ORGANIZATION & DESIGNLearning organizations as interpretative framework
Joselyne Katherina Nairouz Mora Mat. 858891
Supervisor: Dott. Francesco ZurloCo-supervisor: Dott. Tommaso Buganza
Politecnico di Milano
School of Industrial and Information Engineering
Master of Science in Management Engineering
Design management, Innovation and Entrepreneurship
Organization & Design Learning Organizations as Interpretative Framework
Supervisor: Dott. Francesco Zurlo Co-Supervisor: Dott. Tommaso Buganza
Master thesis by:
Joselyne Nairouz
858891
Academic Year 2016/2017
Index
Index ....................................................................................................................................... 2
Index of tables ........................................................................................................................ 4
Index of figures ....................................................................................................................... 5
Acknowledgement .............................................................................................................. 6
Abstract ............................................................................................................................... 7
Abstract (Ita) ....................................................................................................................... 8
PART 1. Executive summary ................................................................................................... 9
1.1 Problem setting ........................................................................................................... 10
1.2 Research objectives .................................................................................................... 10
1.3. Research methodology .............................................................................................. 11
1.4 Conclusions ................................................................................................................. 12
PART 2. Research methodology ........................................................................................... 13
2.1 Problem setting ........................................................................................................... 14
2. 2 Research objectives ................................................................................................... 16
2.3 Research Process ........................................................................................................ 17
PART 3. The structure of organizations ................................................................................ 20
3.1 Principal models .......................................................................................................... 24
3.2 Constraints .................................................................................................................. 32
PART 4. Design ...................................................................................................................... 35
PART 5. Design in the organizations ..................................................................................... 43
5.1 Models/methodologies............................................................................................... 51
5.2 Learning organizations ................................................................................................ 73
PART 6. Case studies ............................................................................................................. 90
6.1 Learning Organizations - Healthcare .......................................................................... 91
6.2 Learning Organizations - Education ............................................................................ 97
PART 7. Conclusions ........................................................................................................... 103
7.1 Managerial implications ............................................................................................ 110
7.2 Limits and future research (follow-ups) ................................................................... 113
PART 8. Bibliography .......................................................................................................... 115
Index of tables Table 1. Six Design Drivers .................................................................................................... 23
Table 2. Mintzberg’s Five Organizational Structures ........................................................... 30
Table 3. Design management is defined by what you think of design (vertical axis: the
“learning leader” of design), and by what you think of management (horizontal axis). ..... 46
Table 4. A competitive advantage brings economic value added if both substantial value
and financial value are created. ........................................................................................... 49
Table 5. Design Value Scorecard .......................................................................................... 50
Table 6. Operating Governance Model: Degrees of integration across business units ....... 55
Table 7. Design tools and methodologies applied in Learning Organizations ................... 108
Index of figures Figure 1. Galbraith’s Star Model ........................................................................................... 26
Figure 2. Key parts of an organization .................................................................................. 27
Figure 3. Sabine Junginger’s model ...................................................................................... 47
Figure 4. Rewards Systems: One of five points of Star Model ............................................. 54
Figure 5. The Five-Milestone design process (with rewards system design questions) ...... 56
Figure 6. How rewards and metrics can help support integration design needs ................ 58
Figure 7. Design Thinking ...................................................................................................... 64
Figure 8. Pluralism of design thinking .................................................................................. 65
6
Acknowledgement
First of all I want to thank to the Politecnico di Milano to give me the opportunity to be part of
this amazing university, I am thankful and proud for all the knowledge in those classrooms not
only with the great professors but also with the colleagues that I met during my master
studies.
To the professor Francesco Zurlo, without his guidance this thesis was not possible to do,
thank you for showing me the importance of design and open my mind to apply this aspect
during my future work life. To my supervisor Tommaso Buganza that helped us to understand
more the way of developing the thesis and for his constant availability to help.
To all my family that supported me during this two years, to give me the love to feel close
from you even if I am miles away from home. To Yinzú and Gerardo you are one big pillar for
me thank you for always help me and care about me.
To my friends and family in this country, Tadeo, Marihum, and specially Ciro and Dani, thank
you for always being there and bring me your kind and sincere friendship.
To my Polimi friends, Sule, Nacho, Andres and Khalid, even if we don’t see too often thank you
for being those friends that can understand me during this process.
To Alejandro, infinite thank you to bring me to this crazy adventure and to always push me to
grow and be a better person.
In memory of my mom, thank you for have made me the person who I am right now, I am
always looking for making you proud of me.
7
Abstract
Design includes so many different applications that is difficult to define it in just one concept.
Designers are used to see beyond the box, they are always looking to provide innovation and
bring a different value to people. Design has evolved during the years to move from a simple
tool to a strategic method to apply on businesses. Design in business helps to provide a
different way of doing things, and to think in all the possible ways to solve problems instead of
going directly to the “should be” solution.
Managers are designers, they design the organization world inside companies and how will be
translate all the processes to the social life outside the organization. Managers follow the
activities in the organization to have a positive and effective impact in all the people involve.
The role of people is fundamental inside organizations, the employees are the ones that work
daily to provide to customers the best result as possible.
Changes are something impossible to avoid, companies are constantly facing new problems
and high competition. It is important to be ready to control these changes, a way to manage
all the possible changes is applying learning inside the organizations. Taking care of the five
disciplines proposed by Peter Senge, having a shared vision, work in mental models, construct
personal mastery, develop team learning or create systems thinking, can help organizations to
success at the moment to face new changes. Learning is a competitive advantage because
teach you to move faster to the other competitors.
For companies is fundamental to evolve and stop doing the same things, always to try and to
evaluate other paths, to bring new values and innovations to customers. It is important to see
the opportunities design can bring, not only helps to focus all the attention into the people,
but also as a way to manage the new situations that can appear during the daily activities. This
thesis introduces the main concepts to help small and traditional organizations to recognize
the role of design in businesses, and to understand how transforming to a learning
organization can help them to face the design introduction among their activities.
Keywords: Organization, design, learning, culture, change, people
8
Abstract (Ita)
Il termine “Design” può contare su così tante applicazioni tutte differenti tra loro che risulta complesso
riuscire a definirlo in un solo e semplice concetto. I Designers sono soliti guardare “oltre la siepe”,
sempre intenti nella ricerca dell’innovazione e l’introduzione di nuovi valori aggiunti per le persone.
Attraverso gli anni, Il design si è evoluto ed è passato dall’essere un semplice e mero strumento ad
essere un vero e proprio metodo strategico da applicare a diverse tipologie di business. In un’ottica di
business, Il design fornisce una metodologia differente nel “fare le cose”: vengono considerate tutte le
possibili soluzioni del problema invece che dirigersi direttamente verso la soluzione più ovvia.
I Managers sono designers, essi infatti progettano il mondo aziendale all’interno delle grandi
compagnie cercando poi di tradurre i processi interni al di fuori dell’organizzazione stessa. Gli stessi
Managers seguono le attività dell’organizzazione al fine di ottenere un impatto positivo ed efficace su
tutti i soggetti coinvolti. Il ruolo delle persone risulta infatti fondamentale all’interno delle
organizzazioni; sono proprio gli impiegati che, lavorando giornalmente, cercano di offrire i miglior
risultati possibili ai propri clienti.
È impossibile evitare i cambiamenti, costantemente le compagnie si ritrovano ad affrontare nuovi
problemi in un contesto di altissima concorrenza. È importante prepararsi ad affrontare questi
cambiamenti, ed un modo per gestire queste situazioni è quello di inserire l’apprendimento all’interno
delle organizzazioni stesse. Considerare le cinque discipline proposte da Peter Senge, avere una visione
condivisa, lavorare in modelli mentali, costruire le proprie abilità personali e sviluppare il “team
learning” o creare pensieri di sistema, sono tutte attività che possono aiutare a gestire con successo il
momento in cui i nuovi cambiamenti si presenteranno. L’apprendimento è un vantaggio competitivo
questo perché insegna a muoversi più velocemente rispetto agli altri rivali.
Per le aziende è fondamentale evolvere e smettere di ripetersi, si devono sempre considerare strade
alternative per introdurre nuovi valori e soddisfare così i clienti. È importante vedere tutte quelle
opportunità che il design può introdurre, considerando quest’ultimo non solo come uno strumento
utile a focalizzare l’attenzione in direzione delle persone, ma bensì anche come un metodologia di
gestione delle nuove situazioni che possono verificarsi durante le attività giornaliere. Questa tesi
introdurrà i concetti principali utili alle piccole imprese per comprendere l’importanza del Design
all’interno del mondo del business e verrà loro spiegato come il trasformarsi in una “learning
organization” possa facilitare l’inserimento del design all’interno delle loro attività.
Parola chiave: Organizzazione, design, apprendimento, cultura, cambiamento, persone
9
PART 1. Executive summary
“Great things never came from comfort zones”
Unknown
10
1.1 Problem setting
Design is a practice difficult to define, it will depend of the perspective and knowledge the
individual has. During years, the concept has evolved according the needs and trends at
that moment. Starting as a graphic tool for communication has move to become a
strategy methodology to face problems. This evolution of the practice make difficult to
many people, even for designers, to express the function, applicability and how useful it
can be.
Many times, as future management engineering is difficult to explain how the design can
be applied in businesses, many people believe that apply design practices means only
graphics, expecting from us abilities commonly used by designers. For design-centric
companies could be easier to understand the importance of methods as Design Thinking,
Sprint, creation of a Journey map, construction of a Business Model Canvas, a Service
System Map, or understand easily the concept of Design-driven Innovation, but what
about the traditional and small companies? How we can explain and introduce those
companies in the Design Management movement? Even, how we as management
engineers can understand our role in this movement, and how to don’t get lost and
confuse about the distinction between manager engineering and designers?
1.2 Research objectives
The aim of this investigation is mainly focus in introduce basic concepts to understand
how organizations can start to implement design management practices among it. For
these three main objectives, have been distinguished:
The first objective is focus on present models proposed in the past by authors like
Mintzberg or Galbraith, the importance of People now of design the structure and way of
working in organizations.
11
The second objective of this investigation is analyzed the designer’s way of working and
see how the design has evolved during the years, to understand the current practice of it
in the business as a strategy methodology. This will help to see the importance of design
practices to achieve innovation and solve problems in a different and effective way.
The second objective is to highlight the importance in the evolution of design from a visual
tool to a managerial activity, to identify how designers think and behave and how this
behavior has transform design into a strategical decision.
And the third objective is the principal one, the introduction of how organizations can
apply design practices in their daily activities. The aim is to see basic concepts that can
simplify the understanding to traditional and small organizations about design, and at the
same time explain these practices with the analysis of learning organizations suggested by
Peter Senge, helping to prepare individuals to face constant changes and evolution in
businesses.
1.3. Research methodology
The investigation is based on theoretical research, counting with the support of different
articles and books related to the topics. We started with a literature analysis about
designing the organizations to understand the principal aspects in consideration now to
implement changes, and literature about design in general to understand designer’s
behavior.
After understand the importance of people, and the benefits of apply innovative way of
working, the focus was in design practices in the organizations. In this way was possible to
create a synthesis about the methods and the behaviors organizations implement now to
apply design inside their businesses. The research was focus on an overview of principal
contributors and models that implement design among the organizations.
12
A general research about design was first implemented to highlight patterns and
repetitive models that have worked during the years in the organizations. After identified
these practices, an analysis of the study realized by Senge about Learning Organizations
was conducted, together with the application of the method in business cases as the
healthcare and education areas.
1.4 Conclusions
The development of the investigation focused in three main aspects, the structure of the
organizations, the design, and the applicability of design in the organizations.
With the analysis of the first part we can verified how important are the human part in
organizations, how their performance going to lead the company’s performance at the
same time. How it is important to develop different methodologies to support people at
the moment to apply radical changes inside the organization.
In the case of design can be highlight the importance of acting in a more open way, taking
in consideration all the possible scenarios and not only the ones that it supposed. The
evolution of design shows how can be implemented in different aspects, and the positive
results can have in the organizations.
Saying this it is possible conclude with the relevance of applying design practices in the
organizations. It is important to remember that the investigation wants to give support to
small and traditional firms to understand the concept and impact of design in their firms.
Simple tools as sketches, storytelling, or to implement reward systems can improve the
company’s performance. An aspect to consider is how people can perceive these changes,
for that reason implementing Learning Organizations is important now to introduce new
design practices. The five disciplines in Learning Organizations can guide people to not
only accept the changes, but instead support them and be an active part of them.
13
PART 2. Research methodology
“The more you learn, the more acutely aware you
become of your ignorance”
Peter Senge
14
Before the description of the theoretical models, it is necessary to present the
methodology adopted during the development of this thesis. The explanation of the
problems of this thesis and how emerges the interest in this topic, the objectives we are
looking with this thesis, and finally the approach and the process employed during the
investigation.
This study is based on literature review to identify and to analyze some of the main
aspects of apply design in the organizations, and the important role or learning and
people among the organization.
The motivation to study this topic coming from the curiosity to understand a well-
established concept for some, but also not clear for many. Because the shortage of this
practice, as design management, it is important to clarify the main aspects to simplify this
new discipline to people not familiar with the topic.
2.1 Problem setting
In this part, we want to illustrate the ground of where the investigation is based, the main
aspects that emerge now to decide to make this investigation. The problem setting
expresses the main thoughts about the topic, and how it guides to the goals and
objectives to reach, with the necessary research and analysis to make.
As we previously show, the design is implemented in the managerial activities of many
companies. But how it transforms from a visual activity to a strategic method to improve
performances?
This transformation is not an easy path, design must fight during many years to show the
importance role it can plays. The problem emerges in this point, how organizations can
accept implement new and unknown activities for them? This brings us to the initial point
how people react to changes? With this question, the problem goes back to the beginning
15
of the organizations, where the traditional methodologies were applied without creating a
high impact in the people and the company involved. But is this completely truth?
The organizations are always looking to improve their performance, searching for the
most efficient and effective way of doing activities and a method to look for this solution
is trying to work in how the organizations worked and its structure. Designing
organizations is an activity that everyday directors, managers, human resources, are
always looking for the best way to divide the organization according the tasks people must
achieve. But this method of design the structure came with a strong factor against it
practice, the people. People have been the main factor in the development of
organizations, without them the gear of the organizations is not going to work. For their
main role, any activity that affects them can directly affect the organization’s activities.
People normally are refused to implement new practices, people feel comfortable with
activities that they already know and that they can feel identified. The design of the
structure of the organizations can affect directly all these people that since the beginning
are rejecting the opportunity to improve with something new. For this reason, we can see
how in many of the methodologies suggested to design the organizations mention always
the human part of the organizations, either referring of the regards they can receive, or
the team motivation and learning they can have with colleagues. The important is to
remember their main role in organizations, that at the end also difficult the evolution of
the organizations because they could oppose to it.
Now to implement changes to the organizations also appear the problem and risk of
failure. To develop new practices doesn’t guarantee that it going to be a success, this
problem can be face it through design practices, responding as designers do. A problem
that emerges is that people are very close to try. For their way of working, designers go
always for try new things, thinking that could be other possible solutions, and not afraid of
fail. They recognize that a failure idea come with a better learning.
With the combination of these two main aspects the human part and their willingness to
change, and how designers face to problems we can arrive to the main problem. How are
16
possible implement design methods to facilitate the performance of the organizations
without affect the experience of the people inside of it?
We want to focus in the basic methodologies and tools that organizations can implement
to start to use design on them. For that reason, after the previous analysis we see how the
proposal created by Senge about learning organizations could be one of the first and big
steps organizations can have to face changes and to evolution organically.
The idea of this investigation is to explain in the easiest way how basic factors can improve
considerably the activities, we want to focus in the basic methodologies and tools that
organizations can implement to start to use design on it. Also, show to not design-driven
organizations, traditional, familiar, and small companies, and to people not related to
design management how practices that they realize every day can change for better all
the organization, it could be also useful in third world countries to change methodologies
of studying and implement design in the study programs of the careers. To reveal the best
practices of design applied in organizations, and to offer tools and models that can be
used as guideposts for organizations.
2. 2 Research objectives
Having defined the problem is easier to define the aim of this investigation. It going to
consist in the examination of two concepts, to arrive to the main objective of the
investigation, the design in the organizations.
The goal of this project is to clarify basic concepts and show simple practices that
organization can have to improve the performance of it. To help design managers
understand and implement new and practical processes for identifying the role and value
of design in their businesses.
The first objective we want to address is to simplify the aspects propose by authors in the
design of the structure of organizations, considering mainly the human part of those. The
17
second objective is to highlight the importance in the evolution of design from a visual
tool to a managerial activity, to identify how designers think and behave and how this
behavior has transform design into a strategical decision.
And finally, the main objective we want to address is understand how basics design
activities can support the activities of the companies, and how those concepts can be
applied inside the five disciplines of learning organizations proposed in Senge’s studies.
All this investigation is focus in show the importance of people inside the organizations,
every model and methodology analyzed is taking in consideration the employee’s
perspective. We should recognize the important role of people in the process of changes.
With this investigation, we will be able to recognize the importance of guide people to
changes, and how the design cares about them.
2.3 Research Process
This thesis is based on empirical research to support the development of the theoretical
model. The final aim is to present a project where people not familiar to design as
managerial process, can easily understand some of the activities they can perform to
achieve better result in the organizations.
In these paragraphs, we are going to explain the process we followed during the evolution
of this research. The general process follows the collection of material, synthesis of it and
a posterior analysis of the main resources.
Planning: The first step was about the discussion of the schedule of the process, at the
beginning was necessary take a couple of months to get in deep in the topic. It is
important mention that for the characteristics of this investigation is necessary a constant
literature review during the development of the thesis. At the beginning of the work a
quick research of main concepts was necessary to understand which could be the main
18
aspects to consider in the investigation. Identify the importance of this investigation,
considering some research questions or objectives, and the topics to cover.
Review protocol: The second step was focus on the literature review. It was based
focusing on a deep analysis of existing studies about designing the organizations, design
practices, designer’s behavior, design new practices and learning organizations. It was
implemented a combination between search on database as google scholars and iteration.
This iteration consisted on the research of some basic concepts related to the topic in
investigation and according the content of the articles and books, try again with another
concept or formalize that research.
