making high performance last reflections on involvement, culture, and power in organizations

In our work as performance consultants we face many challenging questions. Some

of these questions help us understand the critical importance of employee

involvement in achieving and sustaining superior performance. We are talking of

the kind of involvement that is built into the organization’s culture and structure

and that challenges traditional views of leadership and power.

Let us look at a couple of the recurring questions we ask ourselves in every project we

embark on:1. What will happen once this particular process or intervention is over? This ques-

tion helps us deal with one of the paradoxes in performance consulting, which isalso a paradox in business leadership. Building a high-performing organizationrequires systematic effort and visionary thinking, but in order to do that you alsoneed to deliver short-term business results and successfully integrate learning andrenewal into the daily life of the organization.

The issue of durability is a critical aspect of performance improvement initia-

tives, not only a desirable effect. After all, how high performing is the high per-

formance that won’t last?

2. Who sets the agenda before, during, and after the project? The second question hasto do with leadership, power relations, and the cultural conditions to achieve signif-icant and lasting performance improvement. It helps us understand the balance orlack of balance between different voices in the organization and its stakeholders.Who are we really working for? If we succeed, who will win? Every performance gapcontains an involvement gap, which may or may not be acknowledged.

The main purpose of this article is to explain the relationship between employee

involvement and superior business performance. First, we introduce the core elements

of performance, a simple, behavior-based model describing the three key requirements

for sustained performance improvement in organizations. Second, we explain what

employee involvement is and discuss its challenges and rewards. Third, we look at the

balance between organizational culture and structure as a key dimension of involve-

ment and performance improvement. The fourth section poses some provoking ques-

tions about power relations, myths, and practices that may undermine organizations’

capacity to release their full potential.

Performance Improvement • Volume 44 • Number 6 31

Making High Performance Last

Reflections on Involvement, Culture,and Power in Organizations

by Juan Pablo Ortiz and Lisa Arnborg

32 www.ispi.org • JULY 2005

The Core Elements of Performance

In a recent study on corporate performance in largeSwedish companies, we found that a great majority oftop-level managers were convinced that, by eliminat-ing a number of internal obstacles, their organizationscould increase their overall performance by no lessthan 20%-30% (YesP, 2004). The most common obsta-cles mentioned were—• lack of a common sense of direction• ineffective communication• bad leadership• poor execution• resistance to change

The study also showed that despite good awareness ofthe problems, eliminating these obstacles oftenproved to be easier said than done. According to themanagers themselves, the gap between the awarenessof these problems and effective change generates a lotof frustration.

We typically meet companies that do a good job inmany areas but still perform at a level far from theirown expectations and potential. Why? Let us consider someexplanations:• Top-down view of how organizational effectiveness

can be improved• Neglecting the fact that organizations are social

constructions• Linear, cause-effect view of improvement in the

organization• Doing what everybody else is doing and hoping that it

will help, that is, importing best practices• Assuming that effective implementation is a natural

consequence of an excellent plan• Taking a single perspective for the whole truth• Change initiatives dealing only with symptoms• Isolating issues—attempting to solve system problems

at just one level • Lack of courage to challenge prevailing structures

and behaviors• Fear of chaos and letting go• No alignment between strategy and culture• Poor communication practices before, during, and

after improvement initiatives are implemented• One-size-fits-all mentality• Poor understanding of the difference between a desired

state and the transition required to get there

Many factors affect organizational performance. Externalfactors include competition, regulations, community, andprevailing economic conditions. Some internal factorsinclude the business model, financial security, quality,technology, organizational design, recruitment, incentives,

skills and knowledge, diversity, values, collaboration, andcommunication.

In our work, we have defined three core elements of perfor-mance, which are the absolute musts to achieve sustainedhigh performance in any organization. All other strengths,practices, and conditions may influence and reinforce thecore elements, but they cannot replace them.

The core elements of performance are measurable and con-nected to observable behaviors at individual, process, andorganizational levels. As we will discuss, they are basedon an approach that focuses on the impact of culture onperformance.

