the more traditional measures of job performance, and it has significant impact on an organization's long term success. One way to think of culture is as the "software dimension" of an organization's mind. When it comes to designing and implementing change, ignoring the culture simply increases the risk of failure. Preparing for Change Culture possesses characteristics that support or inhibit realignment, externally, moving closer to our customers and internally, reframing roles, processes, and relationships. Unless these characteristics are understood and effectively managed, failed improvement strategies will be the norm. Unfortunately, few companies have actually realized an effective way to alter or improve those aspects of culture that are central to a company's change strategy. Climate, the more surface-oriented aspect of organization life, has been the traditional vehicle that firms have used to try to gain insight into their organization's internal dynamics. Human resource executives often think of using climate surveys as a way to "get a handle" on these dynamics. Starting with a base line measure, some executives regularly commission follow up surveys to measure trends. The Intent has Merit, but... The intent has merit, but the results often do not succeed. Think about the number of companies that use organizational data gathered through climate surveys to make significant organization decisions. Very few. As a way to understand the culture and anticipate its impact on change efforts and organization performance, climate surveys, while a significant step beyond attitude and opinion surveys, tend to suffer important limitations. For example, climate surveys can be confusing for management and employees alike, expressing the results in terms that are abstract and difficult to act on such as "peer group support" or "encouragement of participation" or "job challenge." They frequently depict the particular "state" of the organization, but fail to offer navigational aids for change. And they can dwell on what appear to be entitlement issues, such as career planning, professional development, and compensation. Since one of their underlying premises concerns job motivation, climate surveys also tend to measure the motivating potential in core job characteristics and the psychological state they create in employees. Again, while the constructs are valuable, they often are not operational and are difficult for leaders to act on. Create a Sense of Freedom Organizations must constantly work to ensure their culture does not restrict or inhibit the success of improvement efforts, but inspires members of the organization to accept change and seek responsibility for results. To be a significant competitor requires a state of mind that constantly analyzes the forces that align the customer and the organization. To do this, the culture must create a sense of freedom to experiment, take risks, and increase the levels of creativity and personal initiative. Leaders and organization members need a relatively direct way to determine where to apply their energies to develop the culture. Having a "map" that shows the leverage points is a distinct advantage. This blueprint should depict how best to intervene in the organization to increase the company's alignment and process capability, both of which are direct manifestations of culture. Aligning culture and strategy is a must, yet few organizations succeed because its abstract and diffuse nature makes framing culture extremely difficult. Yet it is possible to create an "organization imprint" that depicts the dimensions most relevant to an organization's ability to succeed at strategic action. An "organization imprint" can give the leader and the members of the organization a sense of whether the organization is aligned, focused, and energized around its mission and whether it has the necessary tools to accomplish strategic intent. Ideally, information is presented in a dashboard-like manner, simplifying the interpretation and creating a directional aid that is easy and fast to understand. The "organization imprint" should be about action and whether the organization is moving toward enhancing customer and company alignment. Any culture profile or imprint needs to reflect the capacities of the organization. It should show where the organization is strong and where it is weak. This may require adjusting the strategic actions and altering the improvement process. And in order for it to be an operational tool, it must be easily understood and interpreted by management and employees alike, both in language and concept. The Organization Print ^SM A 2x2 for Assessing Your Organization... There are two primary dimensions involved in creating a focused and energized organization. Purpose One dimension concerns whether the organization has a clear sense of purpose: does the organization create and release human energy in a positive fashion? A shared vision, confidence in the leadership strategy, an environment of trust and support, and openness among the members needs to prevail. The opportunity to participate in decisions and the encouragement to view oneself as a resource, committed to learn, create, and innovate, are components of this dimension. Some talk about character as a way of depicting this kind of company; others have used the expression "soul" to denote its differentiating qualities. Central to this dimension is that the employees have a sense of "who they are," what is important, and an abiding confidence in the organization's leadership and ability to perform. The Purpose dimension is about creating meaning; using the mission, vision, and values to provide purpose and create energy among employees. It also describes the appropriate behavior of managers and employees. When