Business process reengineering as communication genres in space electronics

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Request accessible transcript

Transcript (if available)

Content INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI
fihns the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some
thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be
from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the
copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality
illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins,
and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete
manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if
unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate
the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by
sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and
continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each
original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced
form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced
xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9” black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations
appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to
order.
UMI
A Bell & Howell Information Company
300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor MI 48106-1346 USA
313/761-4700 800/521-0600
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
BUSINESS PROCESS REENINGEERING AS COMMUNICATION
GENRES E S T SPACE ELECTRONICS
by
David Coleman Logan
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(C ommunication)
December 1997
Copyright 1997 David Coleman Logan
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
UMI Number: 9835089
UMI Microform 9835089
Copyright 1998, by UMI Company. All rights reserved.
This microform edition is protected against unauthorized
copying under Title 17, United States Code.
UMI
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, Ml 48103
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY PARK
LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90007
This dissertation, written by
David.. C —D ogsw.........................................
under the direction of h.Xs Dissertation
Committee, and approved by all its members,
has been presented to and accepted by The
Graduate School in partial fulfillm ent of re
quirements for the degree of
D O CTO R OF PHILOSOPHY
of Graduate Studies
Date September 19, 1997
DISSERTATION COMMITTEE
Chairperson
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
Dedication
To Susan—who made all this possible
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
Ill
Ackno wledgem ents
When I started the process of pursuing a Ph.D., a close friend
gave me words of advice that have stayed with me. He said that “no
one has ever obtained their Ph.D. alone.” True words indeed. I would
like to extend my th anks to people who literally made this possible:
To Patti Riley, for being both a mentor and a friend, in addition
to dissertation chair and advisor. Your views on organizational change
are as grounded as they are ground-breaking, and your optimism has
encouraged me many times.
To Michael Cody, for being an inspiration since I began studying
at u s e in 1992. You are an excellent researcher, an outstanding
teacher, and a constantly supportive presence. Thanks for giving me a
model for which to aim.
To Tom Cum m ings, for your excellence at teaching and
research, along with your extraordinary sense of humor. If I can be
half as funny as you, ITl die a happy man.
To Dr. Tim Wong and all the kind people at the space electronics
organization, for your hospitality and kindness.
To Douglas Andrews, for your mix of encouragement and
prodding, along with your constant friendship. If it weren’ t for you, I
would probably be a member of the “ABD Forever” club.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
IV
To the “ BUCO gang”—Laree, Tom, Paul, Jim, Denise, Ellen,
Anne, Shirley, Donna and Steve—thanks. Your sense of humor is
rivaled only by that of Tom Cummings.
The old CAAS group—especially Jennie, Deborah, Lisa. It was
a great few years, and I’ m honored to count you as friends.
To a team of supporters that I couldn’ t have done this without—
Laura Campobasso, Beverly Kaye, John King, Mandy Green, Tom
Lapacka, Bemie Schnippert, Brian Kritzell, Bob Lindberg, and Scott
Weiner—thanks. You’ ve supported me in so many ways.
Most of all—to my mother and father, all I can say is thanks.
Mom, you always encouraged me to study (even when there was
something good on TV), and I suppose that became a habit. Thanks
for taking the hard road and teaching me the hard lessons. You’ re the
one person who always beheved anything was possible; thanks for
imparting that outlook to me. Dad, you always made me believe th at I
could finish the long and winding road that is higher education; your
example of dedication and diligence has become a model that I’ ll never
follow as well as you have.
To everyone else, thanks for the support. I am deeply, deeply
grateful.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
Table of Contents
Dedication iii
Acknowledgements iv
Abstract vi
1. Introduction to Business Process Reengineering
In Space Electronics 1
2. Literature Review: Organizational Change,
R eengineering and Work Redesign 11
3. Literature Review: Teams Involved in Process
Redesign 43
4. Theoretic Framework and Method of Inquiry 69
5. Genres and Power in Practice 100
6. Summary, Conclusions, and Implications 121
Appendix A: Analysis of Genres 138
Appendix B: Interview Questions 145
Appendix C: Interview Response Summary 148
References 159
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
VI
Abstract
This study examines the role of organizational genres as part of an
organizational change effort during business process reengineering.
The study asks three research questions, dealing with how genres are
formed, how they change, and how they serve to coordinate the effort
of a steering team in a major space electronics company.
Data were collected in several forms: documents from a
reengineering steering team, interview notes, and documents produced
during the implementation of reengineering goals. The study uses two
theoretic frameworks to examine changes in organizational genres.