The core elements of performance also represent three mainspheres of employee involvement:• Engagement• Action and results• Learning

Will and Common Vision

The will and vision of a few is not enough for organizationsto remain successful. Also, the full power of a collective pur-pose can only be unleashed when a majority of the organiza-tion’s employees hold as meaningful the desired state ordream of the future. This synergy cannot be imposed on peo-ple. When individuals take an authentic stand for a purpose,it shows on their behavior. For will and common vision tolast, leaders need to be credible role models, passionate, andprepared to share their dream and their success with others.

Figure 1. The Core Elements of Performance.


We consider that there are six key principles of will andcommon vision:• Every employee understands the top corporate goals,

finds them attractive, and makes a personal commitmentto work for a common vision.

• Management drives vision and strategy forcefully, result-ing in loyalty to core competencies.

• There is clear differentiation between ends and means,so goals guide behavior in the organization.

• Performance and alignment are in focus.• Social and ethical concerns are high on the agenda.• Personal and corporate values are compatible.

Drive and Ability to Take Action

Execution is the Achilles heel of many organizations.Employees, teams, and departments need to understand theirspecific contribution to business goals. Priorities must becrystal clear, and the consequences of high or low perfor-mance must be known by all. The organization needs to bedesigned so it is easy and attractive for people to do their best.At least execution should not be an obstacle to performance.The ability to take action builds on accountability, trust, andcourage. More focus on standards and values and less focuson control can mean more action and better results.

We see six key principles in the ability to take action:• Clear focus and priorities for best use of time and

resources• Short- and long-term visible results• Momentum in decision making and discipline

in implementation• Courage• Accountability, trust, and collaboration• Structures designed to meet goals and enhance

performance

Feedback and Renewal

It’s impossible to improve performance without renewal.This means individuals, teams, and the organization as awhole are prepared to discover new and better ways of get-ting the job done. Learning requires moving outside of ourcomfort zone and challenging our need for security and con-trol. We need not only to adopt new ways and ideas, but alsoto let go of old practices and beliefs. Self-awareness is neces-sary to do this continuously. Insight of what is good andwhat needs to change comes from reliable data and an opendialogue. Feedback is a result-oriented practice of effectivecommunication that ensures continuous improvement. Thequality and frequency of feedback give a good indication ofthe organization’s willingness and capacity for renewal.

Again, we see six key principles of feedback in renewal:• Insight into what is good and what can be better• Prompt responses to changes in the environment

• An ability to let go for the sake of innovation andinventiveness

• Continuous feedback aimed at and effectively promotingperformance improvement at all levels

• Celebrations of success• Diversity and learning

The Reasons for and Rewards of Employee Involvement

The way many employees experience their own work situa-tion today is paradoxical in many organizations. On one hand,employees feel they have too much to do and find it difficultto accomplish all their responsibilities. On the other hand, thesame employees may feel that many of their tasks are not con-nected to top corporate goals and that their job does not allowthem to make use of their full potential, skills, or ideas.

In 2002 Franklin Covey teamed with Harris Interactive toadminister an assessment of execution covering 11,000respondents: executives, managers, and front-line workers in10 functional areas in 10 major US industries (Franklin Covey,2003). Some results from this study are useful to illustrate thechallenge of authentic involvement and effective alignment: • Only 28% of respondents agreed that their organization

focuses intensely on the few, most important goals.• Only 43% said that their organization clearly communi-

cated its most important goals to employees.• Fewer than 25% could name their organization’s top

three priorities.• Only 31% of respondents agreed with the statement,

“We work in an atmosphere of trust where people canexpress opinions freely.”

Organizations are a meeting place. They are socio-culturalsystems that will—or should—reflect their members’ needsin their structures and processes. All corporate change beginsin the realm of the individuals and the relationships betweenthem: new ideas, insights, reactions, decisions, and emotions.

Yet individuals do not perform in a vacuum (Rummler &Brache, 1995). The sum of all employees’ skills and knowl-edge, their personalities, backgrounds, and dreams are allinterwoven in a complex system also shaped by the organi-zation’s business, culture, processes, and working environ-ment. Effective leadership is the glue that holds the piecestogether by providing direction and creating meaning.

Meaning

The relationship between meaning, engagement, action, andresults is one of the main reasons employee involvement isimportant to achieving and sustaining high performance.

