All organizations consider themselves unique. And, in fact, from the perspective of the social construction inherent to their constitution and development, they truly are.
But this is not the reason that other organizations actually display unique characteristics compared to many others in different times and places. The organizational phenomena is, therefore, the result of the tension between the dynamic itself inserted into the regular context and the successive cycles experienced by humanity in its creative inability to produce problems to be solved.
We are currently living out an interesting context. The turn of a century really does seem to have a certain impact on the human psyche - while some glimpse a righteous era never before imagined; others already seem resigned to an apocalyptic end. Whilst walking the line, humanity is walking as it always has done, probably a little faster, but still much less dramatically than the amplified digital anxiety all around us would have us believe.
While individuals and societies eagerly consume technologies and innovations driven forward on a global and locally fragmented scale, while obstinate governments still insist on remaining alienated, companies are actively engaging themselves, some inspired by the inspiring objectives of the digital revolution, others by the practical aim of simply surviving in the new competitive arena.
Five paradoxes are increasingly dominating the executive agenda:
- Horizon
- Agenda
- Transparency
- Work
- Innovation
The Horizon paradox addresses the historical tension between the short and long term. But now it is more intense. The pressure to achieve monthly and quarterly results in publicly traded companies, driven by investment fund managers, is even more intense. At the same time, the increase in social awareness and public scrutiny is challenging companies to assume long term commitments to society and the environment.
The Agenda paradox involves short executive cycles versus the long term decision making process. Senior executives are remaining in the same position for increasingly shorter periods of time, despite the need for companies to take long-term decisions. Conflicts of interest continually appear as there does not necessarily exist any sort of alignment between individual incentives and collective objectives.
The Transparency paradox contrasts the democracy of access to big data with the loss of power based on the control of this information. The praising of enormous found, organized and processed “data deposits” coexists with the significant loss of influence and direction as a result of the broader access to these same data. The standardization of data certainly questions the aggregate value of different functions.
The Work paradox recognizes the individual journey by means of the experience, expression, and nnection inherent to the current context of the ethics of pleasure, where the search for personal satisfaction outweighs the disposition that once existed to obedience to the ethics of duty. Work - previously seen as a punishment to be traversed, like a bridge to the accomplishment of dreams and the fulfilment of duties to third parties - is now seen as a continuous thread through life. Organizational designs and executive leaders are held in check.
The Innovation paradox refers to the clash between compliance and experimentation. The corporate world is becoming increasingly regulated and controlled, with the internal area of compliance assuming responsibility for the observance of codes of conduct and integrated risk controls. But fast cycles of business impose a fluid dynamic of experimentation – often within ecosystems populated by start-ups and partners - that places the organization precisely within that gray area that is so undesirable to the area of compliance.
These are the five paradoxes of the contemporary world of executive leadership in organizations. There is no shortcut to resolving these corporative dilemmas. Only strong strategic direction, group cohesion, a healthy organizational culture, and functional systems can help leaders take decisions in such an unstable context.
__________________________________
Daniel Augusto Motta, PhD, MSc
Founder & CEO BMI Blue Management Institute
.jpg)