The first, punctuated equilibrium, predicts that organizational change
occurs in sudden bursts separated by long periods of relative calm.
The second, “windows of opportunity,” asserts that change occurs in
gradually diminishing waves. This study attempts to determine which
of these two frameworks offers greater explanatory power in exploring
organizational genres.
The data support several conclusions. First, organizational
genres are very slow to change, and meeting participants will actively
defend established genres. Second, younger genres are quicker to
change than more established genres. Third, people’ s attention
appears to shift firom the content of a genre to the form of a genre
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
v il
during a genre change; during this period, genres appear to undergo
further changes.
It appears that “windows of opportunity” provides a better
explanation of how established genres continue to drift after a major
change. That is, this theory correctly predicts that changes occur in
waves as the new genre form becomes entrenched. It also appears that
“windows of opportunity” is the better theory for explaining how
people’ s attention shifts during a change effort. Yet the data appear to
support punctuated equilibrium’ s major theoretic proposition—that an
established genre will be very resistant to change; the data do not
appear to support the “windows of opportunity” contention that this
resistance is overstated by punctuated equilibrium theorists.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
1
Chapter 1: Introduction to Business Process R eengineering in
Space Electronics
Introduction
This chapter presents a problem statement, outlines the purpose of the
study, discusses the study design, summarizes the sig n ificance of the
study and gives a general introduction to the case. This chapter also
presents the research questions and discusses why this study is
needed.
Problem statement, purpose and significance
Recent research suggests that 70% of business process reengineering
(BPR) interventions fail (Bashein, Markus & Riley, 1994). The
consequences of a failed reengineering effort may be anywhere from
lack of cost-cutting or diminished organizational growth to
organizational disaster (Peters, 1992). Hammer (1996) asserts th at a
reengineering exercise is both absolutely necessary for organizations to
remain competitive, and potentially very dangerous to the
organization’ s well being, since the reengineering will alter the
organization’ s links to its environment. To illustrate the seriousness
and criticality of a BPR, Hammer (1990) advances the metaphor of
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
performing bypass surgery to a patient while he is running a
marathon.
Central to most reengineering efforts is a core team (Finn,
Fulgoni, & Reynard, 1995). The core team is generally responsible for
setting the overall direction, baselining and benchmarking, creating
the new vision, launching problem-solving projects, designing
improvements, implementing changes, embedding continuous
improvement in the new initiative, and evaluating and fine-tuning the
implementation (Harrison & Pratt, 1993). In addition, the core team
members lead the effort, act as champions of the change process, and
serve as key communication links to other parts of the organisation
(Hall, 1994). Thus, the work of the core team has enormous
importance since, if the members are unsuccessful, the entire
organization may be at risk.
Various methods of studying teams involved in process redesign
are presented in chapter three. Many of these methods have proven to
be overly prescriptive (and therefore not useful in describing the
working process of these teams) or ineffective. Several of the theorists
cited call for more careful analyses of group process involved in this
demanding and important work.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
3
One fairly new line of research in the area of organizational
communication is organizational genre analysis (Yates & Orlikowski,
1992). Through methods presented in chapter four, researchers view
how groups create rules through negotiated order, and how these rules
serve to regulate behavior. The advantages of using this framework
are several: the method is a fairly simple way of perform ing a
structurational analysis, and structuration has proven theoretically
informative and practically useful (Giddens, 1984); researchers have a
consistent method which can examine such diverse organizational
phenomena as meetings, memos and flow diagrams; and the method
yields insights into illusive but important rules that coordinate
behavior among individuals in a common context, such as an
organization.
The rationale for this study is three-fold: (1) groups involved in
work redesign have an enormously complex task, and this complexity
has not been examined in sufficient detail; (2) the work of these groups
is very important to the organization, its employees, investors, and
other stakeholders; and (3) any advances in reengineering theory
would have significant benefit for researchers and practitioners.
Studv design
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
4
Chapter four presents this study’ s research questions, which are
discussed in the context of theoretical debate about organizational
change. In brief, these research questions are:
1. How do uses of power serve to coordinate the effort of the group and
create artifacts that converge into genres?
2. Do genres evolve slowly, punctuated by periods of rapid and radical
change, or do they change in smaller and more frequent periods of
change?
3. How do organizational genres serve to produce greater group
coordination, and thus help to accomplish the goals of the
reengineering process?
