Page 292 - Managing Change in Organizations

CarnCh14v3.qxd 3/30/07 4:32 PM Page 275

Change architecture: blocks
If plans are worthless once battle is joined, what do we need? A problem-ori-
ented process which seeks to deal with the inevitable gaps between the original
plan and current performance. This demands the training and follow-up we have
referred to above.
These ideas find powerful reinforcement in the work of Manzoni (2000). In a
study of managerial behaviour towards better performers (BPs) and weaker per-
formers (WPs) Manzoni reports the following:

1 Toward BPs managers tend to:
■ discuss the what and why of tasks/projects;
■ be open to ideas from BPs;
■ spend more time with them;
■ give them more challenging tasks.
2 Toward WPs managers tend to:
■ discuss how;
■ push their own ideas;
■ monitor actions and results systematically;
■ be less patient.
3 Various studies show that bosses have ‘in-‘ and ‘out-groups’ and that they probe
failure differently.
But does this surprise you? Does it matter? Manzoni argues that subordinate per-
formance tends to adjust to superiors’ expectation. Thus the danger is that a
vicious circle is created. We expect the weaker performer to underperform. Therefore
the boss tends to get involved, to question, to be impatient and to provide less
positive reinforcement. In turn this is perceived by the boss as ‘doing the job for
the WP!’ and by the subordinate as ‘He doesn’t listen/care’. Overall the subordi-
nate feels undervalued, lacking in confidence and esteem and therefore with-
draws, behaves mechanically, avoids contact with the boss and so on.
Manzoni calls this ‘the set-up-to-fail syndrome’ and brings various ‘costs’, as
follows:
■ worsening performance of WPs;

■ time and energy of boss;
■ weaker team;
■ negative energy;
■ BPs get increasingly loaded with additional work.
And the syndrome seems more likely to emerge if there is:

■ pressure for results;
■ short tenures in post;
■ performance review systems emphasizing a limited range of objectives;
■ flatter organizations and larger spans of control.

We have already seen that much of these conditions are either a consequence of
value-adding organization structures (see Chapter 7) and/or a clear consequence
of radical change.

275