To include or exclude relevant studies we proceed with a selection based on titles of the
publication, then with the reading of abstracts identify if that study is useful for our
research and if it is useful proceed with the reading of the full paper and depending of its
content taking the main parts to consider in our research.
We consider many sources from journals to books of different contributors. For example,
some of the authors we can mention are Mintzberg, Senge and Buchanan; or important
journals and organizations as Boston Consulting Group, The Journal of Design, Economics,
and Innovation, the Design council, the Academy of Management Journal, the Design
management institute, between others.
As this investigation is based on empirical research this was the main step for the
construction of this thesis. After the investigation and readings, we can understand better
the environment related to this study, about design, organizations, human-centered,
learning focus, we can identify the main aspects useful for our research and define the
aim of this thesis.
Definition: During the analysis of the literature review the problem has been defined more
in deep, also it was easier to identify the objectives and the questions we want to solve
with this thesis. In this step, we define the aim of the investigation, our main objective is
to simplify the introduction of design in traditional organizations, and giving a look to basic
concepts they can implement to improve the performance in their company. Also after
19
the review it was much easier to identify the main concepts, models, and theories that
better suits to the investigation.
Selection and analysis: after having well defined the aim of the investigation and have
done the literature research, we proceed to the selection of the relevant material for the
investigation. Having the material, we proceed to the analysis of it, the process was focus
in divide all the literature review according three main divisions, first designing
organizations or structure of the organizations, second design and designer’s behavior,
and of course third implementation of design inside the organizations, including the
explanation of two industries where learning organizations can be implemented.
Now of the analysis of all the support material the process consists in reading the main
topics of the books, or the complete articles and then proceed to coding, mark all
passages of text that are related to certain concepts of interest for the investigation. It
was made a clustering of topics for example key aspects, models, tools, models, and
problems and in that way to define the structure of the thesis. We continued with the
clustering until having more defined groups and concepts in common.
Accomplishment of the objectives: this last step concludes with the development of the
project, the realization of the manuscript where all the previous steps can be formalized.
The focus of the project was to create a simple text where managers of non-design-centric
organizations can refer to begin with basic practices to implement changes in their
companies.
Planning Literature review Definition Selection and analysis
Accomplishment of the objectives
20
PART 3. The structure of organizations
“The conventional definition of management is getting work
done through people, but real management is developing
people through work”
Agha Hasan Abedi
21
To initiate change movements, it is necessary to understand in deep the organization. As
we are going to see during the development of this project, the human part of the
companies has a high impact in all the activities and development of the firms. To
understand the problems to solve, one suggestion is to be close to the human resources
department, they can offer to managers guiding and support now to deal with the people
who work in the organization.
First, it is important to define the right problem to solve, creating a business case can
allow an easy understanding of the situation of the company and the direction you want
to go, it includes the key elements of the strategy, the analysis of the current situation,
and the design criteria of the change to carry out in the organization. To simplify the
process, some points can be taken into consideration: (Kesler & Kates, 2010)
- To clarify the Strategic Priorities
- To define the Case for Change
- To set the Design Criteria
To begin with something new, it is important to have a clear strategy, which everyone can
easily understand and feel familiar, in that way it could be possible to align the expected
results. Not having a clear strategy could bring a lot of conflicts between all the parts
involved in the organization, instead of bringing advantages and innovation in the result.
Other important factor to consider in the understanding of the strategy is the
commitment of people, they can feel more engaged with the process if they recognize the
value of its implementation. A complete current state analysis is needed now of initiating
the change revolution, not only financial data, but also the study of customer feedback to
know how the different metrics are working, interviews and focus groups with all the
managers, employees, and everyone involved in the organization. That way, it could be
possible to see different perspectives of the problem and to define it in a clearer way. For
applying design criteria, it is necessary to go beyond the current problems, to think in a
long period of 12-36 months, to see how the change evolution will be, which capabilities
are going to be required in that moment to work in strengthen them in the present.
22
Seeing the situation as a long-term view helps finding the most effective units and
processes, the best options to work in cross-functional teams, and where to divide the
decision power.
One of the factors to consider if the organization wants to succeed is focusing in the
strategy alignment with all the organization’s components. One useful model could be the
Structural Building Blocks which takes in consideration four main blocks: (Kesler & Kates,
2010).
1. Customer or market: depending on their requirements the solution is going to be a
single product or service, or an integration of both, the idea is to satisfy and to meet their
needs.
2. Function or know-how: to have a clear and organized way of working, it is necessary
having different units that focus on specific activities, for example finance, administration,
or marketing. This can allow the standardization, reduce duplications, and create
economies of scale.
3. Geography or region: to consolidate a business it is important that it first becomes
strong in their local market, in that way having the experience to go to further places. It is
important to consider that each market is different but some disciplines can be
reproduced and tried in other places. For that reason, the support on local managers is
important, the place culture and way of working gives the local taste and the opportunity
to succeed against competitors.
4. Product: the different types of products are the ones that help building part of the
company reputation, a multiple product line can bring a more complete service and
options to customers, calling their attention and creating value to them.
Another useful framework for the organization design is the Six Design Drivers, it could
work to analyze the initial situation of the organization, with its strengths and weaknesses,
considering basic capabilities and benefits. It helps to find which of the Structural Building
Blocks could be more efficient according the company situation to work with the new
strategy implementation (Kesler & Kates, 2010).
23
Table 1. Six Design Drivers
Source: Kesler & Kates, 2010, p. 18.
The functions matrix is a good way to apply changes in an organization, applying
Governance in the Matrix can simplify the understanding of the situation in a company.
With the current global expansion in businesses, the high demand of customers, and the
several brands and products available, the matrix could be a way of easily and quickly
organizing the current situation, despite not being the favourite tool to managers. Some
questions to understand the behaviour of the organization could be:
24
- How much authority will be delegated to operating units vs managed from the centre?
- How independent should operating units be from each other versus how much
interaction and coordination is needed among them to leverage shared investments?
- What role will support functions play in the business and with how much power and
influence?
Managing these questions can bring value for the way the interaction between different
roles can be applied after understanding very well the place and the task of each one,
allowing also to work in collaboration and coordination. The work of managers together
with the human resources office can help to take the right decisions, developing efficiently
the executive team, having effective management routines, or working in a cross-
company environment. A good defined matrix increases the speed in decision-making
(Kesler & Kates, 2010).
In his book, Organization Design (1977), Galbraith defines “Organizational design is the
search for coherence between strategy (domain, objectives and goals), organizing mode
(decomposition into subtasks, coordination for the completion of whole tasks) integrating
individuals (selection and training of people), and designing a reward system.”
The success of a company depends not only of the employee's technical skills and
knowledge, but also on the firm’s organizational facility at combining many capabilities
such as research, talents, or marketing, also on the knowledge sharing between many
disciplines. The company’s organization of the resources will either allow them to grow
and succeed or to fail in its business.
3.1 Principal models
The Star Model framework created by Jay R. Galbraith is based on different design policies
to find the best solution to organize the structure of a company guided by management
25
and that has a strong influence in the employee behavior. It consists in five different
stages:
1. Strategy
2. Structure
3. Processes
4. People
5. Rewards
For this investigation, we want to focus on the human part, taking in consideration the
strategy and structure specifically talking about this model. In the first one, it is important
to consider the following steps to take to achieve success in the businesses, and in the
second one it is important to know how the organizations are arranged to find the
decision-making power location, this will help us to transform from vertical to horizontal
organizations. Usually in vertical organizations the control of making decisions is based on
the high range hierarchical distribution of the organizations. Horizontal distribution focus
on team working where everyone can participate in decisions making.
Starting from the point of the people’s role relevance inside the organizations, it is
important to take into consideration different aspects to achieve as best behavior as
possible of all of them. In the Star Model, it is suggested to focus on Rewards, in that way
people can feel motivated to perform and complete the goals planned for the
organization, also considering the People, it is important to have good human resources
policies, which can influence and define employees’ mindsets and skills, some of these
policies can be achieved with training, rotation, development, effective recruiting, and
resources selection (Galbraith, 2011).
26
Figure 1. Galbraith’s Star Model
Source: Schuster & Kesler, 2011, p. 39.
The rewards can cover aspects as salaries or bonuses, but also some others simpler
aspects as parking facilities or offering free snacks at the office. The human resources
policies could cover hiring processes, internal mobility, or training, improving the skills of
each person to achieve the organization’s goals.
In traditional organizations, normally the focus was on the Structure of organizations, but
with the fast changes on businesses now is looking to how to optimize processes, how to
treat People, and which Rewards to give them to encourage them for their daily activities.
Something important is the connection between each of the 5 topics of the Star Model, a
good communication and the use of a clear language to everyone that brings a consistent
message to all the resources inside the company is necessary.
The Canadian professor Henry Mintzberg established a Framework with three principal
configurations of the organizations. Starting with the part of the organization that can
27
determinate the success or failure, going in deep with the coordination mechanism of all
the activities and passing to how the organization manage the decision-making process, in
a centralized or decentralized way. He defined the different parts of organization, the
principal coordinated mechanisms and the types of decentralization.
The Minztberg Framework analyses six different configurations in the organizations:
1. Simple structure- Strategic Apex
2. Machine bureaucracy- The technostructure
3. Professional bureaucracy- Operative core
4. Diversified form- Middle line
5. Adhocracy or Innovative organization
Figure 2. Key parts of an organization
Source: Lunenburg, 2012, p. 2.
1. The Strategic Apex, located all the top management of the organization and its
support staff. It will be depending on the company structure; a Simple Structure uses
direct supervision that can be a vertical or a horizontal centralization. It could be
overlapping in the tasks of the support staff if the group is small.
2. Middle Line, the middle and lower level management who communicate and work
close with the top management. For the activities coordination to apply
standardization, this division form uses limited vertical decentralization, where the
28
decision-making is decentralized at the divisional level with little coordination
between divisions. Each division itself is relatively centralized and tends to be like a
machine bureaucracy. In corporate headquarters, technostructure provides services to
all divisions; support staff is located within each division. Usually Middle Line is
implemented for large corporations.
3. Operating Core, it is everyone related to the operations processes, all the workers
that execute the daily tasks. Based on Professional Bureaucracy where standardization
of skills is used as a prime coordinating mechanism, high skills professionals. The
Operating Core applies vertical and horizontal decentralization, even the organization
is formalized, provides also flexibility to give autonomy to professionals. The top
management and technostructure areas are small, there are some middle managers
and strong support staff supporting the core activities. The idea is to achieve
innovation solutions and to offer high quality services. The coordination problems are
common because its size that can vary from moderate to large. Examples of this type
are universities, hospitals, large law firms, they are complex but stable environments.
4. Technostructure, all the necessary tools to support the processes. The specialists in
the design systems, processes, etc. Machine Bureaucracy implements processes
standardization for the activities coordination with high formalization and work
specialization. It is based only on horizontal decentralization, therefore centralized
decisions. The organization has many levels starting from the top management to the
bottom. This type has many support staff and technostructure. The techno-structures
are formed by analysts like engineers, accountants, planners, researchers, and
management personnel.
5. Support Staff, all the people needed for support from the outside, allowing the
continuity in the workflow of the operation activities. This is the last type of
organization added by Minztberg, Adhocracy carries out agreements between the
suppliers such as coordination of the activities, and has low formalization and
decentralization. Support Staff implements advanced technologies looking for achieve
quick innovation and adaptation to changing environments. This type of organization
29
is medium size, flexible to adapt to others organizations, and efficient in the use of
resources. Examples of adhocracies include aerospace and electronics industries,
research, and development firms.
Inside Mintzberg study, he also suggested to pay attention to Ideology, the beliefs and
traditions depend on each culture, the way of behaving and acting is going to be different,
also the values each people have; it is important consider it to formulate some norms to
align the organization if is necessary (Lunenburg, 2012).
Mintzberg also suggested different mechanisms of coordination between the different
tasks:
1. Direct supervision, a person oversees others, guides and supervise their work.
2. Mutual adjustment, when the operations are coordinated through the simple
process of informal communication.
3. Standardization of norms, implemented to work in the same way among the
organization, the norms allow controlled activities where everyone can be aligned.
4. Standardization of outputs, specifically when the results are defined. The
specifications and definition of targets allow a coordinate result.
5. Standardization of skills, when it is necessary a specific skill and training for workers,
coordinated with the tasks to achieve.
6. Standardization of work processes, depending of the activities it is necessary to
coordinate and to program all the processes to achieve the required operations.
Finally, per the studies made by Mintzberg he distinguished three different types of
decentralization:
1. Vertical decentralization based on a hierarchical distribution of power, the chain of
command and the authority are distributed beginning with superordinate and
subordinates in any organization.
30
2. Horizontal decentralization works with shared authority, where the different people
inside the organizations work in the same level, taking decisions together.
3. Selective decentralization, where the decisions are taken by a specific unit of the
organization previously delegated.
These different types are going to define the information flow and the decision-making
location. Generally vertical fluxes allocate resources, normally including budget and
planning, horizontal fluxes’ goal is to achieve the integration among the different units
(Marciniak, 2013).
Table 2. Mintzberg’s Five Organizational Structures
Source: Lunenburg, 2012, p. 4.
For the redesign of the organization different strategies could be applied to select the
team to work and to take the best decisions in which changes apply (Kesler & Kates,
2010):
1. The expert model
2. Executive team as Design Team
3. Delegated Design Team
4. Multi-level Design Team
In the expert model the team is formed by the leader, a very small group of advisers, and
one internal or external consultant. In this case the executive board doesn’t take part of
the transformation process, the leader is the one who makes the decisions and the rest of
31
the group creates the communication and how to apply the plans. In the case of the
structure of organizations this model is normally used when the size is going to be smaller
or members of the executive board are going to be replaced. In the executive team as
Design Team the board works closely with the leader, this model is implemented when
quick decisions are needed, it is fundamental that the executive board works together and
in a good way. One constraint in this approach is the executive team itself, they could be
the ones more resistant to change. Normally they perceive this change as consequences of
previous wrong decisions that they made, so it could happen that they create a wall and
tend to defend their current position, for that reason many times it is better to bring an
external consultant that can show from the outside all the benefits the transformation can
bring.
In the model, Delegated Design Team, the employee’s participation in low levels can be
useful to explore other design options, the idea is to find a small group of high potential
employees that could be more in contact with the low-level activities and that bring
alternatives and recommendations to the executive board. Usually this approach has a lot
of success, it is an action-learning development experience for the employees involved
which embrace the active participation and enthusiasm from them. The bigger problem of
this approach is the low participation of the executive team, they only decide the best
option without getting involved in the solutions creation and this can result of a careful
choice of the most conservative alternative, because normally they don’t take risks in
something that they are not involved since the beginning. This can create frustration in
the delegated team because after their hard-working in finding the most innovative
solutions they hit with the wall of negation. The last approach is the multi-level design
team, the most efficient option between the four where there is a mix between the
executive team and managers in low levels. It is used for projects looking for growth,
innovation and to improve effectiveness. The energy, participation and ideation of ideas is
high, the employees are also involved, for that reason it can’t be applied for the unit’s
reduction in the organization.
32
Other approach to implement in the organization’s evolution is the Double design process
where the organizational and architectural design process is generated, this supports the
organizational change and development. This requires a collaborative work between
managers and employees, they could address and accommodate all the possible
organizational challenges, of course without forgetting the user participation giving
feedbacks and analyzing they response to the new changes. The solution improvement is
going to be achieved with the everyday practices and experiences of the team.
The fundamental of the selection on how to work in the organization transformation
depends on the output to achieve, also the culture of the organization has an important
role because the behavior of the people inside is going to influence the response and
effective implementation of the changes.
3.2 Constraints
It is always important to remember that each organization is different and has their
specific characteristics and needs, so also different strategies are necessary per their
behaviour and requests. Good design is based on good strategy.
As with any process it is normal that some complex factors appear, some of those aspects
could be (Kesler & Kates, 2010):
- Innovation in process as well as products, the need to constantly offer something new
and valuable to customers.
- Efficiency pressure to increase volume, keeping in acceptable expenses.
- The Global expansion and the local competition that are becoming more sophisticated.
- The need of changing business models and to manage a more complete portfolio of
business models.
The culture of the organization and the resistant beginning from the management area
can bring many problems to the restructuration of the organization. When the
33
environment is more dynamic is necessary to change frequently the work dynamic, and to
apply different configurations in the organization to find the most effective solution. But
the main difficulty of this is the ability of the organization to adapt to a complex strategy,
it has happened many times that organizations assume strategies far from their own
capabilities bringing disappointment to all the parts involved in the process.
One big problem in designing the organizations is the misalignment of goals and
performance measures, people do the activities that the supervisor checks or the ones
visible to others. This can be managed offering incentives to people, not only with objects
and money but taking care of employees, make them feel useful, part of the team, also
working on improving the organization culture, in that way people are going to feel close
to the company, achieving better results. Of course, this is something that needs a lot of
time of hardworking to remove the barriers that people use to build, but considering that
the motivation system looks for aligning personal goals with those of the firm, it is
important to work on it.
Some impacts can be easily recognized when there is not aligning, for example the
organization can be slow to respond and not able to solve internal conflicts, leaders resist
changing, wrong performing in decision-making or the roles are confused and sometimes
overlapped (Schuster & Kesler, 2011).
The size of the organizations can be also a constraint for designing their structures. Size is
a factor that favors small organizations and plays against the large ones, because the
resistance is higher with more people involved. The environments’ complexity and the
fast-moving evolution provoke that firms must move from stand alone to “meta
organizations” where it is fundamental the collaboration among firms. These are
organizations whose members are other organizations, one clear example of this is the
partnership among different firms (Marciniak, 2013). An important point to consider from
organization designers is to try to achieve something that differentiate the organization in
any way, it is necessary to create unique, hard to replicate capabilities among the firm
that can produce lasting and sustainable competitive advantage that allow to distinguish
the company (Schuster & Kesler, 2011). Even the possibility of creating larger companies
34
with the combination and acquisition of others is fundamental always fomenting the team
work to facilitate the development of the activities.
35
PART 4. Design
“Good management is the art of making problems so interesting
and their solutions so constructive that everyone
wants to get to work and deal with them”
Paul Hawken
36
The concept of design can be interpreted in so many ways, different from the concept to
the real practice, this flexibility often brings misunderstanding about how to conceive
design (Buchanan, 1992).
