From Organic to Organizational

We explore the evolution of the term "organization" from "organ" and highlights the reversal in understanding from human body functions to structured social systems. Despite advancements in understanding social systems, organizations still adhere to traditional order. Real-world examples show that embracing "bounded freedom" enhances adaptability and innovation, challenging the illusion of control and predictability. The text argues for leadership to navigate complexity by balancing order and freedom, encouraging organizations to relinquish rigid control for more dynamic, organic development. This perspective emphasizes that freedom doesn't equate to chaos, advocating for a flexible approach to organizational growth. #organization, #leadership, #innovation, #adaptability, #socialsystems, #complexity, #flexibility

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
Welcome to the Colig Experience episode.

(00:06):
Today, we're diving into a world of bold insights, experimentation,
and groundbreaking leadership strategies.
In this episode, we'll explore how true
organizational success stems from embracing complexity
and relinquishing control to let natural order and innovation flourish.
Let's get started.

(00:29):
Today, we use the term organic to represent something living,
something that grows and develops.
An organism is a living creature, and an organ is a part of a living being.
Yet this same root is also used to describe an organization.
It would seem logical that the word organization,

(00:49):
referring to a collective of people, evolved from the word organ,
referring to the basic human unit of the organization,
but in fact, the process was reversed.
By the 17th century, when the term organism began to be used
to describe living creatures, the word organization already existed.

(01:12):
The scientific understanding at that time was that the human body operates
in a very orderly manner, according to clear rules,
and requires balance to maintain health.
According to this view, illness was an imbalance,
and medicine was the process of restoring this balance.
What's fascinating is that the word 17th century scholars found most

(01:35):
appropriate for describing living beings was borrowed from organizations,
which were themselves perceived as orderly systems.
In the centuries since, science and medicine have developed tremendously,
and we now understand much more about how living organisms function.
Our bodies are indeed organized in remarkable ways,

(01:55):
but their operating systems are vastly more complex than what was understood
when their name was borrowed from a word whose purpose was order and organization.
Yet unlike the enormous scientific advances regarding living organisms,
when it comes to organizations, we still largely think in terms of those
same orderly, structured systems. This is surprising for two reasons.

(02:21):
First, we know considerably more today about how social systems work.
Psychology and sociology, which have developed over the last 150 years,
have given us important tools that allow us to better understand
organizational operating systems. We witnessed this first hand while
working with a major telecommunications company.

(02:43):
Their leadership team was struggling with implementing a new customer service protocol.
The traditional approach would have been to create detailed process maps and strict guidelines.
Instead, we helped them recognize the social dynamics at play.
By understanding how information naturally flowed through their teams

(03:04):
and leveraging existing relationships, rather than imposing artificial structures,
adoption happened organically at twice the expected rate.
The new system emerged from within rather than being imposed from above.
Second, human society itself has changed dramatically, especially in the western world.

(03:27):
The gap between the society we live in today and that of 200-300 years ago is enormous.
Since organizations have always been part of the social system,
it's natural to expect them to be influenced and changed by the environments in which they operate.
Organizations in the 21st century are complex creatures operating in highly complex environments.

(03:51):
There is room for order and organization, but they also require freedom and movement
to change and adapt to the fluid realities surrounding them.
Our position at Co-League is that leadership's role in this era is to work with this complexity
and navigate it wisely and courageously.
At this point, it's important to emphasize that our starting position is not anarchistic.

(04:17):
We don't advocate for chaos and we're not opposed to order.
The perspective from which we view leadership is the ability to lead within complexity.
The issue is that the complexity of modern life, both organizational and personal,
pushes us to constantly seek order.
We desire order because it promises a kind of predictability,

(04:41):
which reduces the anxiety that complexity creates within us.
We seek order for another reason.
Order instills in us a sense of control.
The truth is that both predictability and the sense of control are illusions.
They're psychological defense mechanisms that protect us from the unbearable nature of complexity

(05:04):
and uncertainty.
Defense mechanisms are important psychological features that, as their name suggests,
are designed to protect us.
But nothing comes for free.
These defense mechanisms have a cost.
One of the costs of our desire to be in control and plan the future
is that we try to turn our organization into something well, organized.

(05:28):
This might sound absurd, but it's not fitting.
Organizations cannot thrive when they are too organized.
We saw this clearly while working with a pharmaceutical research division.
Their highly structured approach to research and development had created predictability
but stifled innovation.
When we helped them create what we call bounded freedom,

(05:52):
clearly defined desired outcomes with much more flexibility in how teams reached those outcomes.
They discovered three novel compound applications in six months after a two-year innovation drought.
To flourish in times of such great uncertainty and complexity, organizations need freedom.

(06:12):
Lots of freedom, for some reason, most of us perceive freedom as something that doesn't align
with order.
And this may be the central point of this essay.
Order is not control and freedom is not anarchy.
Organizational freedom can create order, but it's an order that cannot be predicted in advance

(06:32):
and certainly cannot be controlled.
It's an organizational order that will never emerge if those at the helm of the organization
don't dare to relinquish their defense mechanisms and their control over what will happen and how it will happen.
When we're captive to the concept of the organized organization,
we limit our organization to one single order, the order that exists between our ears.

(06:59):
If we give it freedom, we may not know how the organization will arrange itself,
but we might discover that it has thought of a much more successful approach than our own.
As we wrap up today's podcast, remember that success in modern organizations comes from
balancing structure with the freedom to innovate, just like the telecommunications and pharmaceutical

(07:24):
companies that thrived by embracing complexity.
Don't forget to like, subscribe, and share this episode with your friends and colleagues,
so they can also stay updated on the latest news and gain powerful insights.
Stay tuned for more updates.