Meaning at work can be defined as the relationship betweena job or a task and the larger context in which it takes place


and to which it contributes. Meaning should not be takenfor granted. Research shows that employees are more likelyto experience and create meaning if they encounter oppor-tunities for personal growth in an organization that willencourage caring, supportive, and ultimately productiverelationships.

Meaningfulness is more about hopes, dreams, and fulfil-ment and less about needs and expectations. Business mod-els, strategies, and management theories are seldom seen asa source of meaning. There is no direct connection eitherbetween pay and meaning.

Change and performance improvement are, in essence, adynamic process of constructing and reconstructing mean-ing out of our daily experience and our ultimate goals.

Values

Mission and vision statements are meaningless unlessemployees are held accountable for putting the valuesbehind them into action. To some extent, our personalvalues need to be in alignment with the values demon-strated and supported at our workplace. Otherwise wefeel dissatisfied and unsettled and find it difficult totruly feel commitment.

Research indicates that some of the specific benefits of focus-ing and practicing company values include the following:• Trust and fairness enhance creativity.• Employees are more likely to support management

decisions.• Employees are more likely to think of what’s best for

the company.• Employees want to see their bosses as role models.• Employees feel more pride and ownership in their

organization.• Employees are more likely to share knowledge and

learn from one another.• Partnership with customers, suppliers, and other stake-

holders builds on trust and often leads to higher prof-itability (Sharp Paine, 2003)

Trust

Trust is the cornerstone of positive, constructive relation-ships. Without it, engagement is not real. Commitment, loy-alty, or willingness to change and improve cannot beexpected when people are forced into doing their work.Creativity comes from trust.

Three basic components of trust are —• Credibility: the belief that you can count on a person’s

word, intensified by a positive experience of havingdone so in the past

• Consideration: treating others as equals• Respect: relating with appreciation and assuming others

are doing their best.

You need to give trust to get it. The essence of trust buildingis to emphasize the similarities between yourself and others.Superior performance requires a culture of trust, one thatbuilds on sound relationships and upholds collaborativeefforts to achieve common goals.

Communication

Everything that happens in an organization is part of an ongo-ing dialogue. An intensive, constructive dialogue creates aclear sense of direction, stimulates innovation, and strength-ens collaboration. It makes individuals, teams, and organiza-tions more effective. Communication and trust go hand inhand and are the basic ingredients of a winning culture.

Communication means finding something “in common”with one another. It is an acknowledgement of the fact thatpeople are different and an issue can be approached frommany different perspectives.

Effective communication cannot be imposed on people. Itcan, however, be practiced, encouraged, and rewarded.

Whole-System Involvement

“The essence of high performance work arrangements isreliance on all organizational members for their ideas, intel-ligence, and commitment to making the organization suc-cessful” (Pfeffer, 1998).

In performance improvement, whole-system involvement iscritical.

Having more people involved from the start buildsoverall organizational commitment and momentum.Diversity is essential in that no one group or part ofthe organization can speak for the whole. Each group,level, or function has its unique perspective, inter-ests, or ideals. Only when the whole system is presentcan topics inspire the whole organization to higherlevels of well-being and achievement. (Whitney andTrosten-Bloom, 2003, p. 135)

In his analysis of the principles by which culture influenceseffectiveness, Denison argues that—

high levels of involvement and participation create asense of ownership and responsibility. Out of thisownership grows a greater commitment to the organi-zation and a lesser need for an overt control system.There is support for the idea that both formal andinformal sources of involvement contribute to organi-zational effectiveness. (Denison, 1990)


Balancing Culture and Structure

The relationship between organizational culture and struc-ture is critical for business performance. Many of the mostwell-known management models, production systems,tools, and techniques can help companies deliver goodresults, but most of the time these tools and systems do notautomatically lead to high performance.

What high-performing companies do have in common arehigh scores on the core elements of performance and a goodbalance between strategy, culture, and structure.

Cultural and structural systems are mutually dependent. Theycan shape and influence each other, but they cannot replace orsubstitute one another. Short-term structural measures, forinstance, will not solve cultural weaknesses. Likewise,attempting to change cultural values will seldom compensatefor a flawed system or deficient organizational structure.

However, culture and structure serve the same purpose inmany ways. They both influence behavior by reducing

uncertainty in work situations, of which theremay exist multiple and conflicting interpreta-tions. A lack of balance between culture andstructure, on the other hand, may lead to exactlythe opposite: confusion, frustration, and distrust.