To answer these research questions, four sources of data were
gathered and analyzed: notes from over 30 meetings of the
organization’ s space electronics reengineering intervention, which
focused on creating the new organizational vision; over 2,000 pages of
documents from these meetings; over 2,000 pages of documents created
during the organization’ s implementation of the new vision; and
follow-up interviews with the members of the reengineering core team.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
A content analysis was performed on the interview transcripts,
and a genre analysis (Devitt, 1991) was conducted on the visioning
documents. Using the implementation data as a means of determining
which genre innovations survived over 18 months, the data
triangulated in such a fashion as to answer, at least in part, the three
interview questions.
Introduction to case
The course of the defense industry and this organization has been
turbulent in the 1990s. As is typical of the industry, this organization
has laid off over 20,000 workers this decade (from a worldwide total of
82,000 to about 51,000), and is struggling to reinvent itself (Deady,
1994).
The crisis began with the end of the Cold War. Ironically, one of
the most victorious events for the United States since World War II
resulted in temporary devastating economic effects. Military spending
is projected to continue its decline to 3.5% of the gross domestic
product in 1997, down from 6.1% in 1988 (Farrell & Mandel, 1992).
Subsequent cuts in defense spending hit U.S. aerospace companies
such as this organization the hardest (Schine, 1991). Over the last ten
years, the aerospace industry has rehed heavily on the military as its
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
6
biggest customer and, as one of the nation’ s biggest military
contractor, this organization is no exception (Farrell and Mandel,
1992; Smith, 1992).
This near total dependency on a single market has proved
difficult for employees in this organization. One study indicated that
44% of laid off aerospace and defense employees had still not found
work up to a year after losing their jobs (Mandel and Smart, 1993).
In response to this crisis, this organization, like many other
aerospace companies, had to seek a new vision for itself. However,
after decades of heavy militari.«stir influence, converting into a market
driven enterprise is not easy. As predicted from the organizational
change hterature, one factor which stands in the way is organizational
culture (Budiansky, 1992, p.58).
According to the Washington Post, the defense sector’ s
restructuring effort began in earnest in 1990 (Pearlstein, 1992).
However, it has been slow going. William A. Anders, Chairman of
General Dynamics has been quoted as saying, 'T think most of my
colleagues in the defense industry understand intellectually that the
industry is going to have to consohdate and restructure, but
emotionally they are still fighting it.... Too many of them still think
they can dodge the bullet” (Pearlstein, 1992, p. FI).
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
7
The trouble for this organization, and this division in particular,
began in 1990 when then 1200-employee division was feared to be a
candidate for an out-of-state move (Tobenkin, 1990). The division
eventually reduced its head count to about 700.
In 1994, this organization named Dr. Tim Wong to succeed the
previous manager. Dr. Wong, who first joined the organization in
1969 but punctuated his tenure with several years at another defense
contractor, initiated the reengineering effort for the division in 1995
(PR News wire, 1994).
As the interview notes demonstrate, one of Dr. Wong"s first
actions was to begin a series of informal discussions with senior
management in the division about how m arket conditions, key
financial indicators, and a corporate direction mandated that the
division reinvent itself. These meetings, which took place on a weekly
basis, had two key effects: (1) most senior managers became convinced
that a reengineering effort was the only hope of the division becoming
viable again, and (2) those senior managers who were unable or
unwilling to support a BPR effort were given other assignments in the
division.
About a year after these discussions began, the division sought
the help of a consulting firm. After narrowing the search to four
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
g
candidates, management retained, the services of ISS, which later
changed its name to Renaissance (yet is referred to ISS in this study
because this is the language of the visioning documents). Several of
the interviewees asserted that the one critierion that led to ISS’ s
success was the flexibility they demonstrated in working with an
engineering culture.
With ISS’ s help, the division began its reengineering effort with
a kick-off meeting on June 19, 1995. This meeting also initiated the
visioning process, which was scheduled to encompass five tasks:
creation of the basic business reengineering vision (scheduled to take
place from June 19 to July 26), a current assessment of the division
operations and a concurrent assessment of the information
technologies infrastructure (scheduled to take place from June 27 to
August 4), a formal gap analysis (firom July 31 to August 11), a
prioritization of improvements initiatives (firom August 14 to August
25) and a finalization of the recommendations (August 23 to
September 1). As the interview notes demonstrate, the process took
shghtly longer than expected for some of these tasks, but the overall
vision was approved on schedule.
After the new vision was approved, the core team then planned
implementation steps to move to a work cell culture. The advantages
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
9
of such a culture purported include the benefits of reengineering: lower
work-in-progress inventories, streamlined operations, and a customer
focus.