an organization is strong in Purpose, it has a compact between leader and followers that "binds those who lead and those who follow into the same moral, intellectual, and emotional commitment" 4 Mutual obligations and responsibilities prevail and the compact demands commitment on the part of the leader and employees to the organization. Process The second primary dimension concerns the ability of the organization to perform; to possess a strong set of competencies and deliver its unique qualities to customers which differentiate it from competitors. Mastery means possessing the right tools with the ability to apply them artfully and efficiently. Effectiveness of core processes which enable the company to gets its work done efficiently are a necessity. The company must have the capacity to integrate and balance the planning and execution of work across disciplines and organizational domains, and resolve governance differences. Process is both "tool oriented and organization oriented," and applies to technologies such as value-added work analysis as well as structures of committees and task forces. 5 For example, cross functional teamwork as a structure within an organization is a part of the Process dimension. The following diagram depicts these two major dimensions and divides organizations into four general types based on their ability in each of these two dimensions. Frustrated "We're in this together…but it's still not coming out very well" We have all experienced organizations that are well-intentioned but unable to perform. Likely, they have successfully worked the team and relationship aspects of organization life. Employees are eager to partner with customers and with each other; they are involved in making decisions and see themselves as invested in the goals of the organization. Management "cares" and is concerned with how influence and power are used. Importance is placed on employee involvement and in building trust and support. Still, the organization's performance is less than sterling. Success at building relationships and having an aligned understanding of the mission is not enough. Competence in task performance is a necessity. It's an obviously essential requirement for attaining key goals and objectives, and moving the business strategy closer to fruition. However, task competence serves another purpose. It's necessary to ensure the ongoing motivation of individual employees. Successful task completion builds and maintains personal and organization energy. The individual finds meaning in taking significant action; successful acts that engage the self and others-peers, bosses, and subordinates-and building organization and personal capability. Unfortunately, the frustrated organization lacks the tools to take significant action. Work systems are either faulty in their design or their execution. These systems may have deteriorated over time to the point where inefficiencies exist. The quality of work necessitates redos, and the pace and flow are out of synchronization and balance. Hand-off of work and information between units is incomplete and often late. The expression which captures this type of organization is "we're in this together...but it's still not coming out very well." In this kind of work group, the basics often have been overlooked and the ability to perform has eroded. Disengaged "We'll do it if we have a contract" We've all likely had the experience of receiving service that was not differentiated based on our individual needs and delivered in a distant and noninvolved fashion. The systems may have been state-of-the-art, but the experience, that is, the transaction, left us wanting. Disengaged organizations strive for high efficiency with streamlined processes but create an interaction that leaves us feeling nonappreciated and nonvalued. Actions have both an affective and a task aspect to them. Their impact is not only determined by the difficulty revealed in their execution, but in the common meaning that is created for the people affected by them. Furthermore, transactions that have value provide meaning for both parties; the creator and the recipient. The disengaged organization fails to understand this point; good service is an "aesthetic gesture," and it provides "pleasure to both the giver and recipient by the beauty of the performance...and adds value to an event." 6 Unfortunately, the disengaged organization treats us no differently than any other customer. Responsiveness at an affective level is missing. We don't feel special. Likely you think "I need their process capability, but I don't like dealing with them." In cases where the transaction is routine, such as cashing a check, the customer may well prefer speed over a high degree of attending behavior, although research at one financial institution refuted this as least for senior citizens. Senior citizens valued human contact and individual attention over speed of transaction. Cashing a check or making other financial transactions was a social event. Differentiating what the customer valued was found to be key in retaining senior citizen accounts. Since the buying decision can be emotionally critical for the customer, representing significant investment or risk, listening to the customer and attending to their affective pulse is critical. What's lacking for employees in the disengaged organization is a sense of connectedness, of being a part of a work unit which inspires and produces energy. Internally, employees experience what we as customers experience externally, a level of nonconnectedness. Similarly, employees go through the paces without commitment to the outcome. Consequently, they are less likely to make a personal investment in creating new products or innovating new services. Removing roadblocks, setting and