The Future of Organisations is anything but, ‘Organisation’
An idealist's take on what the future of work should be.
Hello dear reader,
Today, I request you to please go on a journey with me.
Imagine a world where you are not told or taught what is to be done - but one where instincts are primordial.
You are not governed, yet you know exactly what the right thing to do is.
Imagine then, if we were living in an ideal world - what would the future of work be.
Here is my take.
Nisha
The Future of Organisations is anything but, ‘Organisation’
Ever wondered how harmonious the functioning of nature is? There are no leaders, no organisations or work itself; yet every movement is so perfect. Seasons come and go, birds and animals follow unique patterns, plants have their own synchronous growth process and all elements work together as if performing a well orchestrated melody. So timely, systematic and inconspicuously code-driven. Yet, no one is seemingly governing their process, symphony or code. It is inbuilt, in their DNA.
Juxtapose this with human life. Everything we do is trained, taught and told. Especially at the workplace. We form organisations (defined by the Cambridge dictionary as ‘a group of people who work together in an organised way for a shared purpose’) that require us to conform. In these organisations, we create levels of hierarchy and authority, we further complicate the process by adding power dynamics and obsolete practices to the mix. Unlike nature, we expect people to ‘work in an organised way’; the rules of which are defined by those in power, not collectively.
Does this not strike you as odd?
We have reached a point in time where it is important to question these systems, power dynamics and levels of authority and probably propose a new way of work. The word organisation needs a more evolved definition and so does work (defined as, an activity, such as a job, that a person uses physical or mental effort to do, usually for money). I had recently written a piece, ‘is work dying’, where I had elaborated on probable scenarios of how work will pan out in the future. In this article, I aim to make some suggestions towards tweaking how we have accepted the organisation to be.
Art by Natural Warp
My definition:
“An organisation is a collective of people who want to collaborate together in their own unique way for a shared purpose/ vision or impact.’
There are four distinct changes to the existing definition that I would like to make. By virtue of changing the definition, I would also urge us to think of how we are likely to operate in the future. To me an organisation is anything but ‘organisation’.
The four phases I have added/modified are 1) collective of people 2) want to collaborate together 3) in their own unique way 4) for a shared purpose/ vision or impact. What I am trying to get at is this: in its existing form, an organisation is restricted, governed by a few people and power laws and is not necessarily the breeding ground of creativity, passion or value. What it needs is not only a redefinition, but overhaul in mindset. Very specifically, change in the following areas:
The concept of the organisation itself.
The concept of leadership and authority.
The concept of the office or workplace.
The concept of purpose/ vision and impact.
Let us take each of these concepts and come up with a present-day charter.
The concept of the organisation.
Ever heard of a fish going to the office or a bird giving an interview to join a company? Just as nature's operating expanse is vast and unlimited, so should the nature of an organisation be. In fact the idea is to not even call it an organisation anymore but a collective. A collective is defined as a business that is controlled by people who work in it. The difference between an organisation and collective is that a collective is managed without any hierarchy. It can continue to be a for-profit enterprise, however, what changes in this model is that a collective operates across geographies, is not restricted in its offerings and the biggest differentiator being an inbuilt code. This code is created by people who want to work together collectively (without any hierarchy). It is mostly learned and followed, without any single individual governing another. If the code has to change, people come together and vote (everyone has a voice). Profits are equally shared and every individual is equally responsible for the success or failure of this collective.
What I propose is not far-fetched - some countries and industries already have collectives and one such example is Assemble, a London-based collective whose work spans the fields of art, architecture and design. Focusing on projects that involve and benefit the people who use and inhabit them, they merge artistic expression and social activism in a community-oriented way. They have remained true to the cause and put people first in their operations so far.
The concept of leadership and authority.
Biomimetic leadership is a pioneering research framework that considers nature as a model and mentor. A research paper by Andrea Somoza-Norton and Shawna Whitfield, of California Polytechnic State University explores the various leadership lessons nature offers to us.