Design has evolved from a trade activity to a segmented profession, then to a field for
technical research, and now known as a new liberal art of technological culture
(Buchanan, 1992). Each of these different uses of design continue working for different
requirements, but the last one is the one referring to the new develop inside
organizations to apply a different behavior more focused on human-centered. The way
designers mix ideas and find relationships between signs, things, actions, and thoughts
show that design is not only used as a technical tool but also as a new liberal art.
Traditionally different areas are linked with different types of professionals,
communication with graphic designers, industrial designers, and engineers with the
production of objects, designers with a managerial background with activities and
services, and architects and urban planners with the developing of systems and
environments. The design has been applied per the demands of each area of practice,
each science that meets design tended to use it as an “applied” version for their needs,
according to its own knowledge, methods, and principles (Buchanan, 1992). Normally
design is only conceived simply as a decorative art, but there are different areas where
design can have a strong and decisive role.
In Buchanan’s article, Wicked problems in Design Thinking (1992), distinguished four main
areas where designers have a principal role in the contemporary life. The first one is the
design of symbolic and visual communication, this is the most known and it lies inside all
the graphic designers who implement traditional approaches as book or magazine
production moving to photography or television, that of course continues evolving per the
current and fast movement of life, changing the way and the tools for communicating. The
second area covers the objects, all the products, its form and visual appearances, this area
has also evolved according to the customer needs, not only focusing on physical aspects
but taking care about the cultural, social, psychological impact in the person, working
37
together with engineering, art, natural and human sciences. The third area concerns about
the design of activities and organized services, at the beginning just focusing on logistics to
reach specified objects, but it has evolved to a more complete strategic planning bringing
decision-making where the Design Thinking makes a fundamental part of the activity, this
area starts to taking care about the experience, how could bring more value. Is it a
relationship between connections? and which are the consequences? how can affect the
everyday activities? The last one is the design of complex systems or environments for
living, working, playing, and learning. Starting with urban planning, architecture and
systems engineering, and now going in deep with the concern of providing ecological and
cultural environments for humans in a more consciousness way.
The distinction of these four areas are clearly defined but with the develop of Design
Thinking the limits are expanding and mixing between them, allowing places of invention
where more than one type of designer works together with others in a co-creation of a
solution for different problems. The way we are living is more a multiple system where the
linear reasoning is not anymore applying, there are different requires that need
combinations of different systems to create the solutions people are looking for. The
designers cannot be longer perceived as just individuals who decorate messages and
produce nice looking products, they are a fundamental part of the complex system for
problem solving, the way of thinking and working can bring better and optimal solutions.
Saying this, design is evolving as a new discipline where acting together with other
different subjects can be implemented as practical reasoning and argumentation, guided
by designers but mixed with others creating a collaborative work where design is used as
communication, construction, strategic planning, or systemic integration (Buchanan,
1992).
The design takes into consideration a current form or situation, but it also is an ongoing
process that continues to redesign and reinvent the traditional methods and behaviors.
The processes are part of a history of different solutions where different actors are
involved in the development of the evolution to arrive to the best solution as possible
(Stang & Georg, 2012).
38
The design is an iterative process where the influence of different disciplines allows
offering a complete solution. We can see how the way of working of designers has been
implemented in different sectors, and with positives results. A usual case where this way
of thinking has been a success is in the creation of a startup, these entrepreneurships
normally applied different reasoning to try new paths and success in a world close to
change. The way of transform an idea to an action can be fundamental to achieve good
results, in the article written by Austin, J. R. in the Journal of Organization Design (2013)
he divided the conversion of an idea to reality in three different translation moments. The
first one is the creation of a new mindset, the second the movement from an idea to
action and the third one is shifting contexts.
To implement a new mindset, it is important to create a memorable and exciting moment
to participants, to get their attention and their interest. This moment could be very
quickly followed by the implementation of the process. To create this moment is
important to have the right people involved, to have processed that challenges mindsets,
giving the time needed to the discussion for create a successful breakthrough. The shared
experience brings a momentum and enthusiasm to all people, bringing then a successful
team work and an alignment focus on the new mindset. Of course, when the development
of a new idea starts, coming with it also contradictory feelings about the new mindset.
This creates double and incompatible ideas that can interrupt the transformation to
reality, but at the same time this discussion between two different ideas creates insights
that could bring better results.
Some of the barriers to overcome in the creation of a new mindset are:
- Binary traps, this is a well-known attitude in decision-making. It is about seeing
only two possible options. For example, common binary traps are to assume
something is in favor or against, or the us vs them. This barrier tends to limit new
alternatives and the creation of new and innovative ideas.
- Fear of failure, people tend to repeat same practices because they are afraid to
take risks. Managers must be brave and try new things, they also must encourage
39
others to take risks and to search new possibilities. The idea is to look for
behaviors where people go beyond and not only to do what is expected of them.
- Limited frames of reference, normally people tend to limit the possibilities
between the ones that they know and are familiar for them. It is necessary to
examine different frames to recognize which are the ones that can create more
value.
- Overconfidence, this behavior brings that people think that they know more of
what they really do, this can increase the possibility of failure and the option that
individuals reject any different perspective. For example, when managers have
suggested the current solution, they tend to refuse other new ideas because they
feel that their idea doesn’t work so their reputation can be damaged. To create a
new mindset, it is necessary that people recognize that they don’t know everything
and that you can constantly improve your current situation.
Some techniques can be implemented to handling this first translation moment. First it is
important to analyze the uncertainty points, rather than discussing about the trends,
showing these spaces not yet filled can increase the interest of the people to get involved
in the search of new solutions. Scenario planning can be a useful tool to facilitate the
generation of innovative perspectives and strategies, it can stimulate the discussion of
different scenarios and relevant data. It can also be implemented a blue ocean strategy
where people must examine the firm’s products and markets per the customer
perspective. It can generate a new perspective of the purpose of the business, value of
products, or investment priorities.
The second translation moment refers to moving from ideas to actions, it is all about
changing behavior. Moving from the excitement feeling from the Eureka moment in the
first translation, this step is more difficult because it requires a long-term commitment. It
requires a lot of energy, patience, flexibility, and engagement with all the people involved.
The transformation to actions is not a quickly activity, it is necessary a lot of time, to
practice and to institutionalize all the new routines. One problem of this long-term
40
transformation is the commitment of participants, people always expect quickly and
visible changes if not they can feel that is not efficient and lose the interest of it. For
implement new actions it is important to take in consideration also the stakeholders’
perspective, the new ideas must be aligned with the interests and perspectives of them.
The main activities in this second translation moment are conversation and
communication to find the best way to implement the new ideas.
Some of the barriers to overcome in the translation from an idea to an action are:
- Conflicting interests, as mentioned before the stakeholders must be considered
in the transformation of the ideas to action. The idea is to show them the
importance of the problems of the organizations and how this transformation can
improve this situation, but it could happen that come of their interests are not
aligned with the solution.
- Entrenched routines, more established are certain activities more difficult to
implement new activities, greater is the risk that the new ideas will be rejected. It
is necessary to commit hard to the idea, have goal clarity, and support the
engagement of all the members in the organization.
- Lack of entrainment, entrainment refers to the alignment of time cycles within an
organization. The second translation moment requires a long-term commitment of
all the activities among the organization, so it is important to understand the
different types of work cycles and to manage the tensions between them.
For transform ideas to actions some capabilities can be strengthened to facilitate this
change. Some of those can be, training in influence and persuasion to get all the people
involved, stakeholder mapping and engagement, team leadership, and project
management. The implementation of the TAP team expertise tool can be also useful, it
consists in combine scheduled times to adjust team composition as the process evolves.
The main forces to take care are the management of stakeholders, the monitoring of
member motivation and enthusiasm, and the committed leadership.
41
The third and last translation moment suggested by Austin (2013) is the shifting contexts.
It consists of the translation of a successful practice in another part of the organization. It
is important to remember that is not to replicate, it is about translate, remembering that
the context has changed so it is necessary to retranslate the actions to the new context.
The barriers to overcome are:
- An insular culture, to implement new actions in a new part of the organizations is
important to understand them first to go there. The best example is how
marketers study new markets now to start to sell previous products successful in
other countries but not yet in the new one.
- Confirmation bias, it refers about how people invest in the ideas they think are
correct without giving the opportunities to the new ones that they could don’t
know. So, arriving to new areas we are going to look for the characteristics that
already work in the first are, looking for the similarities, but at the same time we
are going to remove those ideas that we don’t know even that in the first area did.
It is normal blame the execution instead of thinking about that it fails because of
the new and different context in comparison with the first area.
- Idea championing, the success of an idea in previous situations can blind the
opportunity to arise new ideas, individuals can overconfidence of this successful
idea without taking in consideration that the context has changed.
Some of the tools that can help in this translational moment could be re-prioritizing
uncertainties, revisiting stakeholder maps, and examining needed expertise. Also, the
project premortem exercise where the team should assume that the project fails and start
to analyze what could be the possible causes. As the same time, can be implemented
techniques for customer-centricity and understanding of customer pain-points, these
going to help to understand the behaviors and responses people going to have, and to
identify what could motivates them.
Applying the behavior of designers in thinking not only in the one and first easy solution,
but instead try again and find all the other possible solutions, give us the chance to ask
42
what we really want to achieve inside the organization. The process design implemented
can be divided into two steps: the problem definition and solution, in the first designers
identify all the elements of the problem and the factors to find an appropriate solution,
and in the second one is the combination of the different requirements and factors to
choose the correct option. The normal sequence in a process is not linear, in fact for that
reason is very useful implement design as a problem solving because the way of working
allows you to be more open to other possible solutions and try many times as required.
One problem for designers came from the difficulty of the problem, the behavior is useful
for complex problems but normally those have a high grade of uncertainty. The problem
came because is complicated conceive and plan what does not yet exists, they usually
must “invent” and create something completely new that brings enough value and
experience for the customer. They can also found problems of integration with the people
they worked, for example a product design can face different lines of reasoning: the ideas
coming from designers and manufacturers about their products; the internal operational
logic of products; and the desire and ability of human beings to use products in everyday
life in ways that reflect personal and social values (Buchanan, 1992). The designer should
create a good environment of work between colleagues where they can work together
bringing good solutions for customers, finding the effective option where everyone
related to the solution perceive the value of the product.
“Designers are thinkers, makers, and doers. Designers have the capacity to think before
they make or do” (Buchanan, 2015). For this ability, the designer’s way of acting is so
useful in the current fast speed evolution of the world, they study all the possible
variables in a diverse and quick way to able to achieve the best possible results.
43
PART 5. Design in the organizations
“To fear change is to fear being challenged. To fear being
challenged is to fear growth and new possibilities”
Ty Howard
44
The design has move from the initial and traditional point to solve tactical problems of
designing products and then services, to be use in organizational problems of operations
in the daily activities of companies. The design starts to be implemented to solve
problems of vision and strategy, preparing the organization to react to the constant
changes in the external world. According this new vision of design managers should act
not only as decision makers also as designers to bring new and creative solutions.
To consider design as part of business, it is important recognize their important role on it,
sometimes the problem of recognition begin from the designer that are not clear about
these new areas. This could happen because of two reasons, for the designer’s lack of
knowledge of management concepts and of management as a science, and for their
difficulty in implement a value model in their everyday practices (Mozota, 2006).
The evolution of design has brought it to be applied as a strategic tool for business, using
technological capabilities to achieve innovation to bring value to users, taking care of what
are they needs, and accomplishing business value with the experiences providing by the
products and services that the company provides (Academy of management journal,
2015).
As mentioned in the analysis of how organizations design their structure and operations,
we can see how the human resources are so important and how working with reward
systems can improve their performance and align their goals with the ones of the
organization.
Now design is integrating to the businesses, many companies are hiring designers,
collaborating with design companies, or acquiring them. In 2013 Accenture acquire Fjord,
in 2014 IBM hired 1500 designers and make partnership with Apple for B2B services,
Samsung are introducing in their team already formed by UX, interaction and product
designers a big number of service designers. This is not only for companies, also the design
has been implemented in public government, for example in United Kingdom the
Government Digital Services added more than 250 designers, the Cabinet Office worked
with designers for the implementation of a new Policy Lab, and a government service
45
provider called Capita has introduced a service design practice (Academy of management
journal, 2015).
Design in the organization can’t be an individual activity to perform, it is presented in each
of the different areas because can bring better performances in different environments.
There are different ways design is perceived and applied in the companies, the decision of
choose one depend of the singular peculiarities of each company.
In a study realized to different design-oriented European SMEs, it suggested that there are
four main powers of design, as differentiator, good business, integrator, and transformer.
The first refer to Design as differentiator specifically talking about the external
competitive advantage that design can provide to the product or service, as design of
products, brand equity and brand design value, customer loyalty, premium price,
corporate image, or customer orientation. Design as good business helping to
organizations increase sales and have better margins, more brand value, greater market
share, better return of investment ROI, and including the impact in the society as
sustainable design. Design as integrator considering the internal competitive advantage,
participating actively in many areas of the organization as a unique, invisible, and difficult
to imitate combination of processes and resources, taking care of the new product
development processes as time to market or visual communication for teams; the design
provides the support to the modular and platform architecture of product lines, to the
user- oriented innovation models and in general to the project management. And finally
Design as transformer connecting with the possibility of create new business
opportunities, improving the abilities to deal with changes, and to understand the market
moves and the company itself (Mozota, 2006)
46
Table 3. Design management is defined by what you think of design (vertical axis: the
“learning leader” of design), and by what you think of management (horizontal axis).
Source: Mozota, 2006, p. 45.
As the same way Mozota (2006) has expressed in her study, the Danish Design Council
explained some of the ways design can be implemented inside the organizations. Design
as a service, as a catalyst for organizational change, and as a strategic “Design Thinking”
resource to reframe business models and markets. Other study made by design
management researcher and professor Sabine Junginger suggest also three different
values designs can bring to the organization, tactical, organizational, and strategic value
(Westcott & others, 2013).
The tactical driver more related to the products and processes, to the aesthetic or
functional development, the impact in the return of investment is high because any
modification made can bring new revenues but at the same time could increase cost for
the change of any material or component. Some examples could be which flow can allow
me have a shorter time to market or which materials going to bring me cost advantage.
The second way considerate the structure, function and behavior of the organization
itself, design as organizational driver to see which markets can be reached, the growth
achieved or the impacts inside the organization. Also in this driver is considered design as
connector or integrator, working with a better connection with customers moving from a
product-process centric to human centric organization bringing experiences and value to
47
customers. Some factors that take in consideration could be the brand loyalty or market
share.
And the last way is design as strategic driver, how are the factors that allow me to growth
as a strong business, the position in the market or also the perception of the consumers
about the company. Many companies invest in a long-term strategy providing different
and new experiences to customer that allow them to have a better relationship with them
and keep them loyal to the brand for example Apple and Nike (Westcott & others, 2013).
Figure 3. Sabine Junginger’s model
Source: Westcott & others, 2013, p. 13.
A tool useful to understand the behavior of all the aspects in the organization is the
Balanced Scorecard. It is a tool used by many companies to assess a business’s strategic
priorities and decide which of those priorities need to be consistently tracked (Westcott &
others, 2013). The Balanced Scorecard is based in four main perspectives, financial,
customer, internal business process and learning. This is a method used to measure the
business unit performance.
The Financial perspective take in consideration all the actions that can provide superior
returns based on the capital invested in the organization. In the Customer perspective is
described the customer and market where the organization have chosen to compete, it is
considering market segment, customer’s needs, but also customer profitability, how the
company can be profitable providing products and services to that customer segment. In
48
the internal process perspective executives identify the core processes where the
company should focus and on the ones, that needs more attention to maintain the
operations running. And last one the Learning perspective, here the idea is to provide the
infrastructure to enable ambitious objectives in the other perspectives, it will help to the
growth in many aspects, providing the support and the base infrastructure of the
organization. With the use of the Balance Scorecard could be possible have more cleared
each of the aspects that can bring the success of a company (Kaplan & Norton, 1996).
In her study about the four powers of design, Mozota (2006) also analyzed the potential
use of the Balance Scorecard previous proposed by Robert Kaplan’s and David Norton’s as
a decision tool to simplified the understanding to managers of the role of design in the
organizations. Each power identified each perspective of the Balanced Scorecard,
customer perspective-design as differentiator, process perspective-design as coordinator,
learning perspective-design as transformer, and finance perspective-design as good
business. The implementation of the Balanced Scorecard can simplify the integration of
design with the other areas in the organization, this method is often used for audit and
strategy consultants, areas as finance, marketing, procurement, R&D implement it to
analyze the current situation of the solution, so for them is a common language to
understand and facilitate the communications.
49
Table 4. A competitive advantage brings economic value added if both substantial value
and financial value are created.
Source: Mozota, 2006, p. 47.
Also, is important that managers recognize the point of maturity of the organization to
know which points to tackle, allow to understand how is the current situation about
design and how can be improved to achieve future goals. With the Design Value
Scorecard, the managers could move between the three different drivers, and to locate
the organization activities depending on how advanced is the design practice in that area.
50
Table 5. Design Value Scorecard
Source: Westcott & others, 2013, p. 15.
With the evolution in business, the design is looking for provide better experiences to
customers, for that reason we can say we are moving to an “experience economy”. Users
are not only looking for high quality products, they are looking for extra services that give
them gratification in the exchange with the company. A combination of different
disciplines can bring better results for the customer, for example the work made by the
craft of industrial design, UX design and service design offer a solution thinking in different
aspects that can provide satisfaction to the user.
Design is considered most of the time as an integral part of the businesses but their
impact is increasing in a way that sometimes is difficult distinguishes the task of it in each
area of the company, especially in the design companies where all their activities are
touched by design.
It is normal that to apply the new way of design focus on business there will be resistance
from the people involved. Roger Martin (2009) suggested some considerations to break
this mentality. “Take design-unfriendliness as a design challenge, empathizes with the
design-unfriendly elements, speak the language of reliability, use analogies and stories
and bite off as little apiece as possible to generate proof”. We can see how the obstacles
can become our support to arrive to people and try to change their mentality, also the
power of communication with the analogies and stories, people feel more comfortable
51
with things they can be familiar and that they already know. These aspects must be
considered for the managers to implement a correct transformation among the
organization.