meeting stretch objectives, innovating and acquiring knowledge, and generating a level of resourcefulness require a commitment and investment of personal energy rarely found in a disengaged organization. Companies are social institutions as well as businesses. Issues of trust, support, power, and influence are paramount. How these and other similar matters are dealt with are essential to employee performance. In a disengaged organization they seldom receive the level of attention required. Struggling "We're not doing it very well…and no one wants to know how I could help fix it." The culture of the "Struggling" organization depicted in the Organization Print SM grid is a compounded blend of the characteristics found in both the Frustrated and Disengaged segments. Problems exist both in the process and in the purpose dimensions; the latter usually from the leadership level on downward. Frequently, an unclear link between mission, strategy, and work leads to conflicting objectives and difficulty staying focused. There is no overarching purpose. Commitment to objectives is less than whole hearted; while there may be an intellectual validity to these objectives, emotional investment and ownership is lacking. In this stage, employee energy is disproportionately expended on redoing or correcting improperly done work. The channels for expressing concerns and frustrations regarding work are insufficient. The normal anxiety experienced in performing the work is suppressed, and often manifests itself in dysfunctional ways such as scapegoating others or other work groups. Moreover, employees frequently report insufficient tools and resources to do the job. Granted, such deficiencies may be the product of poorly designed work systems or reflect the misapplication of resources rather than a shortage of them. Standards are either unclear or often change, leaving people puzzled. Lacking a larger sense of purpose, employees feel dispirited. Stated differently, in the "Struggling" condition work processes are viewed as out of control, with the employee's ability to influence the situation seen as minimal. There is a good chance employees feel undervalued. Therefore, they will often choose low-risk decisions in contrast to those of a higher risk nature selected by individuals in organizations where healthier egos prevail. Under these conditions active participation to transform the organization is reduced and "organization citizenship" is diminished. It is likely that without the right leadership intervention, the determination to develop the skill and to exercise the courage to be an active participant in changing the organization will languish. Clearly, the challenge of leadership is to remedy this situation. Energized "We do it together…the right way" Energized organizations are more than just the mirror opposite of those found in the other stages. They have a different character and tone to them, both effectively and operationally. The following characteristics depict an energized organization. The list is not inclusive but describes an organization that excels and has the capacity to adapt and change. Vision, Mission, and Values The overarching purpose and mission is understood and employees can explain them in words and examples that are meaningful and valuable. Long-term goals are valued and pursued. Rules are viewed as general guidelines not unchangeable absolutes, and exceptions to these are known and understood. Achievement is a primary value and employees see real choices available to them, not a set of "manufactured" options. There is a clear emphasis on building a more hospitable environment. There is a strong connection to the customer; the customer is someone to help and provide value to. Individual Motivation, Competence, and Influence The individual employee has higher control of the factors that influence the results of his or her effort. Employees are invested in the outcome of their effort; they are ego-involved, prepared to help change the system, and recognize both their own needs and the needs of others. In the energized organization the individual is helped to publicly demonstrate excellence, and this in turn builds the inner level of motivation. Involvement of employees is authentic and centers on matters or issues of importance to the success of the business. What employees do goes beyond simply the "work" or "labor" stage; it involves a level of action that brings higher meaning into their lives. Processes and Work Design Work is synchronized and balanced. However, the adaptive component is high, and the ability to react and change "quickly" in meeting shifting demands is considerable. The issues that employees are working to improve are highly relevant to task performance, that is, they center on getting the organizations' and their own work done better. Employees have moved beyond making slight alterations or improvements in the systems and are working on significant changes that will transform the organization. The knowledge required for excellent job performance is at hand, and applied. Leader The leader has a healthy amount of tolerance for ambiguity and is not easily threatened by the influence and actions of employees. He/she works at "managing complexity," getting hold of the information he/she needs and making sense of it and reducing it to the essentials so others can understand the situation and how it relates to the organization's mission. Helps to ensure the dynamics found within the hierarchy of the organization don't constrain the generation of good ideas. Uses external elements such as competitors and challenges to help shape the identity of the organization. The leader actively works to instill a high sense of "organization citizenship" among employees and encourages them to develop their