both forms a physical environment and is at the same time a product of that
environment.
2.4.2.1 Flexible, But Not Chaotic
The opposite of rigid structures is not creative chaos. This point is very important to
me. My work as a manager and as a management trainer have showed me time and
again the importance and benefits of structures and generally recognized rules,
especially in situations of change. They enable a manager to delegate tasks and
responsibilities, to give the employees more freedom and to maintain at the same
time the company’s effectiveness and productivity.
Drucker too saw the need for this: in a dangerous situation the survival of
everyone involved depends on “a clear chain of command.” There must be a “boss”
making the final decisions. If a ship is in danger of sinking the captain does not call
a meeting but gives a command. Of course, we as modern managers tend to respond
negatively to the term “command,” but Drucker showed that there may be situations
in which participation and empowerment of employees is (and has to be) subject to
clear limits (see Drucker 2004, p. 98 ff.). But Drucker also maintained that a flat
hierarchy, where the number of decision-making levels is limited to a minimum, is
a good structural principle.
Structures and rules ensure that quality standards and good practices are used
regularly, without their having to be reinvented them each time and by each
individual. Structures are not inherently contrary to change and innovation. The
opposite is the case: they can ensure that information is conveyed more quickly,
that processes are set in motion sooner, and that ideas are better implemented.
But structures – and this is the minimum requirement – have to be reflected upon
and above all they have to be “lived out”: federalized structures and principles have to
replace hierarchies. A structure of related departments has to be transformed to an
alliance of independent power bases, with decentralized communication and coordi-
nation institutions and their own governing bodies. The culture and structure have to
support creativity and innovation. Companies need flexible structures that promote
cooperation, that connect people and help them to see and act beyond the boundaries
of their tasks. There has to be an emotional climate that embraces creativity,
innovation and change (see Kanter 1998, pp. 74–119). People are no longer perceived
as “organizational people,” as small cogs in the huge gear works, but instead flexible
organizations that utilize the knowledge and resources of the staff must be created (cf.
Bartlett and Ghoshal 2000, p. 19). The organization needs to be (re-) created around
the people. Admittedly, this is easier said than done – but I mention this point because
it still has not been sufficiently embraced by managers in my own experience.
In addition, organizations must be designed in order to not only best achieve
their designated objectives best, but such that bad, incompetent managers can do
only minimal damage and are quickly discovered and replaced (see Malik 2001,
p. 45). Each organization must have mechanisms and structures that monitor the
people in power and constantly check their performance. Management floors cannot
2.4 The Leadership Situation 111