Take for example, honey bees. They are known for demonstrating remarkable leadership signals among non-human vertebrates for their collaboration, self-organisation and networking. Flocks of birds dance across the sky as if following a choreography, and they have no director or leaders. These birds follow some simple rules of self-organisation that result in perfect alignment. Similarly, termites are known to have ingenious communication structures that allow them to effectively communicate despite the size of their colonies. These actions are called, ‘stigmergy’ - a mechanism of indirect coordination through the environment and its agents.
Nature is known to be the biggest exponent of systems thinking that can transform rapidly for survival. It is always self-organising and creating internal rules and new orders that fosters meaningful conversations among its beings and also a perennial never ending force that adapts to any circumstance. Just what the modern day world needs - yet, nature has no CEOs! Systems thinking uses habits, tools and concepts to develop an understanding of interdependent structures of dynamic systems. When individuals have a better understanding of systems, they are better able to identify the leverage points to achieve desired outcomes. Today, the systems thinking approach is used in several industries like education and healthcare where a particular situation is first studied and solutions are then derived. The overall point is this, leadership and authority is man made. Especially at work. If thought about deeply, these age-old systems can be replaced by many practical solutions where people can collaborate instead of wield power. Call it the cosmic dance, if you may and it is possible.
The concept of the office or workplace.
Workspaces and offices are the biggest killers of creativity. They are boxes that expect humans to reflect the same box behaviour. If anything, an organisation is but a box. It is almost a living organism. In the animal world, an office or building or box would be considered a cage, how is it then that as humans, we do not realise how caged these buildings have made us and our minds. Left to me, I would never work out of an office space. Don't get me wrong, I love collaboration, but in open spaces. How about we move to forests or nature or green spaces for work. Normalise city infrastructure that enables people working out in the open.
Chronic stress and burnout are key issues workers face today. Several studies prove how working in nature or close to it enhances well being and reduces anxiety. Can we learn from the Japanese method of tree-bathing called shinrin-yoku? Shinrin in Japanese means “forest,” and yoku means “bath.” So shinrin-yoku means bathing in the forest atmosphere, or taking in the forest through our senses. Never before in human history have we been so distanced and removed from nature as now. Concrete is a way of life and somehow we are OK with it. Though, if we want some kind of semblance back, this has to change and our contact with nature has to be more seamless and integrated. The International Living Future Institute is an organisation that believes in reconciling humanity’s relationship with the natural world. They have come up with various challenges like the Living Buildings Challenge, the Living Community and Product challenge to create buildings, products and communities that align with nature.
The concept of purpose vs. impact.
I question the existence of workplace ‘purpose’. I am unclear about whose purpose does the workplace cater to (the Founder, Investor, Shareholder, Customer or Employee?) - it certainly cannot be all. In such a context, seeking purpose from our work may sound self-defeating. However, whether it is a millennial or GenZ, each generation wants to find meaning in what they do. Since we spend 8-10 hours working, it is only natural to seek purpose through work. Yet, so many people I speak to today (in their 30s), are disillusioned with work. If workplace purpose is so gratifying, why are so many people unhappy?
My theory is that the concept of purpose is flawed. Especially when ‘purpose’ is used as a camouflage to capitalistic intent. No harm being capitalistic, in fact every business must be - what is incorrect is to sell a larger purpose, when the intent to create one does not exist. Rather, in our world of unorganisation, the vision is stated simply and realistically. It can be impact (on stakeholders and customers or employees or just maximising revenue), but there is no camouflage. It is worn as a badge of honour and derived collectively by those who are building. Purpose to me, can never be one-sided.
Some examples of mission statements that inspire me and seem to hold true:
TED: Spread ideas.
Patagonia: We’re in business to save our home planet.
I may be an idealist, but I am basing my theories on ideas that are already being practised in various parts of the world. Through the concept of unorganisation, I am evoking each of us to wake up to the larger raison d'etre. And that certainly is not ‘organisation’.
***