All efforts put into building up the structuralsystem will reflect—positively or negatively—in the attitudes and behaviors of the culturalsystem. The prevailing culture is the true mea-sure of how management’s efforts impact dailywork at all levels of the organization. While thestructural system tells us what needs to be doneand how to do it, the cultural system deter-mines whether it will get done.

Company Culture

Company culture is the unwritten code of conduct that gov-erns the behavior, attitudes, relationships, and style of theorganization. It is shaped by a pattern of shared assump-tions and meanings. Cultural traits become visible in theway people solve problems and interact with time, witheach other, and with the environment.

Key elements of the cultural system include the following:• Power: Role and symbols of status, structures of power,

and decision making in the organization• Leadership: Accepted leadership styles and behaviors; level

of personal initiative and proactive behavior; role models• Rituals: How, when, where, and how often and effi-

ciently people meet and communicate; expectationsand perceptions of those involved in formal and infor-mal meetings

• Values: What each individual experiences as themotives, meaning, and purpose of their work; what isconsidered important in the organization?

Figure 2. Structural System—What Needs to Be Done and How to Do It; CulturalSystem—Whether It Will Get Done.

• Encourage involvement as a driving force, results-driven and solution-oriented.

• Challenge the truths and assessments you get from top management.• Communicate the purpose of surveys and assessments in advance,

make sure the results reach all respondents, and organize interactivefollow-up meetings with groups at all levels of the organization.

• Implement as you analyze, from day one.• Go from systems thinking to systems involvement.• Use action learning, open space, group coaching, and other highly

participatory methods to involve employees in the design and imple-mentation of solutions.

• Meet performers in their workplace and encourage them to share their stories.

• Reframe complaints and incriminations into shared dreams and forward-looking proposals.

• Promote ownership and accountability through top-down, bottom-up,and peer-to-peer structured dialogue and sharing.

• Build trust and partnership at all levels.• Encourage awareness of how status and power structures impact

overall performance and results.• Focus on involvement and alignment around core processes.• Address needs and contributions of all key stakeholders and the

relationships between them.• Implement at all levels of the organization: management, units, teams,

and individuals.• Secure balance between culture and structure.• Secure balance between short- and long-term planning and action.• Coach managers in employee involvement skills and strategies.

How to Ensure Employee Involvement in Performance Consulting


Culture emerges and develops through a natural process.Managers may influence but not fully control this process.Even if a relatively homogenous company culture emerges,this doesn’t mean there is a single culture shared by all partsof the organization. Unique and diverging cultures oftendevelop in different departments, units, or teams.

Cultures that encourage inappropriate behavior and inhibitchange to more appropriate strategies tend to emergeslowly and quietly over a period of years, usually whenfirms are performing well. Once these cultures exist, theycan be enormously difficult to change because they areoften invisible to the people involved and because theyhelp support the existing power structure in the firm(Goffer & Jones, 1998).

Company Structure

Structure can be defined as a mechanism to optimize effortand use of resources in the organization by coordinatingand controlling tasks and processes. It can also bedescribed as the degree of centralization of decision mak-ing, formalization of rules, authority, and communication.Others prefer to think of structure as the standardization ofwork processes, outputs, and skills (Mintzberg, 1979; Katzand Kahn, 1978).

Key elements of the structural system include the following:• Strategies: Focus on the requirements to realize the orga-

nization’s mission and goals• Organization: Roles and responsibilities within the orga-

nization and how they interact with one another• Policy: Principles and guidelines for expected behaviors

at different levels of the organization, both internally andexternally

• Process: Workflow and routines within theorganization; the series of steps or actions thatadd value to a product, service, or plan andthat lead to a desired result or output.

In the end, what really matters is understand-ing which structural elements boost humanperformance and which ones obstruct or delaybetter results.

Interaction Between Company Culture and Company Structure

The elements in the cultural system legitimizethe organization’s structure. This means thatstructure will only be performance enhancing tothe extent to which culture allows it to be. Inturn, the elements in the structural system sup-port the organization’s culture. This means thatstructure is meaningful as long as it backs up the

essential and most positive aspects of the prevailing culture,while encouraging the development of new cultural featuresrequired in reaching goals and objectives.

