Archiv der Kategorie: Management

Here you find topics like planning, organization and leadership.

Dynamic limits

In a world that is evaluated and assessed become more and more limits significant. It is difficult to get through the jungle of data. For this reason orientation levels are determined, so-called limits. In Germany, for example, the limit for radioactive radiation is 20mSv per year and/or 400 mSv for the entire working life. In Japan, TepCo increased the limits in the course of the accident of Fukushima from 100 to 250 mSv per year. This shows that limits are not cast in stone. Limits change.

Blutbild

The variability is defined by the appropriate organizations – authorities and specialized institutions. Goal is the definition of the value from where negative effects are expected, e.g. health risks from radiation, noise or harmful substances in food.

Limits have the following weaknesses.

  • They refer to separated circumstances – individual substance or an individual sound.
  • They relate to a certain period.
  • They are defined for healthy people.
  • They are valid for average humans.
  • They do not consider reciprocal effects or gradual accumulations.

and

  • They are not naturally given, but bureaucratically determined.
  • They are compromises between the involved stakeholders.
  • They depend on the state of science at the moment the definition.
  • They depend on scientific proof.
  • They are changed again and again.

and

  • Within the limits, it is by definition healthy.
  • Outside of the limits, it is by definition unhealthy.
  • The difference between healthy and not healthy is very small – for people exposed to radiation in Germany 19 mSv per year are considered harmless and 21 mSv per year as dangerous (Japanese limits see above).

Bottom line: Limits should be looked at critically, since they suggest security, but are based on determination that can be changed at any time. Neither the basic conditions of the definition, nor the interaction of different aspects or the apparently objective criteria provide watertight statements. Limits develop continuously to a political instrument. For these reasons, they should always be questioned critically.

You must be able to afford decentralized bureaucracy

As soon as you give Mr. Hammer a hammer, everything looks like a nail. This curse began with the division of labor. This creates in parallel Screwdrivers, Sawyers, Grinders, Painters, Welders, and Gluers etc. Everybody is brim-fill of energy and designs the environment depending on its specialty. In a similar way, administrative or better bureaucratic functions evolve in the enterprises and the public administration. All undertake dedicated their tasks and produce one administrative act after the other. How can you stop this fate?

Komplexes Netz

Let us consider as an example a group company that has its headquarters somewhere in the world. In different regions are local headquarters that have a similar structure and tasks. The Headquarter (HQ) controls the local headquarters (LHQ) that control the locations. All have staff positions that develop eagerly strategies, target values and guidelines – everyone, of course, for its area of responsibility. The result is a flood of regulations that develops redundantly, overlaps and often contradicts. Due to ever more hierarchical levels, this effect multiplies.

The following measures might defuse this development.

  1. Clear, non-overlapping distribution of tasks, authorities and responsibilities
    Everyadministration gets an aligned bundle of tasks, clear authorities and obligations. This avoids duplication of work, creates fewer regulations and a smaller variety of interpretations. The related units streamline themselves.
  2. Bundling of roles at the highest level
    The higher regulations are positioned in the hierarchy, the more uniform and the more economical become the results. This is particularly valid for basic guidelines, like e.g. the reporting system, performance reviews, or travel guidelines.
  3. Defined escalation and decision procedures
    Most of the friction losses result from unclear or competitive decisions. The clear, for all available descriptions of the decision levels, procedures and related committees enables all to obey the official channels.
  4. Defined reprisals in case of infringement
    Rules that are not connected with painful punishments, defuse the requirements. An understandable catalogue of implications for offenses increases the probability of compliance.

Bottom line: In each organization, no matter how large or distributed around the world, bureaucratization can be reduced by re-organizing the competencies. For this purpose redundancy-free roles are needed that are as high as possible established, with clear official channels and are provided with valid sanctions.

P.S.: The example of the European Union shows the same tendency. As long as the European Union can afford the luxury of national right in competition to the European right, enormous amounts of tax funds are wasted on unnecessary administration – quite apart from the bureaucratic hurdles between the 28 member states. The non-overlapping distribution of tasks, the establishment of the regulating agencies on the highest level, clear official channels for each European Union-citizen and for all a binding, uniform juridical system would make bureaucratic operational sequences easier. The bundling of national tasks within the European Union could save ten percent of the national bureaucracies.