Prologue
The distraught CEO
informs the chairman
that the lady entrusted with the responsibility of conducting the mega event is
insisting on chucking out the time-tested canvas and experimenting with an
entirely new roll out. The gravity of the situation is accentuated by her
insistence on adopting a line, visibly very contrary to the views held by the establishment.
The CEO is convinced that if this attempt at questioning authority is allowed to
pass, it could open the flood gates for dissent across
the board, lead to erosion of authority, weaken controls, adversely affect
organisational efficiency and jeopardise the very existence of the
organisation.
The CEO seeks
intervention of the Chairman to ensure continued conformity. She also informs the
chairman that she has already identified someone willing and conforming.
Visionaries and Dissenters
Customs, practices and policies evolve as organisations
grow. In the course of evolution, organisational practices gradually and inevitably
assume sanctity. Questioning such practices could have different responses
depending on who questions it. With all respects and no malice whatsoever to
visionaries, when the top man questions or changes established practices, however
mundane or inconsequential, he is hailed a visionary. However, if established practices are questioned by someone down the
ladder, he risks being branded a dissenter to be appropriately dealt with.
Although dissent is the natural spring from where creativity originates, it is often unfairly branded obstructive and detrimental to
organisational health. The silent majority in conformity, though only seemingly,
is regarded loyal. Mega-corporate entities
have been consigned to pages of history because most of those within willingly
conformed and very few dared to really care.
Avoiding
the Rough and Ensuring Smooth Sail
Experts somehow have come to believe that success
in management is about ensuring smooth sails and avoiding the ‘roughs’.
Internal ‘Roughs’ normally originate from dissent in the ranks. One can find enough
literature on various types of dissent, how to prevent it, spot it at
conception, classify it as it emerges and despite all that effort, if it still raises
its ugly head, how to nip it in the bud or control it. Dissent with reference to working conditions, it
is widely accepted, if mismanaged leads to conflicts precipitating situations for collective bargaining at great costs to the
organisation.
At managerial
levels, dissent need not always seed conflict. It could also be a
catalyst to organisational growth. In most
organisations where difference of opinion with superiors is anathema, one
is expected to voice ‘differences’ only in private with the superior concerned. Airing dissent
in public is considered insolence and disrespectful. If private discussions to
iron out differences do materialise, probability of it being honestly objective
is bleak. When organisational culture turns hostile to differing opinions,
exodus of fertile minds becomes the norm.
Who Embodies an
Organisation
Proprietorship
aside, organisations are ideas manifested. Brick and mortar, process and people
are all physical manifestations of business ideas. Since macro policies
originate naturally from strategic vision at the top, ideas originating there
and flowing down find better traction and easier acceptance than those crawling
up from the bottom against organisational gravity. This is why it is possible for
men at the top to effortlessly intervene, efficiently steer organisations, successfully
drive diversification and venture into new pastures. Top-down ideas easily find
faithful multitudes below. But it could also result in the individual enslaving
ideas that represent an organisation. Under such circumstances dissent is likely
to be construed as questioning the wisdom of the chair and therefore termed
obstructionist.
If the rank and
file is clear on what truly embodies the organisation, difference of opinion would
normally be converged towards achieving organisational betterment. For this, an institutional mechanism has to
be instituted. Managerial dissent expressed freely and institutionally helps
highlight incoherence in converting macros to micros. Stifled dissent condemns
organisations to stunted growth.
Dissent Release Mechanism
Incorporating a system to hear and address
dissent within the organisation is akin to efficient pressure release valves on
a pressure line. Besides giving vent to dissent, it also
rids the system of malicious grapevine and helps establish healthy two-way
communication in the hierarchy. Organisations that institutionally channelise
and allow expressions of dissent without apprehensions of being hounded stand
to reap long term benefits.
Regardless of this opportunity being given
or denied there would be individuals in any organisation attempting to hijack constructive
freedom of expression towards insolence and obstructions. There are many ways
to handle them. But built-in opportunities to express dissent allow those who mean
well for the organisation to contribute, even if it is by differing in
opinions.
Customization
One of the first questions that could come
up would center around how such a system should be designed and implemented.
There can be no universal instrument that can be prescribed or adopted. Each
organisation, depending its field of operations would have to tailor a system
for itself. The instrument would have to be dynamically evolved to suit the organisations
future and contemporary needs. What would be required for it to succeed,
irrespective of the type of organisation, is the readiness of those higher on
the ladder to listen to what is being said, why it is being said and often
ignore how it is said. The intent must receive overriding consideration over
the language.
Epilogue
The chairman had a
meeting with the individual and the CEO.
The discussion revealed that the lady was committed to the organisation
and wanted to make the event uniquely contemporary. The chairman gave the
go-ahead. The event became a success like never before.
It is now an eagerly
awaited annual fixture, characterised by innovative original ideas.
The lady moved on
to higher pedestals, the CEO continues to lead the organisation to growth.
The chairman,
since retired, spends time penning articles like this.