skills and take participation in improving the organization. The leader works to challenge the perceptions that employees have about the organization and helps them to view the enterprise as a whole, so they will have a broader perspective. The leader demonstrates "attending" behavior toward employees, and directly shows respect, consideration, and interest in their well being. The leader works to ensure the distribution of influence is full and well balanced. Aligning Improvement Strategies and Culture As the results of a Rath & Strong survey show, converting strategic intentions into successful actions often produces disappointing results. As we have seen, it is the culture of the organization that is a major determinant of success. How can we best align strategic intent and culture? Is there a preferred approach, and if so, what is it? It is difficult for organizations to become something that they have never been. While strategy and strategic improvement involve creating the future, all such endeavors have to start with the past. An early question has to answer, "how much change do we desire?" It involves assessing which actions are realistic and which are not. Each improvement strategy will have its own set of initiatives, and each initiative has to be defined at an operational level; included at this operational level are the critical actions, the "vital few tasks which create most of the results." These must be identified, and an evaluation of the capabilities required to perform these critical tasks is essential. Stage of Development and Selecting a Strategy... An organization's stage of development has important implications for selecting an improvement strategy. For example, picture an organization that is defined as being "disengaged." The strategy options for improvement need to address different issues than do those chosen for an organization that is "struggling." The motivation level of employees as well as the basic capability to execute a critical task will be different. So too will the necessary amount of structure provided by the leader and the attention to detail in follow-up assessments of progress. The nature and the size of the gap that can be realistically closed will vary, along with the type and amount of resources necessary to support the change. Today's business world is moving at a dizzying pace and with compounding complexity. Better change plans are a necessity for growth and an imperative for survival. The organization that does not follow some systematic process in setting improvement strategies and ensuring these strategies and the culture are in alignment is courting disaster. Here's a macro approach to alignment that's intended to provide an overview; a general pathway rather than an exhaustive set of instructions. As the assessment process unfolds, change targets will appear and creative actions can be taken to remedy problem areas and leverage identified opportunities. Step One Identify improvement options by studying the markets, customers, products and service, the competition, and your own organization. Select improvement strategies to achieve the preferred business options, those strategies that will help create the preferred future. (Often this step is done in the strategic or business planning phase. Regardless of where, the important issue is that it be completed). At the same time begin assessing your organization and identify the stage it is in using the Organization Print SM . Examine your organization along the two Organization Print SM axes: Purpose and Process. Each axis is composed of several characteristics. Purpose: Alignment Trust, support and mutual commitment Decision making and involvement Information sharing Initiative and latitude Staff development and coaching Customer Connection Process Work flow Quality and efficiency Continuous improvement Teamwork (cross functional and work group) Managing change Engage the organization in creating this assessment. An employee survey which collects data in each of these areas will generate a powerful information base. Step Two For each improvement strategy chosen, identify the major initiatives required to support that strategy. Follow up with identifying the critical success factors for each major initiative, that is, the vital few tasks that are essential to reaching the outcome set by each major initiative. Step Three Identify the vital capabilities that have to exist in order to execute the handful of critical success factors. Step Four Review the vital capabilities in terms of the results of the Organization Print SM assessment. Where are they congruent ? Where do the behaviors, skills, and competencies required of the vital capabilities match the assessment of the organization? Identify the discrepancies. Step Five Reassess the choice of strategies and major initiatives based on the assessment with the Organization Print SM . Which are realistic and doable given the present state and the resources and time required to make the necessary changes in the organization's capability? Which will be handicapped because the profile indicates critical impediments will have to be overcome before progress can be made? For example, an organization that places in the disengaged zone likely lacks sufficient organization affect and alignment. Concern with the limited sense of purpose among employees suggests that the leadership mode will have to address the creation of a more compelling sense of challenge that inspirits and energizes. This can be a daunting task for some leaders, and progress is often slower and more consumptive of time and resources than many anticipate. In this type of situation, the use of the connection to the customer can be a highly effective rallying point in mustering employee energy. Step Six Using the