5.1 Models/methodologies
For the implementation of design in the organization one of the first thing to consider it
the alignment between all the aspects, getting the strategic grouping aligned with the
strategy of the company makes the rest of the design task much easier, for that reason
there are different tools applied for organization design that works to apply the design, for
example the Structural Building Blocks which helps to define in a clear way the aspects
inside the organization.
Other methodology that can help is the Star Model, it is more related to how organize the
structure of the company, and it is a simple and powerful tool to help managers to align
structures, processes, measures and find the correct talent to support a strategy. Taking in
consideration how each organization have their own characteristics and capabilities, this
model could help as a beginning to organize and understand better the operations in a
company. Design focus a lot in the human part of the organization for that reason in the
start model is interesting takes two main factors, people and rewards.
For problem solving is useful implement different approaches that combining them can
bring a more complete solution to the problem, these approaches are leaded depending
on the capability of the company. These approaches are according the designer, business-
like and technological or engineering approach (Academy of management journal, 2015).
There are different approaches to face problems in organizations. The business-like
approach could start with the definition of a problem or a market opportunity coming
from insights or market analysis, then move to the problem and solutions definition
supported by deeper market research and testing, and finally going to the developing of a
business plan based on different factors as market penetration, pricing and distribution
52
strategies. There is also another approach to implement when facing a problem, it is the
technical or engineering approach where the way of working is dividing in different
components, analyzing each of those searching the best solution to each problem that
emerge and then combining all to a complete solution.
The first approach depends of the capacity of the managers to analyze the insights and
respond quickly to the market information that they have, it is highly influenced by the
management for that reason can be risky because going to depend on the ability the
manager must control the situation and create innovation. The second approach is more
useful when the problems are simple and already defined, also useful for apply an
incremental innovation.
As part of the beginning of design as communication, we can see how effective are the
graphic designers for example to implement visual graphic messages to transfer an idea,
the sketches are fundamental in a design process to understand in a simply way the
concept and find possible solutions to problems. In the design of the Peter B. Lewis
building by the architecture Frank Gehry we can see how his first sketches become in the
real solution of the building, he didn’t use this sketch only to communicate with his team
but he can also use it as a starting point of the brainstorming that find the final output. He
mentioned how important are these initial sketches in the develop of a project, how it is
necessary to give them form and feeling of what it is seeking, in that way we can
remember them in a vivid way during the rest of the process. For Gehry this first sketch
where the place to start, just the beginning and then all will change, but at the end and
trying different possibilities the team and he decided to go back to this first solution and
prove that was the best one, so this mentality to change, try, and go back is fundamental
in applying design inside the organization. The example of the Lewis building is one where
the first sketch brings the final solution, but it is important don’t fall in love with your idea,
it is necessary to be open to re-do, listen and combine different opinions instead of focus
in your idea only (Boland & Collopy, 2004).
The role of visualization is useful not only for professional designers but also to the rest of
the team with other disciplines because it is a basic tool that helps to explain in a better
53
and easy way the possible solutions. Drawings, sketches and photographs are part of
these “artifacts of knowing” because allow describing in the best way the progression and
further steps in the design process. The use of material objects and different visual
representations can make easier the evolution to the change because everyone can easily
understand the process (Stang & Georg, 2012).
Some tools can be applied to transmit the message, storytelling is one strong and effective
method that can help to understand the process. Also, known as model building, it not
only works to clarify the work, but also as a powerful learning process, especially for
teams (Senge, 2014). The idea is to transmit the idea in a familiar but also meaningful way.
The language, consciousness and society are some of the factors that going to guide the
creation of the storytelling. During many years, the way to preserve our history has been
through storytelling, it is not strange to apply this tool to express in a clear way our ideas
to solve a problem, it is a simple and efficient way to transmit our thoughts (Brown, 2009).
With the storytelling, we are introducing the “fourth dimension” to work, the opportunity
to express time. We can see how in customer journeys are expressed time among
different touch points that user must pass to complete the experience. We also integrate
storytelling in other tools as storyboards or scenario matrix. For the design of the possible
interaction users going to have with a product or service, also the use of storytelling is
fundamental, designers must understand the behavior customers going to have, the
actions they are going to take and their responses (Brown, 2009).
The narrative of the storytelling must be in a way that integrates the participants without
overwhelming them with unnecessary data. To construct these stories is not easy,
requires skill and imagination (Brown, 2009). A good story is the one that keeps you
interested on what is next, that guide you through a roller coaster of emotions from
excited, to neutral to again excited, the one that connect emotionally with you.
With storytelling, we construct our solution in a way that makes sense, it is possible to test
the story you have created and in that way to highlight the problems and blank spots in
54
the solution, when the assumptions can’t be supported it is necessary to refinement or to
check the solution. (Senge, 2014).
There are two frameworks that can be useful now of redesign the reward system: “The
What” with the Reward System Design Logic, and “The How” with the Design Milestones
Process (Schuster & Kesler, 2011).
The first one refers to the Rewards System Design Logic, on this one there are different
factors which must be considered for the good development in reward system:
1. Compensation delivery mechanisms
2. Rewards philosophy and objectives
3. Strategic drivers
Figure 4. Rewards Systems: One of five points of Star Model
Source: Schuster & Kesler, 2011, p. 40.
The compensation delivery mechanisms state how the core policy is carried out, cover
components as base salary administration, job evaluation, market pricing, performance
management and delivery of variable pay programs. Variable compensation delivery can
include short-term bonuses and long-term incentives.
55
Rewards philosophy and objectives include all the core design decisions. The core
elements of rewards systems design are: base pay, compensation governance including
performance management, fringe benefits and variable compensation.
There are three Strategic drivers that are fundamental to take in consideration now to
implement the reward systems design:
- Labor market requirements, define the price of acquiring and retaining defined sets of
talents, based on market forces globally and locally.
- Organizational capabilities, the strengths that help the businesses to compete in their
markets. Capabilities determine what behaviors and actions should be encouraged and
rewarded.
- Operating governance, this will depend on how the decision-making is distributed,
central or disseminated. The more integrated the governance model, the more linked
business units and functions need to be. Harmonized rewards systems and metrics are
part of driving integration.
Table 6. Operating Governance Model: Degrees of integration across business units
Source: Schuster & Kesler, 2011, p. 41.
56
Other model applied in integrates design in organizations is the Design milestones process
(Kesler & Kates, 2010). It works as a guidance to know the steps to follow according the
components you have and how to connect them. Organization design decisions depend
mainly in two foundational elements as operating governance model and capabilities. This
model is based on the connections between the business units to find synergies and
leverage scale.
Figure 5. The Five-Milestone design process (with rewards system design questions)
Source: Schuster & Kesler, 2011, p. 42.
a) Milestone one: Business case and Discovery: to begin is necessary define the goals the
organization want to achieve as a new business strategy or to improve performance. In
this diagnostic leaders and designers should ask: “How are current metrics and rewards
contributing to the current problem?” Examine the current measures and see what is
missing and required to achieve the goals. It is important have clear the distribution of
human resources, their location and how the decision-making is distributed, in that way is
possible to align the individual performance with the strategic goals. It is normal that
when a new business strategy happen exists gaps between the behavior of the people and
the organization, it is possible recognize them in the interviews, focus groups and other
57
qualitative analysis and it is important write them in a problem statement to remember
them and trying to improve it and finally eliminate this gap.
b) Milestone two: Strategic grouping: in this step is define the structure of the
organization, how create the most efficient teams to achieve the goal. Metrics as
customer, function, geography, or product can play an important role in helping the
leadership team choose the best primary grouping logic. Depending on the metrics to
consider can result to different strategies, for example could be considered for the
strategy of the brand or for a product. One case we can mention is the Gillete’s razor, this
is focalized in product and the metrics to consider are the one related to the product for
example the segmentation of the existing products to avoid cannibalization with the new
ones. Working together in this step with the Chief Financial Officer CFO and the Chief
Information Officer CIO allow clarify the division of each unit and the accountabilities
designated to them.
c) Milestone Three: Integration of the Design: The call for “boundaryless organization” at
GE, IBM and elsewhere has become an urgent matter of working across geographies,
functions and business units to go faster and to gain the benefits of scale. In this step is
when the compensation occurs, it works like a strong way of integration and alignment
between the business units. Two strategic drivers can be applied in rewards design to
apply this integration, capabilities and operating governance can guide the best selection
to choose. The options to create the integration could be between establishing networks
and councils to creating robust planning processes and linking units together with smart
pay programs and measures.
58
Figure 6. How rewards and metrics can help support integration design needs
Source: Schuster & Kesler, 2011, p. 43.
The compensation considers the operating profit and the operational performance
metrics, can be vary according your performance but also about the team performance so
for that reason the alignment should be something to take very serious because even an
employee has a perfect performance their reward going to be low if the rest of the
organization don’t work in the same way to achieve the same goals. The figure of the
manager is very important in this step, in the enterprise level occur the discussion of the
output they are looking for, so the incentive to the employees coming from the
management must be consequent and attractive to them. The companies must focus not
only in business process but introduce also human resources processes.
a) Milestone Four: Leadership and Talent: in this point the new organization design is
created, it is a good opportunity to embrace talents and integrate new others. The reward
system is fundamental for attract these new members and to retain the people already
working in the organization. The payment, compensation and benefits must be market-
driven, considering other companies in the market, for example creative designers at
Apple and Nike are paid based on market pricing of jobs, software engineers at Google are
paid at levels necessary to compete with Facebook and others in the same talent market.
59
b) Milestone Five: Transition or Implementation: Implementation of complex
organizational realignments often takes many months or more. Rarely do leaders and
designers get it completely right the first time.
A fundamental factor to take in consideration is about this last milestone, the
implementation, it should be a core activity in any design process. The executive team
must analyze together with the human resources the critical actions that affect the
evolution of the company, and think about the plans and following steps to implement.
The success of applying new practices depend of the hard work and discipline, it is
important to set the implementation plan and guide the transition (Kesler & Kates, 2010).
Part of the task of design inside the organizations is the care of the people who work in it,
to achieve a good environment it is necessary to tie talent and organization together. The
team of Human Resources must work constantly in the research of good talents and
taking care of the organization discipline at the same time, in that way they can avoid a
misalignment between resources and strategy, the integration of new talents is
fundamental for the success of the organization. Three options to mix the talent and the
organization can be: (Kesler & Kates, 2010)
- Define the work of the executive team
- Design the direct report structure
- Make the right talent choices
The role of the executives can be fully operational or more strategical, it is important
outline this to identify their management routines, agenda, and responsibilities. Even if a
company is flexible in the line of command is important have very defined all the tasks to
avoid a too independently work creating a misalignment in the strategy. It is important to
find a balance between delegated and get involve in the operational work. In the first one
is important that the manager follows close all the activities but also give freedom to the
team so they can growth and learn, in the second one is possible that the managers lose
too much time that cost money if they want to be in every activity instead of delegate.
60
Now of delegate is important design how going to be the Report Structure, define the
roles of each in the team and how going to be the communication. This decision must be
based on the skills of the people and the position of they in the company, but also other
factors as how will be the span of control between managers and employees or the
influence of each position in the organization. The idea of apply design practices in the
organizations is avoid a hierarchical structure where is possible loose the effectiveness,
and focus in a more flexible organization with greater span of authority and better
communication mechanisms.
The talent choices are almost located completely in the human resources team, but also
big part of the decision is taken by the managers. It is important to have a good
communication to human resources and a defined and clear strategy explained to them to
not lose any good opportunity. The design is based in multidisciplinary work so the
integration of new talent into the business is something that usually happens, it is an
opportunity to integrate new and different talent, more aligned to the change the
company wants to make. Also, is important to work and enhance the current talent to
bring them to these new movements and activities. To achieve a good result is important
to try, new skills should not be allocated only in one part, it is necessary that the change
will be applied in all the areas, even with the current talents but the important is that
everyone relates to the strategy to follow. It is not about “designing around people”, it is
about the correct combination of resources, having talent in mind knowing their
capabilities and make the most efficient configuration in a way to explore all the
possibilities where organization can provide the best experiences.
After the right selection of talent is important to take in consideration the team working,
this is fundamental when applying design inside the organizations. The way of working is
in iterative way, design suggested keep trying and searching all the possible solutions, it is
necessary to guide the process when there is interaction with others to have a more
complete solution. It is a collaborative process, this bring a better organizational
environment for successful, finding value-creating designs achieved at the organizational
and the societal level. It is important not only involve the employees in the design
61
processes, but also consider the future users. Instead of consider user’s needs as
something to discover we must understand that their needs are constantly changing and
evolving with the design and the development process, for that reason introduce them in
the participation of the process can bring advantages for the company.
The most excited of work in team is the meaningfulness experience, people can feel part
of something bigger than themselves, for managers is important to keep the team
motivated in a way they can have this feeling during all their work and continue evolving
with the same satisfaction that they have at the beginning of the process (Senge, 2006).
Other important aspect to consider now of apply design practices in organizations is the
team that going to develop the activities. One of the method suggested to apply is the
Design Charrette, it is a system to choose the best team to work in a design process that
allows the best as possible generation and evaluation of a problem. Many time now to
analyze a problem the people who identify it are not the best one to solve, when a
problem appears there are around a complete system or factors that the people who face
the problem keep with those, for that reason if someone new came to try to analyze the
problem can start from zero without anything that can limit them to find an innovative
solution. Other factor that can help the creative process is the mix of different disciplines,
when each person can bring different perspectives generating a more strong and effective
solution. The Design Charette starts in architecture and it is applied as a collaborative
working session where everyone participates and shares their opinions about a problem
(Kesler & Kates, 2010).
The principal characteristics of the Design Charette model are:
- Size: the dimension can vary a lot going from small groups of 12 to more than 100
people, all the team meet in a room and stay together
- Work: the sessions are intensive and iterative, just two or more days preferably away
from the office in a new environment where everyone can feel in the same way. The
proceed is first working in small groups and then share together with the others their
ideas, review, evaluate and revise each of the proposal solutions.
62
- Option Generation, Not Decision-Making: differently from other design processes in
Design Charette the group doesn’t choose the best option and meet a consensus of what
they prefer. In this case the role of the leader is strong and the idea is to receive input
from all the group and then the leader takes the decision of which solutions can help in
the best way the organization.
For any implementation of a different mindset in the organizations is needed some
competencies and skills that allow an efficient development of the new actions (Kesler &
Kates, 2010):
- Consulting and Facilitation Skills
- Deep curiosity about Organizations as Systems
- Design mindset
- Diagnostic and Analytical Skills
For implement something new is needed to have high confidence and competences
guided by leadership, core competences as good communication and presentation ability,
contracting, assessment, facilitation. The manager must know how to manage conflict and
act in a comfortable way, because it is normal that some problems emerge from the
discussion of the different options and the implementation of changes. It is important to
be open and have a lot of curiosity about how the organization works, not only as a group
of individuals but as an interconnected political, social and information network that start
with the individuals but evolve as a complete system where every person is a gear of a big
machine. The change process is creative and excited but could bring a lot of emotions that
the manager should know how to manage and control it in the most beneficial way for the
transformation.
As business-like approach and technical or engineering approach, it existed one caring
about the design mindset. It is useful now to search for disruptive and radical innovation,
because of the co-design with the users that bring better and quick feedbacks from them.
The designer’s approach explains the steps that they normally follow now to face a
challenge. They start with observations of user’s behavior and context, analyzing the
63
constraints presented and the key points, this is the initial phase called Discovery phase.
For this step, some design tools are employed as ethnographic research, visual
anthropology, realize customer journeys or co-creation workshops. The next phase is the
Define phase where the insights from the previous step are analyzed and the problem is
explained in a more specific way. Then they move to the Ideation phase where they try
the concepts through different prototypes and visualizations the different possible
solutions, in this phase also is consider the interaction the users going to have with the
final solution. And finish with the Delivery phase where through feedbacks are tested the
real interaction with the users. This approach is iterative moving backwards and forwards,
interdisciplinary and collaborative. In each phase are considered technical, design and
business factors to create a complete solution. It moves from observation and analysis in
the Discovery, to imagination and design in the Define and Ideation phases, and finally to
the realization of the idea in the Delivery phase (Academy of management journal, 2015).
Discover Define Ideation Delivery
This method is known as Design Thinking and with other similar approaches allows
individuals to develop a complete solution through the definition of different steps to
follow. It is a method based on iteration and collaboration, useful for discover needs,
recognize key insights, and create a quick prototype test with stakeholders to then rapidly
launch.
64
Figure 7. Design Thinking
Source: Academy of management journal, 2015, p. 2.
Designers start to care about the important role of human needs in the solution, in that
way Design Thinking was born. They start to search the feasible combination between the
requirements on businesses, both technical and economic, without intervene in people’s
needs and rather looking for improve them. Design Thinking enhances the capabilities that
we can have as designers and problem solvers, instead of applying traditional, repetitive,
and known methods to solve problems. Abilities as being intuitive, to recognize patterns,
to construct ideas with value, to know how to express ourselves, are some of the skills
that Design Thinking can foment in organizations (Brown, 2009)
According Buchanan (Buchanan, 2015) there could be four different meanings for Design
Thinking:
1. Cognitive Process in the Brain
2. Creative Inquiry
3. Imaginative Act
4. Spirit or Culture
65
The meanings start with the capacity of the brain to collect, store, and process the
information, and how it takes decisions based on this to find the best possible
combination between all the options. Design thinking also is useful for analysis, develop a
creative inquiry, asking all the questions needed to understand the problem and find the
best solution. It is necessary two main steps, the analysis and the synthesis. This practice is
implemented for the designers, in specific they divided the process in the analytical,
creative and executive phases, to then proceed to the communication and
implementation of the solution.
The Design Thinking allows the person to find unprecedented solutions, it is an
Imaginative Act of the Mind, the opportunity to find new possibilities and how to develop
it to have the best results as possible. The last meaning refers to how the culture of an
organization can guide the Design Thinking, instead of starting from the individual it starts
from the characteristics and abilities of the organization or of a whole community, the
creation of the solution came from the combination of the different thinking of all the
individuals. It can be difficult to apply because mix the rational solutions with the
imaginative meanings, it uses all the qualities and values of all the people involved.
