While reading the required texts this week, a couple of points
immediately jumped out at me: Henri Fayol’s scalar chain and Frederick Winslow Taylor’s
pay-for-performance theory.
The scalar chain resonated with me because of the way part
of my company works. In the Korean culture, chain of command and respect to
those either older or more powerful than you is extremely important, as it is
in several cultures. Being able to talk to some of the Korean managers at Samsung
can be quite challenging if I’m either in a different department or am lower in
rank than they are. Instead of talking with them directly, I am often forced to
relay messages through their assistants or through other employees who are on
their teams. I can also determine if a coworker is speaking in Korean to a
subordinate or someone higher than them in two ways: the amount in which they
are talking, and the numbers of times they say yes.
I also see this daily in non-verbal forms of communication. When
our president – who came to my subsidiary from Samsung headquarters in Korea—walks
into the café at lunchtime, almost every Korean in the lunch room stands up and
bows to him. This also happens in break rooms when a boss walks through, in the
elevators and anywhere else people come in contact. The most interesting part
about this is that I have started bowing slightly! Without realizing it, I have
started slightly lowering my head when I say hello to our President, CFO and
other Korean members of the leadership team.
The scalar chain slows down productivity. It would be more
efficient to speak directly with someone than to go through the channels to
have a discussion.
The other theory about pay-for-performance sings to me because
I am part of the human resources department. Reading about the man, Taylor, who essentially created the concept of a human resources department
was quite interesting. All employees at Samsung receive quarterly bonuses based
on sales numbers and other key metrics. And we all take them very seriously! We
are able to celebrate our successes as a company on a continual basis
throughout the year instead of getting one reward at the end of the year. This
ties back to Taylor’s principle of temporal
contiguity directly and motivates everybody to work hard each quarter.
I don’t think that one style of management is necessarily
better across the board than another. The style that works for a company and
departments within the company depends largely on company and department cultures,
employees’ cultures and, I think, trust within the organization.
Hi Lauren,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading what you wrote and found your post very interesting and much of what you said rang true in my experience, as well. I think you touched on a very important aspect ~ trust.
I very much agree with this statement. "The scalar chain slows down productivity. It would be more efficient to speak directly with someone than to go through the channels to have a discussion." I do see the need for a chain of command. However, how are subordinates supposed to develop trust in management and vice versa without open lines of communication?
If the scalar model were altered, would that lead to personal relationships and trust. A strict adherence to the scalar chain of command actually creates distrust. Although, an organization is, by nature, a machine without thoughts, ideas or feelings. However, the individuals who make up the organization are not. Separation fosters fear. Fear and resentment then can grow in the minds of upper management as well as in the lower ranks. Both sides will imagine what the other thinks of them if there is not open communication.
Not that a company needs to be one big happy family, as I see this possibly leading to favoritism and more fear and resentment. However, a democratic workplace would lend to employees being valued and superiors being respected. In turn, I believe productivity would increase.
I suppose, however, that this does beg the philosophical question of is it plausible for an organization to run efficiently with a strong element of trust and open communication. Every company I have worked for states the theory of an "open door" policy. However, I have yet to see it actually be practiced with a positive outcome. Lack of trust keeps the door closed.
Interesting to hear more about your company, Lauren. You mention the scalar chain in your assignment, but not Fayol's gang plank. At Samsung, do you have open communication laterally, or across the lines of authority? Also, you comment that the scalar chain slows down productivity. If it were taken away completely, do you think that could also slow down productivity? If so, how do we find a happy medium?
ReplyDeleteThis post touches on many organizational culture issues, so it will be interesting to hear more about your company during Week 10.
Hi Lauren and Lisa,
ReplyDeleteI found Lauren's post really interesting as well, because I am a subordinate in the working world. I actually commented on this in my post, how there are positive and negative aspects to the chain of command when you are at the bottom of it.
Lisa, I think the only way for subordinates to develop trust in their management is to have open lines of communication, and to be able to express your opinions and concerns about all aspects of the organization in a tactful manner. Even though your voice may not carry much weight at this point, it is important to know that you do, in fact, have a voice.
Fayol's principal of Equity comes to mind when I think about this. Our readings say he looked at Equity as 'a combination of kindliness and justice'. If subordinates are treated this way, and made to feel their opinions are valued and that they can talk to their superiors and provide intelligent feedback, I think trust can definitely be gained.
Lauren, I haven't found that the scalar chain slows down productivity in my athletic department, but that's probably because our department consists of 10 full-time employees. Do you think that the scalar chain's efficiency might be directly linked to the size of the organization or division? I'd be interested to hear your thoughts since you are working for a much bigger organization.
Really interesting post and response!
Hi Andrew,
ReplyDeleteI believe Fayol offered the gang plank as a way to cross communicate without going up the scalar chain, and that it is more applicable and effective for an org of larger size. I've noticed the gang plank (and I never knew there was a phrase for it until this week) in the large organization I worked in (AT&T) but for a smaller one I founded, there was no need for one. I did try to keep the chain and unity of command fairly simple, but instead of going to staff directly with work tasks or messages, I left that with their supervisors. I did, however, always try to stop by their desks/offices at least once in the day,usually before lunch. And I'd request that they do the same in the afternoon or at the end of their day.
Al,
DeleteReally appreciate the feedback. I just find it interesting how the chain of command works in a big company as opposed to a smaller one, because the dynamic is so much different. There's more of an opportunity for the gang plank, simply because there are more people within the organization or within the specific department. just something interesting to think about.
Hi Lauren,
ReplyDeleteDoes Samsung have anything like an Omsbudsman position in or outside HR? I wonder how suggestions/cold pricklies/warm fuzzies filter into their company.
I noticed at a sporting event in early January (the Hyundai Tournament of Champions in golf held in Maui) the sponsoring company (automobiles, shipping, manufacturing) relies on its car company to be the representative, the flagship company for the conglomerate.
It seems that a car company, regardless of its country of origin, needs to connect with their target audience and general public, in a way that perhaps another type of company does not. (This might be even more crucial for Hyundai in that it is a Korean company with a shorter history in carmaking than nearly every other car company today. They have to be "out there" or they won't survive) That way to connect is with its cars and advertising messages. I wonder if the culture is similar as Samsung's, and their sleek car designs and glossy ads with Jeff Bridge's voiceovers are effective in keeping us focused on their cars!
Wow, thanks, everybody for the comments and feedback!
ReplyDeleteLisa--I truly think trust is what it boils down to. I've heard several people say that we foster a fear-based management style. That can't be good! Of course this isn't true across the board with all managers in all departments, but survey results have consistently shown this is the case.
Courtney--yes, we do have open lateral communication across the company. As far as taking the scalar chain away all together, the top management could get bogged down with unnecessary meetings, emails and other events. So where's the happy medium...great question. Employee judgment would play into that solution. The problem, though, is that your direct manager might not be looped in on what's going on and have something sprung on them.
Al--great idea to have open lines of communication with your employees. I think that's extremely important in any organization, but especially at a small company. As far as having representatives out in the business, we do have HR Business Partners who sit in different functional areas and support those business units. The HRBPs are essentially the eyes and ears in the departments to make sure that employees have a dedicated HR person to go to and to also help the managers facilitate reviews, team meetings and employee ratings every quarter. Hyundai is becoming huge, and it seemed to happen overnight! That's a brand that has gone from producing small, cheap, poorly made cars to a brand that is quite respected even in the luxury category! I have to imagine part of their culture is similar, but it would be interesting to see how similar we are.