However, about one year into the implementation, the division
experienced several problems in its traveling wave tube (TWT)
operation, which were unrelated to the reengineering effort. At the
date of this writing, these problems are not yet resolved. As a result,
the pace of the BPR implementation has slowed considerably. Yet all
the people interviewed asserted that the BPR has largely proven
successful, although more time will be needed before a final
determination can be made.
With the exception of the interview data, the data collected for
this study were obtained during the visioning process. The interviews
were conducted by phone in the months of August and September,
1997.
Conclusion
This study seeks to illuminate the important process of a core team
reengineering a major company’ s operations. By using genre analysis,
the study shows how the group creates norms that guide its future
behavior, and how this behavior coordinates the activities of the
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
10
individual members. Chapter two presents a literature review of
reengineering in the context of organizational change; chapter three
focuses on the efforts of teams involved in work redesign; chapter four
presents the theoretic framework and method of study; chapter five
highlights the data analysis, and chapter six presents conclusions and
limitations of the study.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
11
C h ap ter 2: L ite ra tu re Review: O rganizational Change,
R eengineering and W ork R edesign
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to review the hterature on
organizational change in general and the definition, process, and
major constructs of business process reengineering (BPR) in particular.
Since this hterature is broad, and arises firom varied sources (e.g.,
scholarly writings, professional journals, trade periodicals, popular
business books, etc.), an attempt is made to review the subject in terms
of its major categories. In addition, this hterature review places an
emphasis on sources relevant to the study of organizational
communication.
Whv organizations change
An important subject is why organizations change at ah. This issue
was raised by Lawrence (1990), who, in a hterature review on the
subject, offers four answers that account for a majority of
organizational change efforts. The first is implementation of new
technology, which requires changes in the structure of the
organization and its processes. The reason new technology is
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
12
introduced in so many organizations at such a rapid pace is to keep up
with competitors, to keep pace with customers’ expectations, and
simply because new technologies become available.
The second reason organizations change according to Lawrence
is the increasing force of global competition, especially from Asia.
American organizations must now compete with organizations in parts
of the world where labor and technology are cheaper.
The third reason for organizational change is ownership
turmoil, especially that brought on by takeovers and leveraged buy
outs. Yet this factor goes beyond actual ownership transitions, since
pubhcly-held companies may spend considerable time and resources
preparing for, or defending against, takeover attempts.
The fourth reason that organizations change is the presence of
new laws and legal rulings, including the trend toward deregulation.
Since organizations exist to interact effectively with the environment,
any such major environmental change will necessitate a shift to a new
mode of operating.
Lawrence notes that, while these four reasons account for most
organizational changes, they cannot explain the depths of these
changes. To arrive at greater explanatory power, he asserts that we
need a framework taking more factors into account. The framework he
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
13
offers is a four-ring model. He calls the center ring “value-adding
behavior,” which consists of the behavior of organizational members
producing changes to organizational inputs (e.g., information or raw
goods) such that it can return them to the environment for some
benefit, such as a profit. The next larger ring, which includes aU of the
first ring, adds the familiar 7-S framework (strategy, structure,
systems, superordinate goals, staffing, skills and style). The next
larger ring includes the primary stakeholders, such as customers,
suppliers and employees. The final ring includes basic drivers of
change from the environment, such as social change, technological
change, economic change, and poHtical change.
Lawrence asserts that this model explains the vast majority of
organizational change in considerable detail. For example, a driver
puts pressure on the stakeholders, who force a change to the 7-S ring,
which affects the everyday behavior of people in the organization. Yet
change does not always go from the large ring to the small. The first
ring may experience a change, such as an innovation or the sudden
absence (e.g., death or defection) of someone whose work is critical to
the inner ring. This may affect the 7-S ring (since systems, skills and
style, for example, will likely be affected), which in turn puts pressure
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
14
on the stakeholders to change and may even affect the basic change
drivers in the environment.
The value of this framework is that it shows the
innerconnectedness of organizations and society, as well the hierarchy
of analysis levels. With this framework in place, we now turn to an
examination of types of organizational change.
Types of organizational change
Any attempt to categorize types of organizational change m ust first
deal with the issue of scope (Ledford, et al., 1990). A key factor is
whether the change affects only a small part of the organization or if it
is ‘ large-scale.” While this is a common issue to raise, Ledford et al.
assert that more researchers focus on large-scale changes than small-
scale, and yet more scholars need to pause at this point and attempt a
definition of large-scale organizational change. They write: “we wiU
define large-scale organizational change as a lasting change in the
character of an organization that significantly alters its performance”
(p. 2).