Figure 8. Pluralism of Design Thinking
Source: Buchanan, 2015, p. 11.
66
Having clear how the implementation of Design Thinking can bring innovation through the
analysis and develop of creative solutions, Buchanan (2015) suggested also four main
moments to facilitate the evolution from an idea to a real solution. Very like the steps
previously discussed he distinguishes these four steps:
Invention Judgement Connection and Development Integration and Evaluation
The Invention is seeking for new ideas, there are some strategies in design to search these
innovative ideas but could arrive to the same results known. The idea of this moment is to
achieve a new solution, something potentially strong to bring new values and experiences
for the people involved, and solve the problem in the most efficient way. Then in the
second moment it is necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the ideas coming from the
invention, they must be desirable, feasible and viable solutions. Desirable when the
solution offer something meaningful for the people; feasible concern to technology,
production and behaviors of people; and viable when it fixes in the culture, capabilities of
the organization and on the social practices.
The third movement refers to the Connection and Development of the idea, analysis of
the main features of the solution coming from the previous two steps. Develop something
useful, usable and desirable. It does not refer only about products; the design also can be
applied for services or to find new experiences to offer. The last moment is the Integration
and Evaluation, it is important because is the step where the solution can be studied and
know if we achieve the innovation that we were looking at the beginning of the process.
The design can help also to manage different aspects in organizations, such is the case of
the workplace. Many times, the workplace is only considered to analyze economical
aspects of the organization. Some aspects as space efficiency, reconfiguration costs or
energy use are part of the factor analyzed to study the cost efficiency. However, the
workplace can also have a high impact in organization’s people, processes and technology
(Mozota, 2006).
Design approaches can be useful to design the workplaces. Starting with the traditional
approach from the twentieth century where the management of workers were based on
67
“Taylorism” and the standard, industrial and mass production of goods following the
“Fordism”, passing through the 90’s with the process reengineering and early 2000’s that
focused on operational effectiveness, we can see how during the history the focus was in
a product technical engineered but not caring too much about the design and the user’s
needs. Taylorism refers to the analysis of business decisions according previous data
researched and tested quantitatively. Fordism is based in the Henry Ford’s working
philosophy about the mass production run by autocratic management, high division of
labor, little workplace democracy, but with the consolidation of high wages.
The competition of talents between the companies is high for that reason the people are
force to be continually in a constant movement of learning and growth, this coming also
for the expectation of the Generation Y workforce. This generation came with a well-
developed network, high degree education, multilingual, and being strongly self-
determined, for that reason they are expecting a workplace where they can growth
professional and personally. The problem is coming from the traditional way companies
still working, this generation are looking for something completely different of what they
found, hierarchical structures, high routinized activities and not flexible companies
(Academy of management journal, 2015).
Other important aspect to take in consideration in the workplace is about how they
implement the technology, big data, cloud computing, internet of things, social media, or
high-speed connectivity, all these and more factors can highly influence in the daily
processes and bring the company in an advantage position against competitors.
When we refer to experience is how the individuals feel, but it is not something that only
happen inside them, it is about the interaction they have with the environment where
they develop. In general, the environment refers to all the things that surround us, the
infinite objects, activities, signs and symbols with which we interact in the daily to day. All
these components are nothing without the interaction of the people with them that give
them sense. The role of design in workplaces is to create these environments where
people can feel comfortable and fulfill them with meaning. The design enters in the
68
crafting of a strategy and vision of the future, crafting of the operations or also creating
the products and services that have impact in people’s lives (Buchanan, 2015).
There are three different aspects where design can influence in the workplace:
1. Practical action
2. Intellectual understanding
3. Emotional engagement
The practical action refers to all the physical aspects that can interrupt the good
development of the activities, for example doors that don’t open or maybe difficult and
uncomfortable movement to use machineries. In the case of intellectual understanding
design plays the role of communicator, all the information and instructions to develop the
activities, it must be clear and simple in the design is the one that can through images and
good use of language communicate in the best possible way. And emotional engagement
refers to the human feelings in the interaction with the environment, the pleasure,
satisfaction, disagreement or any other emotion humans can experiment in the
workplace.
There are too many factors that can influence the workplace experience. Starting from the
organizational design, incentives or rewards and management procedures, like we see in
the previous chapters the importance of these. Also, have an impact in the business
process design, the support tools, information services, physical and virtual environment,
the interaction between the organization and the employees, partners or customers, the
organizational culture, communications and human resource programs.
These factors can influence in the employee’s experience in the workplace, the (Academy
of management journal, 2015) suggest take in consideration these six elements:
1. Collaboration, co-creation and co-production
2. Creating a narrative
3. Design the employee experiences
69
4. Focus on value and values
5. Identify real and compelling needs
6. Sensory and emotional engagement
The design always goes for the collaboration between equals, not just consultation but
real participation of all the individuals involved in the project. From employees to
customers, everyone should be integrated and considering in the process. The creation of
a narrative help to understand in a clear way the process, not only storytelling with high
and lows parts, but the control of the sequence, progression and duration of each step.
For the Design of the employee experiences is not only taking care about the workflow
and tools to implement in the process, it is about going deep into the employee journey to
understand where are the touchpoints and work on those, the workplace influence in the
emotions and satisfaction of employees so it is important to invest time on it to find the
best working environment for all.
When we talk about workplace is not only about physical spaces, also it is important to
explain to the employees the importance of each of their roles in the organizations, how it
contributes in the organization’s values and how working in a good environment can bring
a new value for customers. It is important that they understand the importance of the
creation of the personal value, their contribution in the organization’s value and how
should be aligned the values of the organization, employees and customers. For a good
design of a workplace is important to start analyzing the user’s needs and how could be
possible providing valuable experiences, then pay attention to the employee’s needs and
which activities could satisfy in the best way both needs. All the possible tangible
elements are taking in consideration in the sensory and emotional engagement, also the
digital interaction and the physical environment, these influences in the experience and
performance of employees. The different spaces can be designed per the feeling it looking
for, from relaxation to concentration, to stimulate the collaboration or creativity. A good
design in workplaces can enable a better integration, collaboration and interdisciplinary
way of work.
70
Traditional companies focus all their effort in the profit and economic gain that of course
is necessary for maintain the organization, but they usually tend to forget about the
impact that employees can have in the development of the activities. It is important to
express the importance of profitability but the experiences we can provide to employees
could be more important, the environment we can create in the organizations and how all
of those connect with each other creating a better environment to all and resulting in
better performance.
As mentioned at the Design part explanation in this work, having a Design Mindset helps
to face the problems in a different way, designers always frame the problems with the
right questions to ask and generate a wide range of options to choose the best solution
between all. They work in iterative way and taking in consideration different perspectives.
Designers can be considered as ambidextrous thinkers, always having in consideration all
the possible options, from the possible to the practical to the most effective one.
Implementing this Design Mindset is easier have Diagnostic and Analytical skills to ask the
right questions and make sense of the answers, can determinate the roots of the
problems we need to solve without forgetting to take in consideration the impact of the
possible solutions to the whole organization.
In the article Bringing Design Back In (Stang & Georg, 2012) is explained how having a
Design Attitude can facilitate, questioning and monitoring the other possible
opportunities to a solution instead of going directly to the known alternatives.
After the analysis of the Gehry’s work in the Lewis Building, it shows how managers and
the rest of the team normally use to look for a “crystallized” design solution where the
solutions keep close to the ones that the team already know, instead of a “liquid” state
where the factors keep changing and the solutions are broader (Boland & Collopy, 2004).
For the manager is fundamental applying the design to achieve better results not yet
thinking. The importance of apply a design vocabulary in the daily activities of the
manager can engage the rest of the team to be open to the transformation from
traditional practices to something new, in this way all of them can start to act as good
designers. Implementing a design language and put it on practice among all the
71
participants in the organization, can also to help top managers to share a common
vocabulary and point of view when formulating their own design-value formulations.
It is all about implementing design in all the possible aspects that concern the
organization, it can be applied from different perspectives as we have seen before. The
design centric is a combination of design aspects in the structure, leaders, process or
culture in the organization. In the case of structure we have seen how designing
organizations can be fundamental in the development of the activities, how the location
of different areas can depend on the effectiveness of the decision-making, and how big
can be the impact of the organization structure in the people involved in it. Design has to
be part of the C-suite referred to all the organization directors and managers, the way
they face different problems and how it can help them to start to look for solutions
beyond the “should be” answer.
The Design centric can be also considered in the leadership, depending on how the
activities are managed could result into different results. Leaders in companies can take
better strategical decisions when considering design practices, it will be a competitive
advantage in comparison with others. For that reason the importance to care about the
talent and have it connected close to the organization culture and values.
The Design Thinking is considered as the principal model to apply design centric in
processes, it helps to analyze problems in a different way, and to find all the possible
opportunities. Design Thinking guides the processes since the problem analysis moment,
through the definition of the possible solution, and then ideation of it, to finally pass to
the prototype and test. It creates a cycle between learning, improving and testing that
helps to develop better quality of the company products and services. It is a constant
learning, improving and testing cycle and, as such, lends itself best to process execution. It
is not only taking care about product development but also processes effectiveness,
services definition and all the daily activities inside the organizations.
Finally design have to centric also in the culture, we mentioned before how the culture
can be one important constraint at the moment to apply changes in organizations and the
72
introduction of design in it. For example authors like Mintzberg and Buchanan analyze its
impact in the organizations. Mintberg specifies how important is to study the people’s
culture because it going to define the behavior and values of the people, in that way it
could be define it the most efficient way of working with the people of the organization.
Buchanan mentions the culture or spirit as one of the different meanings design thinking
has, showing when a solution is viable when match with the culture of where going to be
applied.
This last is fundamental to create an evolution environment, the culture of the people and
the organization itself can have a big impact in the development and growth of a
company. To work with the change of the culture of the organization is necessary have
people involve in the process, one model that help to process this change is the proposal
by Peter Senge. Learning Organizations can help people to accept and to get active involve
in the culture transformation, and in the activities improvement.
To choose the right implementation plan is not something easy to decide. There could be
different ways to achieve it, one that allows a slow development during a period giving the
time required to not create an abruptly change, and the other one “pull the Band-Aid off
fast” when there is a critical situation as recover market share or an external change
already happening for example. For the transition, we should remember that is needed
build new capabilities, implementing new actions and reinforcing current skills, it takes
time this change to the new model. A method is use tipping points to represent tangible
actions or decisions that are different from the current activities, these are only symbolic
actions because don’t have a strong impact in the power dynamics (Kesler & Kates, 2010).
For the implementation of new practices in organizations it is needed new way of acting of
the people inside it, the evolution of businesses requires an evolution of all the people
involve. It is not only about one person working as the big strategist and the other
following instructions, it requires a complete evolution of the organization, and it requires
evolving to learning organizations.
73
5.2 Learning organizations
Peter M. Senge, an American engineering, senior lecturer at the MIT School of
Management, developed a full investigation on how organizations should become
Learning Organizations to achieve common goals and succeed in the fast-moving
businesses. He explained how the learning ability is something intrinsic in all of us, we
born with the capability of learn, as an early age babies start to learn all the principal
aspects needed for their growth. For that reason, develop Learning Organizations should
be not difficult to do, but the reality is other because many circumstances can be
presented starting from the reject of people to change their current practices. Moving
from the traditional management, organizing and controlling to a learning organization
where some of the principals are vision, value and mental models.
The learning organizations look for increase their knowledge and innovate in their work
routine. The organizational learning should be supported by all the team in the
organization, their cultural values of openness and excellence, all the mechanisms used
for the information flow, and in concrete the systems thinking that tie all the fundamental
factors for the evolution of the organization. The learning organizations are not only about
to improve in policies, budgets, or organizational charts, but in ourselves.
For apply learning in organizations is necessary the continuous testing of experience, and
the transformation of that experience into knowledge, useful to guide the companies
through successful activities. In Chinese, the word learning connects to study, to
accumulate knowledge, and to practice constantly, this mean how the human can through
learning master self-improving (Senge, 2014)
Organizations implement some ways of learning as creating a good information flow and
knowledge creation, performance reviews and evaluation at the end of the project, audits
from internal and external resources, team feedback, problems analysis, simulation,
stimulate creativity, benchmarking, experiment new routines, between others. Through all
74
these activities organizations can standardize some practices, create knowledge and
follow the continue learning in the daily operations (Carroll & Edmondson, 2002).
Knowledge sharing requires appropriate communication systems. With the evolution in
technology each time is making easier to communicate with others through e-
communications facilitating the work in organizations based in different parts of the
world. This is not only the first tool, technology have also allow to communicate in a more
clear way through programs where the compression can be achieve with images, tables,
schemes, diagrams or any kind instrument that are easy to implement and that bring
successful results.
Some actions that organizations can implement to accelerate learning are building
informal networks that can be useful for collaboration, provide to innovators connection
with internal and external resources, finding new partnerships and creating channels of
communication to avoid discontinuity in the information (Carroll & Edmondson, 2002).
To establish new practices in businesses is important to know the characteristics of your
organization, to understand if you have possibilities to put in practice a learning
organization. First it is necessary to imagine the characteristics you want if you are going
to have a learning organization, to define policies, interactions, behalf of people, the
difference between this ideal situation and your current one, between others. Then
enhance the definition of a learning organization, analyzed previous cases, and defining
what are the main features the organization could has. With the mix of these two phases
you can construct a list of at least five characteristics. The next step is to study these
characteristics and ask you “What would it bring me…?”, doing a testing of the options
you have selected. After this analysis is the moment to pick and to refine the
characteristics that better match with your organization. It is important not only include
obvious characteristics, but also include some of those that makes you doubt about the
implementation of it in the company, challenging characteristics that is success can bring
new and innovative results to your organization. Now is moment that you go to real and
start to define what obstacles can be present in your way, what you need to do to arrive
to the organization defined by the previous characteristics. And finally mix the
75
characteristics and the obstacles and create for each option an indicator that helps you to
define the evolution of the project, to know the progress you have made (Senge, 2014).
According Senge (2014) the first steps to design learning organizations are:
1. Establishing the groups
2. Divergent thinking
3. Clarity or simplicity
4. Convergent thinking
5. Presentations and priorities
6. Implementation
In the decision of choose the groups is necessary to include two types of participants, one
type including all the people that believe in the change and in the improving of the
organization, and the other type the people that because of their position in the
organization are involved in the learning effort even they are not interested. This step is
interesting now to mix different roles and hierarchical positions into discussion about the
same problem, it is a way “to dance to the same music”. The group then going to be
divided into two, the one that supports the ideal organization how it going to be, and the
one that defends the current situation with its strength and difficulties, like team A in pro
of the creation of a learning organization, and team B the ones that discuss all the possible
negative effect this option can have, presenting all the obstacles and possible barriers.
Both parts are important because it going to help to define what to do with the current
resources to achieve the ideal situation. Working in this way help you to define the “How
do we get started?”.
In the second step, Divergent Thinking, the discussion among all the participants starts.
The number of participants can vary from ten to two hundred people, not necessarily
working together but interrelated in a way that the topics are relevant for the others. The
time will depend about the number of people, the discussions must be of forty-five
minutes or a little bit more, but the complete workshop could take from four hours to two
76
days, it going to depend of the number of people involved and the topic to discuss. The
environment should be a large room with enough space for all the teams, with the
supplies needed as flip charts or felt pens, the wall can be used to hang the papers and
facilitate the communication and understanding of all. Some of the answers discussed
must solve inquiries like benefits of apply learning organization, actions to take, barriers or
obstacles, changes to make, areas to work on or eliminate. These are only main topics to
discuss, but each case is particular and for that reason also require topics to discuss.
After this general discussion is necessary to pass to the third point and clarified the main
topics. From the previous discussion take ten or twelve coherent points of it. Then it is
needed to reduce more the list, in the fourth step Convergent Thinking. The list must be
reduced to three items, the idea is having an active participation where everyone in each
group can defend their point of view about to remain or eliminate one of the topics. Then
the fifth step is about the presentation and priorities, this going to depend of the number
of participants, but the idea is to express the three main significant points of each
perspective in team A with their suggestions about the creation of the learning
organization and team B with the barriers or obstacles. It is not needed reach consensus;
the most important part is that every participant can feel that they can express their
opinion and everyone listen and consider their point of view.
The last step is the implementation, after the previous discussions the actions to take are
clearer, now it is necessary to assign the actions to take and to define the tasks for each of
the chosen projects. Then the process starts, the team must take notes, learn, and analyze
the performance. Later between thirty or sixty days, these results must be presented to
the complete group. In this point, you could achieve a shared vision or having worked with
mental models.
Senge (1990) distinguished five main components to consider now of develop a Learning
Organization:
1. Building Shared Vision
2. Mental Models
77
3. Personal Mastery
4. Team Learning
5. Systems Thinking
The disciplines of personal mastery, mental models and systems thinking help to examine
and change the way of thinking. Shared vision, systems thinking, and team learning are
focus on changing interactions (Senge, 2014)
First is important that the organization have a defined goal and vision to where they want
to go in the future, after this it is easier to guide all the people inside the organization into
a common future where everyone understand and have a Shared Vision of the next steps
to make. Having all the people the same goals facilitate the work, the people are not going
to move to the future only because someone told them, but because they want to achieve
that goal, they don’t feel it as something alien but as something that is part of them. This
is an important aspect that managers should take in consideration, they need to translate
individual thoughts to a Shared Vision that everyone can feel part.
For achieve a Shared Vision in the organization it is important to have defined how the
people behave, and for this is fundamental understand the mentality of the people
involved. The Mental Models explain how we could interpret different situations, from
assumptions, generalizations or pictures that facilitate the understanding and the
response we could have. This is something difficult to describe even for each person
herself, it is not easy to know how going to be the reaction so it is important to get involve
with the behaviors and responses people must different situations in the organization. The
process for the Mental Model should start from our inside to deeply understand our
reactions, then learn from those and describe them to others to distinguish which could
be useful for the purposes of the organization.
It is important recognize where the organizations and the employees are, empower
people that constantly resist to change and are not able to share common mental models
could be counterproductive. It can create a division between management and
employees, and increase organizational stress losing the direction.
