Placeholder Image

Subtitles section Play video

  • I have spent the last years

  • trying to resolve two enigmas:

  • Why is productivity so disappointing

  • in all the companies where I work?

  • I have worked with more than 500 companies.

  • Despite all the technological advances --

  • computers, I.T., communications, telecommunications,

  • the Internet.

  • Enigma number two:

  • Why is there so little engagement at work?

  • Why do people feel so miserable,

  • even actively disengaged?

  • Disengaging their colleagues.

  • Acting against the interest of their company.

  • Despite all the affiliation events,

  • the celebration, the people initiatives,

  • the leadership development programs to train

  • managers on how to better motivate their teams.

  • At the beginning, I thought there was

  • a chicken and egg issue:

  • Because people are less engaged,

  • Or vice versa, because they are less productive,

  • we put more pressure and they are less engaged.

  • But as we were doing our analysis

  • we realized that there was a common root cause

  • to these two issues

  • that relates, in fact, to the basic

  • The way we organize is based on two pillars.

  • The hard -- structure, processes, systems.

  • The soft --

  • feelings, sentiments, interpersonal

  • And whenever a company

  • reorganizes, restructures, reengineers,

  • goes through a cultural transformation program,

  • it chooses these two pillars.

  • Now, we try to refine them,

  • we try to combine them.

  • The real issue is --

  • and this is the answer to the two enigmas --

  • these pillars are obsolete.

  • Everything you read in business books is based

  • either on one or the other

  • or their combination.

  • They are obsolete.

  • How do they work

  • when you try to use these approaches

  • in front of the new complexity of business?

  • The hard approach, basically

  • requirements, structures, processes,

  • committees, headquarters, hubs, clusters,

  • you name it.

  • I forgot all the metrics, incentives, committees,

  • What happens basically on the left,

  • you have more complexity, the

  • We need quality, cost, reliability, speed.

  • And every time there is a new requirement,

  • we use the same approach.

  • We create dedicated structure processed systems,

  • basically to deal with the

  • The hard approach creates just complicatedness

  • in the organization.

  • Let's take an example.

  • An automotive company, the engineering division

  • is a five-dimensional matrix.

  • If you open any cell of the matrix,

  • you find another 20-dimensional matrix.

  • You have Mr. Noise, Mr. Petrol Consumption,

  • Mr. Anti-Collision Properties.

  • For any new requirement,

  • you have a dedicated function

  • in charge of aligning engineers against

  • the new requirement.

  • What happens when the new

  • Some years ago, a new requirement

  • appeared on the marketplace:

  • the length of the warranty period.

  • So therefore the new requirement is repairability,

  • making cars easy to repair.

  • Otherwise when you bring the car

  • if you have to remove the engine

  • to access the lights,

  • the car will have to stay one week in the garage

  • instead of two hours, and the

  • So, what was the solution using the hard approach?

  • If repairability is the new requirement,

  • the solution is to create a new function,

  • Mr. Repairability.

  • And Mr. Repairability creates

  • With a repairability scorecard,

  • and eventually repairability incentive.

  • That came on top of 25 other KPIs.

  • What percentage of these people is variable compensation?

  • Twenty percent at most, divided by 26 KPIs,

  • repairability makes a difference of 0.8 percent.

  • What difference did it make in their actions,

  • their choices to simplify? Zero.

  • But what occurs for zero impact?

  • scorecard, evaluation, coordination

  • to have zero impact.

  • Now, in front of the new complexity of business,

  • the only solution is not drawing boxes

  • with reporting lines.

  • It is basically the interplay.

  • How the parts work together.

  • The connections, the interactions, the synapses.

  • It is not the skeleton of boxes,

  • of adaptiveness and intelligence.

  • You know, you could call it cooperation, basically.

  • Whenever people cooperate,

  • they use less resources. In everything.

  • You know, the repairability issue

  • is a cooperation problem.

  • When you design cars, please take into account

  • the needs of those who will repair the cars

  • in the after sales garages.

  • When we don't cooperate we need more time,

  • more equipment, more systems, more teams.

  • We need -- When procurement, supply

  • we need more stock, more inventories,

  • Who will pay for that?

  • Shareholders? Customers?

  • No, they will refuse.

  • So who is left?

  • who have to compensate through their super

  • individual efforts for the lack of cooperation.

  • Stress, burnout, they are

  • No wonder they disengage.

  • How do the hard and the soft

  • The hard: In banks, when there is a problem

  • between the back office and the front office,

  • they don't cooperate. What is the solution?

  • They create a middle office.

  • What happens one year later?

  • Instead of one problem

  • now I have two problems.

  • Between the back and the middle

  • and between the middle and the front.