Achieving performance gains is not an automatic byproductof building a cohesive and confident culture. It also takespurposeful management (Deal & Kennedy, 1999). When cul-ture becomes dysfunctional, strong leadership is needed tohelp the organization unlearn some of its cultural assump-tions and learn new assumptions (Schein, 1997).

Involvement and Power Relations: Challenging Old Truths

High performance requires the company to have one mainagenda, recognized and endorsed by all employees. Leadersface the challenge of making this agenda viable in terms ofprofitability, capability, and culture. They are responsiblefor aligning all work, all processes, and all resources withthe company’s mission and strategic direction.

While leadership and commitment at the top is perhaps themost visible success factor for sustained performanceimprovement, the challenges facing organizations today andin the future will gradually erode the predominant top-downview of organizational effectiveness. Leadership will still beimportant, but it will build on new premises, with higherregard for other success factors in the system and increasedunderstanding of how individual effort, constructive relation-ships, and complex networks impact business performance.

In addition, change success and durability depends on crit-ical mass. As employees’ participation grows, their priori-ties expand to include larger strategic issues traditionallyreserved as management rights or the domain of leadershipexperts (Cutcher-Gershenfeld, Nitta, & Barrett, 1998).

Figure 3. A Gap That Affects Performance.

The gap between management and employees in many orga-nizations is today a major obstacle for strategic alignmentand improved performance. It is a gap in resources, pay,credit, status, and power. Management and managers arefrequently overestimated in terms of how much value theycreate for the organization and how much credit theydeserve for accomplished results. Higher involvement isrequired because employees in many organizations have lit-tle or no input in decisions that affect them directly, andthis is hardly performance enhancing.

References

Cutcher-Gershenfeld, J., Nitta, M., & Barrett, B. (1998).Virtual knowledge: cross-cultural diffusion of Japanese and U.S. work practices. Japanese business and economicseries. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.

Deal, T., & Kennedy, A. (1999). The new corporatecultures. New York: Perseus Publishing.

Denison, D.R. (1990). Corporate culture and organizationaleffectiveness. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Epps, J. (2003). The journey of meaning at work. GroupFacilitation: A Research and Applications Journal, 5. St.Paul, MN: International Association of Facilitators.

Franklin Covey (2003). The real leadership challenge: Top-to-bottom focus and execution. White paper. Salt Lake City, UT: Franklin Covey.

Goffer, R., & Jones, G. (1998). The character of a corporation. New York: Harper Business.

Katz, D., & Kahn, R. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations.Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Rummler, G., & Brache, A. P. (1995). Improving performance: How to manage the white space on the organization chart. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation. Boston: HarvardBusiness School Press.

Schein, E.H. (1997). Organizational culture andleadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Sharp Paine, L. (2003). Value shift: Why companies mustmerge social and financial imperatives to achieve superiorperformance. Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill.

Whitney, D., & Trosten Bloom, A. (2003). The power ofappreciative inquiry. San Francisco: Berrett-KoehlerPublishers.

YesP AB & Business Region Göteborg (2004). CEO's in theWest of Sweden: Views on performance, potentials andobstacles. Study Report. Gothenburg, Sweden.

Juan Pablo Ortiz is a performance consultant, currently engaged in projectswith public and private organizations in Sweden and other European countries. Hehas played a leading role in the development of different assessment instrumentsfor organizational performance and is passionate about an interdisciplinaryapproach to performance consulting. Juan Pablo has a broad professional back-ground in different fields. He has held a CEO position in the information technol-ogy industry and worked for several years with human development issues in theUnited Nations system. Juan Pablo holds a degree in Journalism andCommunication. He may be reached at [email protected].

Lisa Arnborg has 15 years’ experience as a management and performanceconsultant. As one of the founders of YesP AB, she is devoted to helping orga-nizations realize their full potential and achieve their goals and vision. With adeep understanding of the dynamics of individual and collective change, Ms.Arnborg has facilitated a large number of change and performance improve-ment processes in different countries and industries. Ms. Arnborg has a back-ground in theater, business coaching, change management, and strategicbrand management. She may be reached at [email protected].


making high performance last reflections on involvement, culture, and power in organizations

Documents