78
As just mention it is important first to understand each person their abilities, for that
reason the Personal Mastery should start with the control and comprehension of us.
Having conscience of our characteristics can be achieved better results with a deep
understanding of all the important aspects to bring the most efficient solution. The
Personal Mastery must be applied in a mature way where it is necessary lay aside our
personal vision and see the problem in a broader way.
The role of the individuals is fundamental in the organizations, and how each of them
interacts with the rest of the team can bring the best results. The Team Learning
highlights not only the benefits to work as a team but the importance to learn also as a
team. The intelligence of the team can exceed the intelligence of the individuals in the
team, the growth of the individuals can be quicker than when they work individually, we
can see many examples of Team Learning in sport, performing arts, sciences and of course
in business. The proceed start with dialogue where the individuals share their assumptions
and think together. It is an opportunity for the organization if teams can’t learn, the
organization can’t learn.
The organizations have constantly evolving and learning, there are not an excellent point,
it is necessary to keep with the practice of the discipline to always get better results and
not maintain or go back to previous results. The idea is arriving to learning organizations
as a discipline not only as a model that is implemented, prove it and then forgotten, the
success will come with the constant evolution and growth in the learning.
A system is a combination of different parts that work separately but each of their
conduct can influence in the others, it is necessary to look the system and not as each
individual part. Systems Thinking is a framework use to simplified the view of the system
as a whole, it can be normal that when a problem arise we start to look the small parts
because we think can be easier to intervene and it can bring a quick solution to the
problem, but we have to remember how the parts are interconnected and at the end it is
better work in the complete system that in one part that can create problems in its
influence in others parts.
79
The success in business will be in the correct combination of these five components this is
not an easy task, many time is easier to apply each component individually that find the
correct equilibrium between all. For this reason, the Systems Thinking is the main
discipline, the fifth discipline. It is the one that integrates all the others to work in the best
possible way, remembering that the whole can exceed the sum of its parts. Each of
components have their specific role, Mental Models help us to understand the way we see
and act in the current situation, Building Shared Vision allow us to look for a long-term
goal in common, Team Learning help to achieve this view and work together in harmony
with all the people involved in the process, and Personal Mastery maintain the personal
motivation important to achieve the goal and don’t get lost from the system. The Systems
Thinking in Learning Organizations work as a shift of mind, from personal vision to a whole
vision on the world and how we can integrate and the impact of our actions on it.
BUILDING SHARED VISION
When there is a new idea that everyone loves, many people can say is shared vision, but it
is not only about that. Having shared vision is something deeper, it is something inside all
the participants, a force, a powerful feeling, a belief about something in common. Having
a truly Shared Vision is when all the people are connected, following the same aspiration.
One of the reasons to people getting involved in Sharing vision is their desire to be
connected to something bigger than them. For the learning organizations having a
common vision is fundamental to focus all the energy into the same goal.
Vision is something that currently is mention a lot in leadership, but it is important
differentiate how most of the time the goals are coming from only one person or from a
small group that can generate different points of view and some resistance from others.
The organization needs that everyone involves of it have a common vision so can find
satisfaction in each person to develop all the activities needed to achieve the result.
Some companies have their idea of Share Vision just for beat a competitor, the example
can be the competition between Pepsi and Coca-Cola, but this an idea that can arrive to
an end, it is better have something in mind that allow creativity, constant learning and
80
growth that bring the excitement of build something new. More than focus on beat the
opponent is better look for the excellence.
Having a Shared Vision help to change the relationship between the employee and the
organization, it is no longer their company but our company, a sense of belonging arises
from each person involved on it, it creates an identity. Also, the work changes from an
individual work to team and collaborative work. Shared vision helps us to express also our
ideas, the organization is open to listen and take care about the interest of the employees,
the vision not only emerge from the high rank directors but the fundamental of change to
Learning Organizations is providing the opportunity to everyone to be heard and see what
they want.
The base of design must be applied also in the searching of Shared Vision, it is common
that the people can identify what they want but not how to do it to arrive to that result,
for that reason is necessary analyze all the possible options available and iterate in a way
to find the best path to achieve to the final goal. The risk can be very high but people can
try because everyone is aligned in what they want.
The motivation must start also by ourselves, developing a personal vision of what we
want. Normally we have expectations that also concern the relationship with others, so
our initial vision finally becomes a common idea. Having a personal vision that then
transform to Shared Vision, it brings a higher commitment to the individual, instead of just
joining to an idea that other has developed. This is part of the design basis, an activate
participation where everyone can contribute with their ideas and then develop them. The
Personal Mastery can simplify the process to develop a personal vision and arrive to a
Shared Vision with the others in the organization.
“Learning in organizations means the continuous testing of experience, and the
transformation of that experience into knowledge—accessible to the whole organization,
and relevant to its core purpose.” (Senge, 2014)
As mention before is important not implement ideas to others, for managers the best way
to work is through communication between the group where all the ideas can be
81
discussed and see the pro and con of each. For the Shared Vision, it is important to
understand how each personal vision can be part of the result. Individuals normally see
their own “picture”, each see the solution in a different way, the communication will allow
to create a consistent result with the combination of each idea creating a common vision
coming from each part. Also, one advantage of this common goal is that the vision doesn’t
rely only on your shoulders, but instead you have other companions that want to fight and
work in the same idea as you want.
As we mentioned before at the review of some of the constraints of design the
organizations, the size can be a factor that has a strong impact in any decision in the
organization. To reach and to maintain Shared Vision will be more difficult and complex in
larger size organizations in comparison with the small ones. Small organizations have the
advantage of being more flexible and able to adjust and adapt a Shared Vision (Bui &
Baruch, 2010).
The best scenario for the Shared Vision is starting from the communication of the idea,
then the people involved start to feel enthusiastic and start to talk and plan how can be
achieved that vision, and finally with this exchange of opinions the decision of the final
goal is made. But this is almost never truth, in the step where people start to discuss
about how they can achieve the goal is normal that other views arise so start a conflict of
views that then past to polarization when each go for the side that they prefer. In this
moment is important the role of the Mental Models, the reflection and inquiry of the best
option. It is not about give up of your idea but it is about construct together with all the
possibilities the best solution for the organization. It is important to remember the
important role of communication and discussion, for practice design methods is
fundamental have a counter point that allows you to growth, always having in mind to
provide an aid that encourages the work rather than criticizing it to evolve an idea.
Provide constructive criticism and not only destructive ones.
82
MENTAL MODELS
The Mental Models focus on how we perceive the world, the internal images we
construct, and the ways of thinking or acting. This practice is fundamental when are
necessary implement new ideas, depending on how we recognize the idea will be a
specific result. Mental Models is not only about how we perceive the world but also how
we take actions, for that reason the importance of work on it. The construction of the
Mental Models depends on each person, two different people can see the same thing but
can perceive it differently, and of course can act and react in different way. The mental
models can impede but also can accelerate the learning in the organizations.
One important factor to take in consideration is the openness, it is necessary create a
harmonious environment so everyone can feel comfortable to give their opinions and in
that way, we can learn how their Mental Models worked. Openness refer to be able to
speak what they concerned and in the correct moment. For example, usually not all the
people talk about a problem they see in the company at the morning, they wait until the
last moment or even they only discuss the problem outside the office where they don’t
feel judged; the idea is that the people feel free to share their vision and perceive that
their concerns are considering. Knowing better the Mental Models of the individuals that
work in the company, best and most effective respond to problems can have the manager.
In the workplace is common that the people feel evaluated and even judged, as defensive
routines people don’t share their thoughts that can block the process of learning. People
are more focus on protect themselves from the constant examination rather than open to
the learning situation. Some people believe that Mental Models are never complete, that
is going to depend about the environment and the relationship you have with it.
To implement Mental Models in organizations is necessary learning new skills and apply
institutional innovation that helps to use these skills in daily activities. There should be a
connection and balance between the business and personal skills. These two sides are
fundamental especially for managers, normally they can learn new things but at the same
time they could be close to those methodologies that are not base in business context. To
83
study the Mental Models with managers, one tool is to work with them in the analysis of
different alternatives in the future to know how they would manage these different
scenarios. This will help managers to not think in only one possible option for the future,
developing in them a more flexible and active respond to changes. It is important that in
the organizations instead of focusing in developing long-term perfect plans, invest more in
learning plans where people could be more aware for the changes and the new trends
that constantly appear in businesses.
In the discussions of Senge (2006) with different managers of big companies they
suggested these ten principal rules for Mental Models:
“1. The effectiveness of a leader is related to the continual improvement of the leader's
mental models.
2. Don't impose a favored mental model on people. Mental models should lead to self-
concluding decisions to work their best.
3. Self-concluding decisions result in deeper convictions and more effective
implementation.
4. Better mental models enable owners to adjust to change in environment or
circumstance.
5. Internal board members rarely need to make direct decisions. Instead, their role is to
help the General Manager by testing or adding to the company mental model.
6. Multiple mental models bring multiple perspectives to bear.
7. Groups add dynamics and knowledge beyond what one person can do alone.
8. The goal is not congruence among the group.
9. When the process works it leads to congruence.
10. Leaders' worth is measured by their contribution to others' mental models”
Even these are specific rules, Mental Models can’t be treat as a close philosophy, it is
necessary to be flexible to each person and each organization way of thinking and to
84
implement what is the best in that case. Many mental models can exist at once, even
some would disagree between them. All of those should be tested to analyze which is the
one that fix the most to the organization culture.
The relationship between Mental Models and the fifth discipline System Thinking comes
naturally, the first one based on analyze how the people think and the other on how those
thoughts can solve problems. It is important that people can accept other Mental Models
to work in harmony with the Systems Thinking. At the end, the idea is creating a “library of
Mental Models” based on systems archetypes, that then going to be suited into an
organization. With the integration of Systems Thinking, the Mental Models going to move
from movement dominated by events to long term patterns of change and the structures
that produce those changes.
PERSONAL MASTERY
For achieve successful changes is necessary have a learning organization but this is only
possible when you have people motivated and able to learn. It is necessary that the
people reach a “Personal Mastery” level where they are always looking for personal
growth and learning to improve their daily activities. The Personal Mastery is not only
about competences and skills, it is more about spiritual growth and how individuals want
to evolve for better. It has two fundamentals steps, the first one focus on what is
important to us and the second one learning in how to see the current reality to be more
aware of the present moment. Knowing what we want and the situation of where we are
now we can have a clear idea of what is needed to achieve or goals. Having this “learning”
is not about only acquiring something new but it is about to clarify our desires with our
opportunities and strengths to arrive to the final output, to understand the abilities and
what we need to arrive to the goal, learning how to control our activities. Something
important about the people that have developed Personal Mastery is that they are not
only aware about their abilities, they also know about their ignorance and incompetence,
and they are mature enough to understand how to overtake those and growth.
85
Having this mentality is a fundamental part of the organizations, all the people involved in
it and the organization itself can be fully committed for the well-being and the correct
development of all the activities inside it. It brings a shift in attitude in the workplace,
where work can be perceived as something more than only generate incomes, the
individuals can recognize the value of it and understand their important role. The
companies must look for the development of people just as they look for financial success,
with this can be achieve more successful results.
For organizations is not easy transform the way of working of employees to Personal
Mastery, it is not recommended force the people, they can oppose because they are
losing the freedom of choice. The managers should create an environment where people
feel enthusiastic to try new practices coming also from their suggestions, where they can
feel safe to develop new visions. This environment could embrace the Personal Mastery
showing how personal growth is valued for the organization.
To work in the Personal Mastery is important take in consideration specific aspects as:
1. Commitment to the whole
2. Compassion
3. Connection with the world
4. Integrating reason and intuition
The Commitment is something bigger than us, it is a truly and sincere desire to serve
others without taking care selfish thoughts. Compassion is only perceived as an emotional
state, but it is also awareness. People perceive more about the environment they are
developing, they start to understand the consequences and impact they have in the
organization so they develop more compassion and empathy to the people around them
and the organization. With the commitment and compassion is easier to understand the
organization instead of only focus on personal desires and growth, it is having a broader
vision and not a self-interested. The babies are the perfect example of how we recognize
the world around us, they learned with test and error how they are part of the world, they
start to recognize their body, then their family and when they start to growth the
86
relationship with others, this is something that we lose when we get older. We start to
forget about the connection we have in the world and how our actions can have a result,
we learned slower than before and most of the time we closed to looking the world and
their new movements. In management, the intuition can bring results never imagined
before, the managers can recognize different opportunities according their experiences
and what they think about a problem, but it is important mix together this intuition with
the reasoning.
The people with high level of Personal Mastery control perfectly this mix, for them is even
difficult to distinguish when they are using one of those. This bilateralism is a design
principle, designers employ naturally all the possible resources in a way to analyze all the
possible solutions without going in specific in one option. Most of our intuitions don’t
make “sense”, and for that reason a person who develops Personal Mastery can
effectively use the reasoning to analyze how could solve the problems in a different but
logical way. Follow these intuitions managers can have new and innovative results. The
best inventions achieve in the world are discovered following this idea of intuition,
because if not also following intuition can bring errors but the important thing is take
those mistakes as learning for future success.
“The supreme task of the physicist is to arrive at those universal elementary laws from
which the cosmos can be built up by pure deduction. There is no logical path to these
laws. Only intuition, resting on sympathetic understanding of experience, can reach
them.” Albert Einstein, 1918. “Prinzipien der Forschung: Rede zum 60. Geburtstag von
Max Planck” in Mein Weltbild
“Doing the obvious thing does not produce the obvious desired outcome” (Senge, 2006)
TEAM LEARNING
In a group of people is normal that each of them move forward into different directions,
the Team Learning look for a work environment where everyone feel in harmony with the
rest and start to going to the same direction without forcing it. One perfect example is
how the sport teams work, they synchronize their moves in a way that the other can know
87
what their companions going to do. It is about going for the same goal, a Shared Vision,
learning about the abilities of the others and integrating your abilities with them. The
synchronization is so perfect that is common see in meetings that all arrive to the same
point without any discussion or vote, but we must be careful about this point, Team
Learning is not about be submissive, it is about participation and learn how to work
harmonically with the rest of the team.
Individual learning could not influence too much in the organizational learning. It is truth
that is needed to develop Personal Mastery and capabilities in everyone, but for create a
continually learning in the organization is necessary a Team Learning that translates into
visible actions for the growth of the organization.
Team Learning has three different dimensions. The first one is to think wisely about the
complex problems; the team must recognize the potential of having different minds
solving a problem and accepting that it is better that only have one. The second is about
work in coordination but also looking for innovation, different sport teams and even music
bands explain how they improvise and even they can follow in synchronization the
direction, the action of one complement the action of the other. The third one is the role
of one team members in other teams, Team Learning is a collective discipline, for the
activities of one team could be necessary previous actions of another team.
In any team, the activities of dialogue and discussion are needed to find the solution of a
problem. Teams usually don’t distinguish very well both activities. In the dialogue, there is
a free exploration of all the factor involve the problem, in the discussion everybody
expresses their ideas and the other ones listen it to then proceed to search for the best
option or combination to solve the problem.
For achieve the most effective synchrony between a team is necessary a lot of practice,
the members must know each other and feel comfortable to work. The process must be
continually practice, perform, practice again, and in each step always looks for learn and
improve. It is important to be mature in the moment to work with others, it is not about
falling in love of your idea and not accept others opinions, for a good development you
88
should accept when it is better the others view, it is not about winning or losing it is about
a good team working and to find the best solution.
It is important to observe and questioning other opinions to improve them, but this is not
possible if we are only defending our option. For a good team working is important to see
each other as colleagues looking for the same goal. The difficult part of course is the
willingness of the members to perceive others in this way and not as competition. As
mentioned before is not about that you must to agree to others opinion, rather it is about
having different point of views to work on those and create a joint decision.
The constant work with others can improve the work environment, creating a better place
where everyone can feel comfortable to work. The experience of developing in Team
Learning is not something that came only from individuals, it is about the interaction
between the individual and the environment where they developed (Buchanan, 2015).
This is something important for the managers that will guide the organization activities,
they must create a work environment where allow people to growth and develop
themselves.
Team Learning require Systems Thinking to integrate all the factors that influence it
together in one, developing the strategy, shaping visions, designing policy and
organizational structures could be some of the tasks that teams must develop and that
can be only achieved with the systematic work. Also, it is important consider the Mental
Model and the language of the team’s members, in that way will be possible estimate
cause- effect response and to deal with complexity.
SYSTEM THINKING
Systems Thinking is a discipline to allow sees “The whole”, it shows the interrelations
instead of different things individually working, analyze the patterns of movement, and
change instead of static behaviors. Nowadays we are generating massive amounts of
information and data that applying Systems Thinking can be useful for reduce its
complexity.
89
For the success of this practice it is necessary to be aware of the complexity of the
problem you have, there could be two types of complexity the detail and dynamic
complexity. The first one is used when there are many variables and the second one for
situations where cause and effect are subtle and where the effects overtime are not so
obvious.
In the case of detail complexity can be implemented conventional forecasting, planning
and analysis methods. For dynamic complexity, the situation is different, the effects in
short and long run have different and dramatic effects not easy to predict. The real
challenge for management is understand this dynamic complexity, not only detail
complexity. Some examples can be how to balance the market growth with the
production capacity, find the best mix between prices, product/service quality and design
or maybe improving quality without increasing too much the costs.
The focus for Systems Thinking is in the Shift of Mind, seeing interrelationships rather than
linear cause-effect chains and how evolves the process of change. For arrive to the main
factors that influence the activities is necessary to identify the actions that recur again and
again to learn from them and improve the practices. Humans are natural learners, we can
see how young children easily understand and develop new practices with no major
problem, for that reason implement System Thinking could be at the beginning not an
easy task to do but as a something new that you learn everything can improve with
practice.
The Shift of Mind have a relationship with the learning, when refer to learning it is not
about the idea of taking in information, the real learning is going more in deep about to be
human, we can think in how babies learn everything, it is going to do something we never
we able to do, it is about how we can re-create ourselves.