  • Plus I have to pay for the middle office.

  • The hard approach is unable to foster cooperation.

  • It can only add new boxes,

  • The soft approach:

  • To make people cooperate, we need

  • Improve interpersonal feelings,

  • the more people like each other,

  • It is totally wrong.

  • It is even counterproductive.

  • Look, at home I have two TVs. Why?

  • Precisely not to have to cooperate with my wife.

  • (Laughter)

  • Not to have to impose tradeoffs to my wife.

  • And why I try not to impose tradeoffs to my wife

  • is precisely because I love my wife.

  • If I didn't love my wife, one TV would be enough:

  • You will watch my favorite football game,

  • if you are not happy, how is the book or the door?

  • (Laughter)

  • The more we like each other,

  • the more we avoid the real cooperation

  • that would strain our relationships

  • And we go for a second TV or we escalate

  • the decision above for arbitration.

  • Definitely, these approaches are obsolete.

  • To deal with complexity, to enhance the nervous system,

  • we have created what we call

  • based on simple rules.

  • Simple rule number one:

  • Understand what others do.

  • What is their real work?

  • We need to go beyond the boxes,

  • the job descriptions, beyond the surface

  • of the container, to understand the real content.

  • Me, designer, if I put a wire here,

  • I know that it will mean that we will have to

  • remove the engine to access the lights.

  • Second, you need to reinforce integrators.

  • Integrators are not middle

  • existing managers that you reinforce

  • so that they have power and interest

  • to make others cooperate.

  • How can you reinforce your

  • By removing layers.

  • When there are too many layers

  • people are too far from the action,

  • therefore they need KPIs, metrics,

  • they need poor proxies for reality.

  • They don't understand reality

  • and they add the complicatedness of metrics, KPIs.

  • By removing rules -- the bigger we are,

  • the more we need integrators,

  • therefore the less rules we must have,

  • to give discretionary power to managers.

  • And we do the opposite --

  • the bigger we are, the more rules we create.

  • And we end up with the Encyclopedia

  • You need to increase the quanitity of power

  • so that you can empower everybody

  • to use their judgment, their intelligence.

  • You must give more cards to people

  • so that they have the critical mass of cards

  • to take the risk to cooperate,

  • to move out of insulation.

  • Otherwise, they will withdraw. They will disengage.

  • These rules, they come from game theory

  • and organizational sociology.

  • You can increase the shadow of the future.

  • Create feedback loops that expose people

  • to the consequences of their actions.

  • This is what the automotive company did

  • when they saw that Mr. Repairability had no impact.

  • They said to the design engineers:

  • Now, in three years, when the new

  • you will move to the after sales

  • of the warranty budget,

  • and if the warranty budget explodes,

  • it will explode in your face. (Laughter)

  • Much more powerful than 0.8

  • You need also to increase reciprocity,

  • by removing the buffers that make us self-sufficient.

  • When you remove these buffers,

  • you hold me by the nose, I hold you by the ear.

  • We will cooperate.

  • Remove the second TV.

  • There are many second TVs at work

  • that don't create value,

  • they just provide dysfunctional self-sufficiency.

  • You need to reward those who cooperate

  • and blame those who don't cooperate.

  • The CEO of The Lego Group,

  • Jorgen Vig Knudstorp, has a great way to use it.

  • He says, blame is not for failure,

  • it is for failing to help or ask for help.

  • It changes everything.

  • Suddenly it becomes in my

  • on my real weaknesses, my real forecast,

  • because I know I will not be blamed if I fail,

  • but if I fail to help or ask for help.

  • When you do this, it has a lot of implications

  • on organizational design.

  • You stop drawing boxes, dotted lines, full lines;

  • you look at their interplay.

  • It has a lot of implications on financial policies

  • that we use.

  • On human resource management practices.

  • When you do that, you can manage complexity,

  • the new complexity of business,

  • without getting complicated.

  • You create more value with lower cost.

  • You simultaneously improve

  • because you have removed the common root cause

  • that hinders both.

  • Complicatedness: This is your

  • The real battle is not against competitors.

  • This is rubbish, very abstract.

  • When do we meet competitors to fight them?

  • The real battle is against ourselves,

  • against our bureaucracy, our complicatedness.

  • Only you can fight, can do it.

  • Thank you.

  • (Applause)

I have spent the last years

Subtitles and keywords

B1 INT cooperate requirement complexity cooperation approach create

【TED】Yves Morieux: As work gets more complex, 6 rules to simplify (Yves Morieux: As work gets more complex, 6 rules to simplify)

  • 20760 356
    VoiceTube   posted on 2014/05/11
Video vocabulary