Organization Print SM Assessment and the Purpose and Process dimension, identify opportunities to reshape the culture and move it toward the energized state in a manner which directly supports the chosen improvement strategy. Focus on the particular characteristics of the Organization Print SM which seem to offer the most leverage. An Example Here's one example of how to bring the strategy and culture into greater alignment. Faced with mounting competition, a manufacturer was struggling to introduce a new component faster and at lower cost than previous models. An Organization Print SM assessment of the new product engineering function placed the organization in the struggling quadrant. The new product introduction process was cumbersome and slow, often resulting in components that under performed or manufacturing costs that significantly exceeded project limits. Commitment to stretch goals was at best only intellectual and lacked internalization. Personal initiative was constrained, and the alignment between supporting groups was poor. Although the organization had a high state of technology at its call, it had not partnered up with those who had the manufacturing expertise and who could ensure that what was designed could be manufactured. Idea generation and testing for practicality were segmented, and significant time was lost due to the recycling of designs. The existing organization processes were inadequate to serve the needs of the rapidly changing market. As a result with problems in the Process dimension, a new organization design was introduced which brought into use new processes, both technical and organizational. The old matrix approach was found to be too cumbersome and a "simultaneous engineering" approach was established. The Purpose dimension was given particular attention, and the management environment was altered, increasing alignment, information sharing and producing a team "compact." Other aspects were affected, such as membership criteria, inclusion of others affected by the design but heretofore functionally excluded, levels of autonomy and involvement from an "organization citizenship" perspective. This newly committed simultaneous engineering organization shortened the design time by over 35 percent and reduced manufacturing costs by one third. Aligning the culture and improving strategy is crucial to implementing any strategy option successfully. The risk of any chosen strategy is the greatest in those situations where that strategy's fit with the culture is the poorest. The optimal choice for a leader is not to march ahead, assume the risks and hope for the best; nor manage around the cultural barrier by reformulating only the strategy. The leader should devise a set of plans that creates a strategy predicated on reforming the culture, bringing both into alignment. This latter approach improves the quality of options and is more likely to create the desired future state. Bibliography The Leadership Mystique, Manfried F.R. Kets de Vries, Academy of Management Executive, 1994, Vol 8. No. 3 Participation, Satisfaction, and Productivity: A Meta-Analytic Review , Katherin L. Miller and Peter R. Monge, Academy of Management Journal, December, 1986 The Company You Keep Affects Your Attitude Toward the Company, Gordon Meyer, Academy of Management Executive, 1984, Vol 8. No. 3 Business Process Reengineering: Or Socio-Technical System Design in New Clothes? Leopold S. Vansina, paper presented at International Institute for Organization and Social Development, International Conference, Barcelona, September 1994 Radical Surgery; What Will Tomorrow's Organizations Look Like? , Ian Mitroff, Richard O. Mason, Christine M. Pearson, Academy of Management Executive, 1994 Vol 8. No. 2 Shared Influence and Organizational Behavior: A Meta-Analysis of Situational Variables Expected to Moderate Participation-Outcome Relationships, John A Wagner III, Richard Z. Gooding, Academy of Management Journal, September 1987 Implementing Strategy: Making Strategy Happen, Paul J Storich, ed. Management Analysis Center, Inc., Cambridge, MA, Ballinger Press, 1982 Organization Culture and Leadership. Edgar H Schein, second edition. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 1992 Developing Corporate Character: How to Successfully Change an Organization Without Destroying It. Alan L. Wilkins. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 1989 Corporate Culture: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life. Terrence E. Deal and Alan A. Kennedy, Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley 1982 Sociology: A Systematic Introduction, Harry M. Johnson, New York, Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. 1960 Footnotes 1 See Rath & Strong's "Executive Panel Survey: Connecting Customers and Change," Spring 1995. 2 Alan Rush, "Managing By Strategy: Eight Basic Steps to Find and Implement Better Alternatives," p.1, 1987, an unpublished paper. 3 "Anticipation, Individual Development and Organizational Change: A Review and Synthesis," William Passmore and Mary R. Fagans, Journal of Management 1992, Vol 18, No.2, p. 387. 4 Abraham Zaleznik, "The Managerial Mystique: Restoring Leadership in Business," New York, Harper & Row, 1989, p. 15 5 Ibid. p.46 6 James Hillman, "Kinds of Power," New York, Currency and Doubleday, 1995, p. 72 About Rath & Strong... Rath & Strong is a management consulting firm headquartered in Lexington, Massachusetts. Founded in 1935, Rath & Strong helps clients achieve desired change by providing consulting services in four main areas: process and operations management, organization development, counsel to leaders, and customer connection. The firm specializes in helping clients address issues relating to these four areas simultaneously from a systems perspective .