90
PART 6. Case studies
“In a learning organization, leaders are designers, stewards and teachers. They are
responsible for building organizations were people continually expand their
capabilities to understand complexity, clarify vision, and improve shared
mental models – that is they are responsible for learning”
Peter Senge
91
During the analysis made by Boland and Collopy in the book Managing as Designing
(2014), we can see a clear example of how using design can change the way of working,
how the architect Frank Gehry teach to his team in the construction of the Peter B. Lewis
building lessons of rework and invention of new solutions. Gehry worked intensive with
his team in having a quick solution for the design of this building to finish with the decision
to throw this draw, showing them how they can be able to develop solutions but now it
was necessary to create the best one solution, something that really creates value.
6.1 Learning Organizations - Healthcare
The difficult financial situation during these years has also hit the healthcare professions,
fewer people are studying fundamental careers as nursing, and doctors prefer to apply
private practices letting the public system almost empty. For this lower number of people
working in healthcare, it has been implemented longer working hours with less resource
support, this had come with many errors during practices because exhaustion (Carroll &
Edmondson, 2002). It is necessary start to implement different practices to improve the
service for patients but also the experiences for the workers.
About the explanation introduce by Peter Senge concerning how the learning
organizations could improve healthcare he pointed: “the reforms will not work unless the
medical community leaders build successful learning organization effort”. The hospitals
have a strong role in the daily life of people, for introduce learning organizations the
attention is not only in the employees but also the unique relationship they have with the
community (Senge, 2014).
Healthcare organizations normally are looking for improve their quality in all the aspects,
focusing on needs analysis and performance measurement. To transform to learning
organizations is necessary also focus on the culture that values people giving to them the
support needed, stimulates the new ideas that arise, foment, and develop teamwork and
adopts staff recognition systems (Luxford & others, 2011).
92
It could be included different medical organizations, from the basic individual doctor-
patient relationship, to a bigger one as nursing homes, hospitals, or health-maintenance,
and to a bigger scale in system of health that impact in a larger region or society.
The learning in healthcare normally is focus on individuals more than on teams. The
studies and training made from a person improve their abilities giving to them the
opportunity to develop best practices. This improve their performance, allow them to
have a high reputation that increase the number of patients interested in their services
and led them to practice more through repetition. This repetition gives them more
opportunity to improve what they have learned.
But this reputation could also come with bad practices, the motivation to improve
decrease because individuals feel comfortable in their current position. The idea of
implement learning organizations is avoiding this, and constantly to search for improve
the daily activities instead of get use to routines (Senge, 2014).
This method of learning from experience is not enough. In the case of routines this can be
insufficient for a high scale system, for example when doctors or nurses start to get bored
of the same activities they are not aware of the new cases that can come and stop to learn
new things. Also, other inconvenient for learning from experience is that not all the
problems can be reduced to technical solutions, in healthcare is common have
unexpected cases where is needed different training and practices to solution them. The
research in this industry is a daily basis, doctors and nurse’s knowledge must be in line
with the new discoveries, innovations and improves to provide to the patients the best
experience as possible (Carroll & Edmondson, 2002).
The research is not the only way of learning for healthcare, also disappointing outcomes
can derive new knowledge coming from the reflection and analysis of what happened,
also proving different possibilities of different scenarios developed with the construction
of benchmarking or brainstorming.
Despite routines could block innovation, few standardizations are required in healthcare
organizations, for example tasks like providing to patients the right drugs or the right tests
93
at the right time can be always similar but the idea is improving the systems to develop
and improve these kinds of daily activities. The standardization must be balanced with
attitudes and structures that encourage discovery and exploration to growth (Carroll &
Edmondson, 2002).
Adaptation to external environment is not enough for the current world, learning
organizations are looking also for enhance internal capacities and learn from past events.
In the case of healthcare, the external factors are not enough to improve the patient care,
because of their complex and unique characteristics it is necessary to recognize the
cultural change and start to working from the inside of the organization to see with what
we can count. Qualitative, quantitative data, as also maintain and improve staff
satisfaction, can some of the aspects that can improve later the patient care (Luxford &
others, 2011).
For the nature of healthcare, the human factor is strong, there is a constant and
significant relationship between the people involved. The organizations are always looking
for improve quality, safety, and service, to develop a shared purpose and having a shared
vision between all the people involved in the health care can help to existing skills and
knowledges. The improves in healthcare are many from improving patient wellbeing,
attracting, and retaining top quality staff, applying constant training programs, or
continually making research. The people involved in daily activities are too many, and they
constantly get into the same activities without paying too much attention in the improves
they can implement. Some of these routines could be patient admissions, delivery of
medications, billing, buildings maintenance, and many others. Normally is necessary the
coordination between a team where everyone have a different role and where exists
different shifts where is required the communication and perfect “synchronization” in the
changes of roles (Carroll & Edmondson, 2002).
Julie Morath, the chief operating officer of Minneapolis Children’s Hospitals and Clinics,
recognize the importance of the patient and their safety: “The culture of health care must
be one of everyone working together to understand safety, identify risks, and report them
without fear of blame. We must look at ways of changing the whole system when we
94
manage to zero defects”. In healthcare, it is important to have in consideration who is the
“final customers”, they are patients and we are talking about their health and live, so it is
a hard and delicate task to take serious when we talk about the experience we can give
them.
For communities, the local hospital is the place where they can go to find assistance in the
first place, Senge suggested four main efforts to take care to apply learning organizations
in those places (Senge, 2014):
1. Start at the top
2. Enable everyone to participate in improving the whole enterprise
3. Follow your curiosity, and encourage others to follow theirs
4. Link the hospital to its community
For the first one is important start in “the head”, the important role of leadership as in all
the other industries. For stablish a systematic change is necessary a guidance coming from
the leadership, if the board or CEO are not able to start a full dedicated effort to create
the change the learning organization going to move in a very slow pace. The commitment
in leadership level should be strong and constant, normally a change start as something
interesting and new, everyone starts to get interested but if the person in charge is not
able to maintain this enthusiasm the effort could be a waste of resources and time. Also,
other important point is the role of the personal in the hospital, normally is perceived that
the executive board knows what is best of the organization and the rest of the hospital
does not, and for apply this learning organization the teamwork and collaboration is vital,
it is about hearing others opinions and implement the best integrated solutions. It is usual
that people expect that the effective changes come from the top, this is constraints from
the way of working in the health care system but for achieve a learning environment the
relationship must be more human and focus on the capabilities of each in the system.
The second one is focused on the participation of everyone, it is important that all the
individual units interact between them, and the improvement that each can have inside
the unit also take in consideration the impact in the other units and share it with them. In
95
the medical field is difficult find the collaboration between equals, the competition is
strong and the barriers that they can construct around their job could be high. Senge put
the example of how doctors perceive the waiting room as something useless and that they
don’t care, forgetting the high impact it can have in the experience of the patient and that
all the service worked as a whole system connected with the doctor at the end. When the
leadership accept the full commitment for the change it is necessary to have a shared
vision, where everyone is invited to participate and make comments and suggestions
about all the aspects to concern in the hospital.
As many design methods, the 5th discipline encourages the curiosity, be creative and
embrace others to work actively in that way. For the third effort, we can consider the
approach in design, always try to find something new, something better, something to
improve the current situation, asking if is there something else to do that add value and
increase the performance. The curiosity must come beside the willingness of change in the
people involved, in the healthcare community normally people are excited to growth,
improve and learn. But, it is something to take care in the leadership level, if the CEO have
not willingness of learn the organization stays in the traditional way of work where the
CEO only teach and control all the organization without taking risk in something new and
without consider the opinion of the others.
The last effort to focus in the application of the change to learning organizations is the link
between the hospital and its community. Thinking in a high scale and not individually can
bring bigger advantages to the community, the collaboration between many hospitals in
the same area allow provide better and complete services. And it is not only about the
hospitals, also with the integration of the community in the improvement, taking their
suggestions and showing how they can learn and implement new behaviors to develop a
better atmosphere. With the cooperation between all the actors it can create a learning
community between schools, political and economic leaders, healthcare chief executives
and medical society leaders.
To achieve these efforts is fundamental that the organization changes its way of working
starting from the high level of directors. Carroll & Edmondson (2002) suggest three to
96
begin focusing in three main ideas: increase the capabilities for organizational learning in a
way to improve quality and other outcomes, the leadership is fundamental in all the levels
of the organization, all the managers have to be engage in the transformation to the
learning organization, this can be achieved when leaders take a broad view of all the
aspects in healthcare, the interdependencies between individuals, teams, task flows,
systems, and cultural meaning.
The importance of team working is essential also in healthcare. Even that senior clinical
leaders and executives apply new practices looking for new values, the impact is low in
comparison with the opportunities that can come applying the same in a team working
scale. Executives could start to improve the performance in a specific area, supporting the
values of excellence, the learning and caring, and then show the example to other teams.
In that way, all the people involved can clearly understand the advantages, moving to a
shared vision, and achieving an organizational cultural transformation (Carroll &
Edmondson, 2002).
“Minneapolis Children’s Hospitals and Clinics made patient safety a strategic goal and built
learning mechanisms such as focused event studies, safety dialogues, and blameless
reporting of problems into their work practices” (Carroll & Edmondson, 2002).
Brock Nelson, CEO of Children’s Hospitals, and Clinics, openly describes his “personal
epiphany” in being able to enact a new policy of disclosing more information and
personally apologizing to a family that had lost a teenage child who had initially been
misdiagnosed (Carroll & Edmondson, 2002).
One example of how organizations implement learning practices, is the case of the
Minneapolis Children’s Hospital and Clinics. The cross-functional collaboration can bring
better result to performance, such is the example made by a clinical nurse specialist and a
pharmacist in hematology/oncology, with the support of the pharmacy manager they
agreed to meet once a month to discuss about safety actions for patients. This initiative
foments that other teams in different areas started to do the same improving the
97
collaboration and each activity in the hospital, all of them have started to share vision
about what they want (Carroll & Edmondson, 2002).
6.2 Learning Organizations - Education
As other organizations, education has applied methodologies to transform to a learning
organization. Some of the aspects education should look to success are knowledge,
information, and reward system. Educational organizations have invested the time in
develop the know-how, knowledge, and skills, and in action inquiry, acquisition,
examination, sharing and processing of information (Fullan, 1995).
As many other industries in education the role of all the people involved is important,
everyone come with a specific way of doing things and culture, then trying to connect in
the best way possible the conduct with others creating the most effective environment for
everyone.
“Leadership on this sector is about culture building that allows educators, students and
parents to be a part of a team that learn together” (Sackney & Walker, 2006)
To apply learning organizations the schools could be one of the best places to do it, the
educators, parents, students, and the rest of the education system are always open and
able to learn and search for improvements in the field, their commitment is useful to
apply any changes. The process of learning in education is a daily basis that the people
inside it perceive it as a normal activity, in learning laboratories as workshops people
normally get excited and involve on it, the interactive learning attracts all of them to act
actively. One problem arrives in the interaction between teachers and administrators, the
us vs them that is present in all the industries and that create a high barrier to learning.
Other problem could be inside the team of students, it is necessary support each of the
view of each participant, embrace their participation without judging and look for team
collaborative working, the result of this collaboration is greater than the sum of the
individual parts.
98
The schools must remain as a reference place to learn, where people join and share their
opinions to construct a better system, there should be common goals to align the work
and the learning. The schools are only a small part of the education, the community
interacts in so many different environments where learning have also to be applied,
colleges, universities, museums, science centers between others. In universities, the
participation could be different, the role of the students changes from a guided behavior
to a willingness of doing the things they prefer, in comparison with kids on schools that
teachers must follow more all the activities.
In the case of high education, universities can apply the five disciplines proposed by Senge
in many ways. A method highly implemented by universities around the world is the
partnership and cross-sectoral alliances with other universities or institutes to make
research and achieve innovation (Senge, 2014).
In education, the impact of professors is high, depending on their values and attitudes the
result can change. According their values and willingness they are the ones that can start
and guide the transformation to the learning organization. Their job is transmitting
knowledge to learners but not only that, in universities the academic staff make research,
develop new knowledge, and publish it to share these discovers into the world and benefit
a wider audience than only students. The motivation normally comes from student
motivation more than staff motivation, but with the willingness to build something
different coming from the Personal Mastery of each professor could be possible achieve a
Shared Vision among all the people involved in the institution. Concerning Team Learning,
academics are highly qualified in terms of formal education, later they continued
developing other practices through the learning gain in conferences, working with PhD
students, learning at work with colleagues and individually (Bui & Baruch, 2010).
The different individuals involved in education can be many, so it is important to follow
and study their performances to analyze the success or errors in the daily practices.
Generally, are necessary to measure three different aspects, the performance for
teaching, the administration staff, and the research performance. In school’s research is
not a common practice, and among universities could be ones focus on purely teaching
99
and others working with research. The research universities are of course the ones that
have more opportunities to learn (Bui & Baruch, 2010).
In higher education institutes where research is not applied, the knowledge basically is
transmitted by staff to students reducing the chances to learn and reflect. The research
universities are more likely to have different elements that can facilitate the learning, for
example singularity of purpose, time, resources, contacts, and relationships with others in
similar conditions of research in the same or other fields (Bui & Baruch, 2010).
For change is necessary to apply continuous learning, work together to see what the
community can create together to benefit all, in that way the community can evolve
together. To guide a school into a learning organization we must start in no considerate
hierarchical administration on it, where teachers can be considered as others co-director,
together with the parents and students as part of the board members, this will facilitate
the problem-solving processes. With the movement of the technology and how the world
is changing the students will barely need to go to school for learn information, but
something important are the skills of collaborative learning and process judgement they
can learn there. The role of the teacher is important to achieve this, they must move from
the front of the room and work close to students as a guide and model (Senge, 2014).
The challenge comes with this, changing the mentality of teachers. It is important to
remember the important role and impact they have in education, so it is necessary to
change their Mental Model from a “teacher-centered” to a “learner-centered”. Perceiving
the opinion of students and rest of the staff is the only way in education to achieve a
Shared Vision. Institutes should move all their efforts to align hearts and mind of all the
staff to construct together the ideal school or university (Bui & Baruch, 2010).
The transformation from the schools must be a change in the collaborative work cultures
focus on the continuous preparation and professional development of teachers to create
and assess learning conditions for all the students. Some fundamentals characteristics that
teachers must manage and control very well are: collaboration, teaching and learning,
100
continuous learning for themselves, moral purpose, and the change process (Fullan,
1995).
Teachers must be the example for students in the collaborative work, they must foment
this collaboration culture inside and outside the school at the community with the work
with the parents. For the teaching and learning teachers must understand how difference
are the students, they must implement and always learn different and new teaching
strategies to meet a wide range of individual needs. With every generation come new
learning, teachers must become continuous learners, improve is a never-ending
proposition, they should understand themselves to be able to transmit knowledge to
students. The role of students is fundamental during a major part of the people’s life, the
most important point is that they are present at the beginning of the development of
people into society, for that reason the moral purpose is a factor that impact a lot in their
activities, they must look for to make a good difference in the lives of the students. And
last the factor of the change process, as mentioned before the societies are constantly
changing and evolving, for that reason teachers must learn how to understand and
manage the process of change with constant learning (Fullan, 1995).
Senge (1990) suggests some learning disciplines to take in consideration for the
implementation of learning organizations in education:
1. Use systems thinking as an incremental starting point
2. Weaken the stranglehold of fragmentation on curriculum and subject
3. Promote dialogue between parents, bureaucrats, administrators, teachers,
students, and government leaders
We must start with system thinking as the first discipline, in that way is possible enable
the enthusiasm and useful as a powerful way to involve participants in generative
learning. For example, in schools one method could be the discussion of a literature in
class, instead the professor read for the class and explain they leaves to students the
discussion in that way they participate and think as a team enable the opportunity of
101
learning. Activities like this one allow the capabilities growth, the active participation
where everyone can expose their points, the change coming from inside out.
Some features of improvement in education include development and training,
management and planning, changes in instructional practices, and review of curriculum
and instruction (Fullan, 1995). With the fast and constant changes in the world, also the
changes in education must be aligning with this movement. The modification and changes
of curriculum and subject are present in all the levels of education, from schools to
universities, it is necessary keep the curriculum always updated. Usually the boards in
charge of the curriculum modifications tend to substitute one topic for another instead of
use it for complement or reinforce.
Like mentioned before the process must be actively, everyone must participate, and for
this create a correct dialogue between all could simplified the work. The best way to
implement the change is start small and work incrementally. For the success in the reform
of education is treating everyone as colleagues, create a community instead of just small
groups.
One method applied in current education system is the Site-based management, where
the central-offices delegate responsibility to each educational institute gives them the
opportunity to have a more participation at local and community level. Give more
flexibility in decision-making the results can be better, for example teachers could feel
empowered to collaborate with other colleagues if they see that their opinions are taken
in consideration, also can make changes in their pedagogy always searching for
improvement (Fullan, 1995). For a constant learning the development and training
programs can be useful for professors, this help them to be in line with the current trends
and improve the relation and collaboration with others colleagues through team-skills
programs (Bui & Baruch, 2010).
A trend perceives in higher education is about how to connect the needs and preferences
of students through interdisciplinary courses. This trend facilitates the teamwork and
team learning. Interdisciplinary teams foster in a better and easy way the organizational
102
learning through the cultural exchange, Team Learning, knowledge sharing and Systems
Thinking (Bui & Baruch, 2010).
Considering the movement of the world, and how design is helping with the integration in
the work with co-design, working together different disciplines to align knowledges and to
find solutions, it seems that the application of the five disciplines proposed by Senge in
education help to facilitate the integration of new practices in the organizations.
There are eight recommendations to simplified the learning organizations creation in
education: (Fullan, 1995)
1. Develop local action plans to transform schools
2. Reinvent schools around learning, not time
3. Fix the design flaw: use time in new and better ways
4. Establish an academic day
5. Keep schools open longer to meet the needs of children and communities
6. Give teachers the time they need
7. Invest in technology
8. Share the responsibility: finger pointing and evasion must end
We can see how fundamental the relationship between educational institutes and the
community can be. The role of education is present in person’s life since small ages and
during big part of their life, depending on what people learn during all these years going to
bring better results as individuals that will be reflected during their participation in their
communities and work environment in the future. It is a task that required a big effort to
“reculturing” people’s mind and way of acting, it is a massive change that could bring
effective future results.
103
PART 7. Conclusions
“If you want to succeed you should strike out
on new paths, rather than travel the worn
paths of accepted success”
John D. Rockefeller
104
Starting with the idea of how design has evolved during the time we can mention the
study realized by Buchanan in the article Wicked problems in Design Thinking (1992),
where he considered four main areas where design is employed: design of symbolic and
visual communication; design of objects, all the products, its form and visual; design of
activities and organized services; and design of complex systems or environments.
Similarly, in the article the four powers of design, Mozota (2006) combine the aspects of
the traditional Balance Scorecard (financial, customer, internal business process and
learning) with design aspects to conclude with four different ways design can be also
implemented in the organizations, design as differentiator, as coordinator, as transformer,
and design as good business. Then in the issue Design Management Review vol. 24 (2013),
we can see how Westcott & others suggest the study made by Sabine Junginger where he
divided design also in three main divisions, design as tactical driver, as organizational
driver, and as strategic driver.
We can see how design has evolved during the years and the important role it has in the
strategies decisions of any organization. Design has been applied to shape and reshape
the organizations, from traditional ones to design-centric companies, the different facets
designing can have, are many and the benefits are infinite.
In the previous studies of the three authors just mentioned, it is clear how they coincide
in one main aspect, design as organizer and supporter. For the development of the
activities design has always have an important role in the decision-taking, either as
communication tool or problem-solving tool. Also, it cares about functional aspects as the
operations design, and the goods and services performance that create value to everyone
related to the organization.
The most important value that design gives to organizations is the ability to focus all their
attention into the people served by the organization. For the success of businesses, it is
fundamental to consider the individual’s needs, to try to find a way to achieve harmony
between the firm’s operations and the daily activities of the community, to take care of all
the aspects that can affect them, only in that way people can perceive the importance of
the organization and its value.
105
Employing just few and basic design practices, organizations can achieve business growth,
find innovations and entrepreneurial spirit, having improvement in their activities,
increase their market share and brand awareness, and creating new values for customers.
Designing business not only brings value for customers but also for employees, improving
the workplaces, caring about giving to them better experiences in the workplaces, allow
the company to have top talent resources that bring an effective productivity and
operational activities, are some of the visible benefits design can gives to employees.
Design is based in the quality experience that the organization can provide to their
employees. This will create a continuous cycle in the relationship with the organization
and the people involved in it. Employees feel comfortable in their work environment, they
are going to perform the activities better, providing better products and services to
customers, customers going to feel satisfy about their offer and going to go back, the
organization gain reputation and increase market share so they will continue performing
the same actions to encourage employees to continue with the hard working, and it
repeats again.
The role of design in the organizations is not only for influence in the behavior and the
ways of thinking of everyone involved, it is looking also to offer and to improve a better
experience for everyone around in an increasingly complex world.
The implementation of design can be complicated, to innovate and to do things different
can challenge the status quo. Many good ideas fail for the rejection of the people to try
new practices. The organizations must balance the different interests with the new ideas
and find the balance point. The risks of failure are high and people usually are not ready
for that, but it is important also to highlight the learning opportunities that failure brings.
Always a consolidated idea will be more attractive than a draft, the idea is to foment
among the organization a spirit of innovation, to look for something new, to learn new
things, and to always try.
One important aspect to take in consideration for traditional and for design-centric
companies is its rediscover and constant evolution. One mistake is to keep doing the same
106
things, even if they have been successful in the past it is important always reinvent, learn
new practices, to take risks to look for new opportunities, and to avoid static behaviors.
The idea must be focus on embracing risk and focusing in reaching new markets with new
opportunities, a constant learning in how to improve the performance.
Learning organizations are companies that facilitate the learning, and look for the
constant growth of everyone in the organization and the evolution of the organization
itself. It is based in the ability to learn faster than your competitors. They are
“organizations where people continually expand their capacity to create the results they
truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective
aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning how to learn together”
(Senge, 2006).
For stablish a good organizational learning is needed a combination between values, skills,
and support structures. These factors don’t come quickly, it is necessary a lot of hard
working, it requires to take a long-term commitment to implement the change in the
organizational culture. A fundamental part of the organizations are people, when they are
motivated to work in a life-long learning they can cultivate personal values. Those are
going to be translated to clear goals, facilitating the evolution in the work environment,
resulting to team working with others having their same vision.
The organizational learning increases the effective actions through knowledge and
understanding. The learning process is a constant cycle between actions and reflections,
try, test, and try again. Positive results become part of testing routines until the idea gets
already consolidate, the routines evolve over time when individuals get familiar with
them.
The relationship of design and organizations is about how to find the correct place to
apply design in an organization, and at the same time managers changing their
understanding of applied design in the business management. The design management
moves in a dynamic process from project design management to strategic design
management.
107
The manager role is fundamental in the implementation of design practices. Managers are
responsible for designing the organization’s world, and for the worlds that organizations
make for others in the social life around us.
The traditional functions in management are controlling, directing, planning, and
organizing. Managers should enlarge their focus and to provide the tools and support to
enable the best conditions for the people in the organization. To apply new changes and
enhance a learning culture is fundamental this support coming from the management
area.
A good design management must embrace the communication, motivation between
workers, and incentive to stimulate, support and reward the good performance of the
team. Even though not all the companies born with a design perspective, individuals born
with a learning spirit. This could be useful now to implement something new, simplifying
the design introduction in the organizations.
Concerning this investigation, some tools and methods have been analyzed. Each has its
own peculiarities and characteristics. We classified them together with each of the
disciplines suggested by Senge:
108
Table 7. Design tools and methodologies applied in Learning Organizations
Source: Own construction.
In the case of the Personal Mastery it can be include the Reward System Design Logic, it
considers the recompense and incentives people going to receive according their
performance, this will encourage individuals to always look for grow personally. The
Workplace design can influence in the Personal Mastery, depending on how people feel in
the environment they are more enthusiastic to improve themselves. Also, it can be
included the first Translation moment referred to the New Mindset, the energy coming
from this moment can create attention and interest to the individual to follow and
develop what is needed to be in line with the new practices.
For Mental Models the second translation moment referred to the Movement from an
idea to action can influence in its implementation. This moment is all about changing
behavior, correlated with the aspect of the way of thinking in the Mental Models, and how
individuals can react to different situations. A very important method that can be
implemented in this discipline is Design Thinking. It can support the people’s behavior
now to search for innovative solutions, implementing organized steps to guide the actions
109
during the process. For example, the Design Thinking meaning as cognitive process in the
brain is a fundamental aspect to take in consideration in the Mental Models discipline.
In Team Learning many approaches can be included, this made sense because of the high
percentage of activities the organization develop in teams. The first one is the relationship
of talent since the beginning of the work, the correct selection of people could bring the
success in team working. The Design Charette going to support in the process of Team
Learning, referring in the optimal size and work process. And finally, the third translation
moment referred to Shifting Context, when teams already develop a successful idea and
transmit it to other areas, working in the organization as a whole and not as individuals.
For achieve a Shared Vision is fundamental the communication among the organization.
Some techniques as Sketches and Storytelling can simplify the information in a way
everyone can understand. This is important now to Build Shared Vision.
In the fifth discipline is the combination of all the others, Systems Thinking refers to
perceive the organization as a whole, integrating all the aspects together. The models that
take in consideration many aspects of the companies are Star Model, Design milestones
process and the Structural building blocks. In each of them are consider each part needed
to complete the structure of the organization, the steps to follow to contemplate each of
the pieces that going to form the complete organization, human perspective, but also
consider the operation perspective.
The approach to face changes in any organization must be always looking for the most
effective method and a possible combination of tools. This mix between different models
can bring better results. It is important always to remember that each of company has
their unique characteristics so unique processes should be implemented.
110
7.1 Managerial implications
In this section, it going to be developed the managerial practices, showing the actions that
managers should take in consideration to foster changes inside the organization.
A manager is an individual who oversees the correct development of the activities inside
the organizations, normally counting with a group of people to develop together those
activities. The findings of this research show the important role managers have in the
transformation of the organizations, and their influence and relationship with the other
members of the firm. Applying new practices as design management activities can bring
huge changes in the work environment, people normally are closed to these changes
because are new and different for them, giving the responsibility to the manager to
foment these changes.
For a business is necessary of course the control of the financial resources to succeed, but
the balance sheet manipulation does not bring a tangible and visible value for customers.
For that reason, managers, should equilibrate their effort between implementing new
ways of thinking applying design practices, and not only care about numbers metrics.
To achieve successful design strategies, it is not possible doing it without facing
substantial changes, like for example in the processes and structures. Managers should
embrace the overall mindset of all the people inside the organization, to support them
among the new practices. The firm’s leadership should be the first one to engage to these
new changes, to work as example for others and to support them through the new
activities.
One core leadership strategy for managers is to be a model, an example for everyone. To
apply any different practices is important first to start for ourselves, in that way we can
spread the new changes with the example. Talking about applying new practices can open
the mind of some, but actions speak louder and can arrive to many.
Applying design practices in the organizations is a long-term and continuous activity. It is
not something easy to perceive, so requires time to see the improvement. This happens
111
because to manage the change it requires most of the time in the transformation of the
firm’s culture, the process is gradual and normally long. So, when managers want to
incorporate design in the organization, they should be aware to analyze the activities in a
long-term perspective.
The design applied in the organizations always is focus on human-centered, focus on
customers, but also in the human part of the organization as the employees and of course
managers. Even they are the ones to guide the application of design, also is necessary take
in consideration models that consider them as the first actor to include in the
transformation. Without the manager vision, the implementation could be much more
complicated. Applying simple practices that help managers in improve and keep the
control in the correct variables to achieve a better result in the implementation of
changes.
Normally the character of the manager should be sufficient strong to respond quickly and
to control fast social, economic and political transitions per the requirements on the
system and its employees, and the design transitions are not different in this aspect.
The manager must have an open mind to embrace the design in their day to day activities,
the manager should act as an idea generator who gives form to new possibilities with a
well-developed vocabulary of design, that can bring different and new results in the
develop of the activities. In the design of the Lewis Building, Gehry explained how
managers must be trained as decision makers; they are form-givers who can shape
organizations and economic processes. He mentioned how the world continue forming
mediocrity solutions coming from people close to change, in the education, practice and
research of managerial activities is necessary to apply a design attitude to solving problem
As management engineering students, the opportunity to act and think as designers can
give us a complete and better solution to our problems, providing better experiences to
the people that will work with us and to customers, and to growth as a more integrated
professional, being more flexible to changes, it is necessary we as future managers open
112
ourselves to the largest number of possibilities we can have acting in a more integrated
way.
The role of the manager is important during all the processes in the business, the design
can be only applied for taking decisions or also to applied a design attitude. The first one is
traditionally linked with management, where the manager should choose an option
between different solutions to a problem, but having a design attitude go beyond this
view, it is problem solving but taking in consideration more opportunities and going out of
the known to find something new. A good design solution is not the one that emerges
from the beginning as the unique solution, it is the one that comes after multiple analysis
and iterations.
For the characteristic of iteration in design processes the participation of many in the
problem solving could help to avoid repetitive solutions. One of the traditional
characteristic of a manager is to work as the leader of a team, but this is not the case. Of
course, they will work as a guide to the process, but it is fundamental that they have a full
commitment in act also as team-players, the collaboration between all the team will be
what leads to the success of the new practices.
In learning organizations, the idea is creating a complete group of people able and
enthusiastic to growth and develop new practices to improve their activities. The
leadership role is not something that should happen only in the CEO or executives level, it
must be distributed broadly in all the organizations, manager is the one that should
promote the develop of each person to become the best version of themselves.
Finally, it is important that managers start to focus also in the economic value and
financial benefits of design. Many times, this aspect is not taking seriously because it is not
clear how to address it. There is a driver that can help to analyze this value, the RODI
return of design investment. It is necessary that managers start to study in deep this
because the benefits coming from design are many and very clear, the design-centric
companies are performing better and growing more than the ones that maintain in
traditional practices.
113
An important aspect to always consider is that there is not a secret for success, it is not
follow the same steps in all the organizations and success, it is about understand the
culture and dynamics of each of the organization taken in consideration. Firms are like
humans each of them have their particularities, so it is necessary that managers
understand this and apply the correct models that fit to each organization.
“The manager does things right; the leader does the right thing”.
Bennis Warren. On becoming a leader, 1994.
7.2 Limits and future research
(follow-ups)
After the analysis of the managerial implications the limitation of this research are going
to be presented with the future research suggestions. With the development of the
investigation some limitations appear during the process.
The first limitation was about the literature in the topic. It is not easy to find a clear
distinction between the design of the organizations and the implementation of design in
it. Many times, the concepts are mixed creating confusion in the research process. At the
end, this limitation helps to create a path in the design evolution, coming from just a tool
to a strategy support.
Second limitation is about the design management literature. There are a lot of
information about design-centric companies, but lack of material about traditional and
smalls companies that want to start to implement design practices.
Talking about the future research suggestions it is important to consider the opportunity
to enlarge this study. With the idea of introduce design management in small and
traditional companies, it is important to support the investigation with analysis of business
114
cases. Doing interviews or focus groups could be useful to understand the current
situation of design in this kind of organizations.
Other opportunity to follow the investigation is focusing directly in managers with a
design background, in management or also in design careers. Studying their behavior, how
they introduce design, and how they implement it in non-design-centric companies.
With the realization of this investigation it was possible to see how designers are
constantly defending themselves about their important role, and how many managers are
close to implement radical changes in their practices. Using this and focusing in a more
quantitative investigation, the case studies can be also focus on how many engineers are
implementing design, and how many designers are applying management practices in
their daily activities. In that way, could be possible understand the value and important
role of each activity in the organization, and the fundamental idea of working as a
correlative discipline.
Finally, a possible future research could be focus on the economic and financial impact in
the application of design inside the organizations, simplifying the benefits to traditional
firms.
In conclusion, this investigation is only a small step in the introduction of design
management in traditional organizations.
115
PART 8. Bibliography
116
Adams, R. S., Turns, J., & Atman, C. J. (2003). Educating effective engineering designers: The role of reflective practice. Design studies, 24(3), 275-294.
Austin, J. R. (2013). Making knowledge actionable: Three key translation moments. Journal
of organization design, 2(3), 29-37. Barber, F. Freeland, G. & Brownell, D. (2006) A Survivor's Guide to Organization Redesign.
In Stern, C. & Deimler, M. (eds), The Boston Consulting Group on Strategy: Classic Concepts and New Perspectives, Second edition Hoboken (302-309). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Bate, P., Khan, R., & Pye, A. (2000). Towards a culturally sensitive approach to organization
structuring: Where organization design meets organization development. Organization Science, 11(2), 197-211.
Boland, R. J., & Collopy, F. (2004). Design matters for management. California: Stanford
University Press, 3-18. Brown, T. (2009). Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and
Inspires Innovation. New York City: Harper Business. Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design issues, 8(2), 5-21. Buchanan, R. (2015). Worlds in the making: design, management, and the reform of
organizational culture. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 1(1), 5-21.
Bui, H., & Baruch, Y. (2010). Creating learning organizations: a systems perspective. The
Learning Organization, 17(3), 208-227. Carroll, J. S., & Edmondson, A. C. (2002). Leading organizational learning in health
care. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 11(1), 51-56. Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2014). Organization development and change. Canada:
Cengage learning. Fullan, M. (1995). The school as a learning organization: Distant dreams. Theory into
practice, 34(4), 230-235. Galbraith, J. R. (1977). Organization design. Boston: Addison Wesley Publishing Company. Galbraith, J. R. (2011). The star model. The STAR Model. www.jaygalbraith.com.
117
Garud, R., Jain, S., & Tuertscher, P. (2009). Incomplete by design and designing for incompleteness. In Lyytinen, K., Loucopoulos, P., Mylopoulos, J. & Robinson, B. (eds), Design Requirements Engineering: A Ten-Year Perspective (137-156). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
Gruber, M., De Leon, N., George, G., & Thompson, P. (2015). Managing by
design. Academy of Management Journal, 58(1), 1-7. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). Linking the balanced scorecard to strategy. California
management review, 39(1), 53-79. Kesler, G., & Kates, A. (2010). Designing strategic organizations: The new work of
executives and HR. People and Strategy, 33(3), 14-21. Lunenburg, F. C. (2012). Organizational structure: Mintzberg’s framework. International
journal of scholarly, academic, intellectual diversity, 14(1), 1-8. Luxford, K., Safran, D. G., & Delbanco, T. (2011). Promoting patient-centered care: a
qualitative study of facilitators and barriers in healthcare organizations with a reputation for improving the patient experience. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 23(5), 510-515.
Marciniak R. (2013) From Organization Design to Meta Organization Design. In: Benghozi
PJ., Krob D., Rowe F. (eds) Digital Enterprise Design and Management 2013. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 205. Berlin, Heidelberg; Springer.
Martin, R. L. (2009). The design of business: Why design thinking is the next competitive
advantage. Boston: Harvard Business Press. Michlewski, K. (2008). Uncovering design attitude: Inside the culture of
designers. Organization studies, 29(3), 373-392. Mintzberg, H. (1989). The structuring of organizations. In Readings in Strategic
Management (322-352). United Kingdom: Macmillan Education UK. Mohrman, S. A. (2006). Designing Organizations to Lead with knowledge. To appear in The
Handbook of Organization Development. Mozota, B. B. (2006). The four powers of design: A value model in design management.
Design Management Review, 17(2), 44-53. Petersen, S. (2015, March 16). Design Centric — What Is It in Practice?. Huffington Post.
Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com
118
Schuster, M., & Kesler, G. (2011). Aligning reward systems in organization design: How to activate the orphan star point. People and Strategy, 34(4), 38.
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization.
Broadway Business. Senge, P. M. (2014). The fifth discipline fieldbook: Strategies and tools for building a
learning organization. Crown Business. Stang Våland, M., & Georg, S. (2012). Bringing design back in: Managing as designing
revisited. Paper presented at the building as an Object and a Project Conference, København, Denmark.
Westcott, M., Sato, S., Mrazek, D., Wallace, R., Vanka, S., Bilson, C., & Hardin, D. (2013).
The DMI design value scorecard: a new design measurement and management model. Design Management Review, 24(4), 10-16.
Zurlo, F. (2012). Le Strategie Del Design: Disegnare il valore oltre il prodotto. Libraccio.