This definition offers two constructs: change in character and
change in performance. These researchers explain change in character
by bringing up open system theory (e.g., Katz and Kahn, 1978), which
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
15
highlights how the organization relates to its environment. Such
changes would thus include how the organization imports energy; how
it transforms the inputs into output; the nature of the outputs
themselves; internal patterns of differentiation, coordination, and
integration; and human resources management practices.
A change in performance can refer to the system’ s effectiveness
as measured in many ways. Important examples include the
distribution range of products (e.g., going from a regional presence to a
global operation), the products themselves, profitability (i.e., a change
in the difference between inputs and outputs as measured in terms of
money), and the speed in which products are produced.
An important element of the Ledford et al. definition is that it
requires the changes to be permanent. A common complaint against
various prescriptive change methods (e.g., total quahty management
and business process reengineering) is that the changes only last until
the change effort stops (Lesly, 1994). Thus, an important topic of
investigation is what leads to changes becoming entrenched. This
takes us to the topic of how to measure a large-scale organizational
change.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
16
Thrpp dim en sion s of large-scale organizational ch an ge
Ledford et al. (1990), in a review of the literature on large-scale
organizational change, report that changes can be measured along
three dimensions: depth of change, pervasiveness of change, and the
size of the organization. The depth of change is often measured by the
depth of the cognitive shifts that are part of organizational change.
Levy (1986) reviews the literature on this aspect of organizational
change and structures his analysis in four layers, going from relatively
low level to high level (or “deep” in Ledford et. al’ s scheme). The first
point (the most “shallow”) from Levy is core processes, including
organizational structure, management and decision-making. Levy’ s
second point is organizational culture, including beliefs, norms and
values. The third point is mission and strategy. And Levy’ s deepest
point is “the organizational paradigm,” which includes meta rules that
drive culture, management style and core processes.
Ledford et. al’ s second way to measure organizational change is
the pervasiveness of the change, which these researchers
operationalize as the proportion of the organization’ s elements and
subsystems that are changed. This dimension of organizational
change has been extensively studied in the organization development
hterature as comprehensive change (French & Bell, 1978), large-scale
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
17
multiple systems change (Goodman & Kurke, 1982) or system-wide
change (Huse & Cummings, 1985). Ledford et al. note three
implications of the research on the pervasiveness of change. First, this
type of change can take years; even revolutionary change often takes a
decade or more to run its course. Second, this change usually requires
multidisciplinary change agents; it is almost unheard of for a single
change agent to cause more than micro-level shifts. And third,
pervasive change requires intergroup cooperation and coordination;
this action necessitates consensus-building and cross-functional
implementation teams.
Organizational size is an important component in Ledford et
al.'s change scheme for the obvious reason—it is relatively easy to
bring about deep, pervasive change in a small start-up as compared
with change at a Fortune 500 company. Yet the way organizational
size is measured is not as straightforward. Kimberly (1976) notes that
this dimension can be measured as number of employees, physical
capacity, output volume or assets.
With this review of large-scale organizational change, we now
turn to a specific method of achieving change that is deep, pervasive,
and robust enough to last even in very large companies. This method
of change is business process reengineering. Throughout this
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
18
discussion, reengineering is differentiated from other methods of
organizational change, such as total quality management.
Definition of reengineering
As defined by Hammer and Champy (1993), business process
reengineering (BPR) is the task of redesigning the company firom
scratch. It is “the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of
business process to achieve dramatic improvements in critical,
contemporary measures of performance, such as cost, quality, service,
and speed” (p. 54). Hammer and Champy’ s advice about reengineering
includes simplifying processes and minimizing controls and checks.
Multiple jobs are often folded into one; workers make their own
decisions, eliminating the need for steep hierarchies. Above all, the
key processes are kept simple and performed “in their natural order”
(p. 53).
Hammer and Champy support this definition by suggesting that
today’ s problems are the result of flawed organizational thinking from
previous decades. The Ford family, together with Alfred Sloan of
General Motors, established the division of professional labor that
paralleled the division of manual labor; the goal was to become
efficient at increasingly simplified tasks. By the 1950s and 1960s, the
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
19
chief operating concern of most firms had shifted to keeping up with
ever-increasing demand. At first, this division of labor seemed to work
well. But by the early 1980s, these authors contend, demand had
peaked while the supply sector had grown somewhat unresponsive to
shifting markets. Companies exhibited—and continue to exhibit—
diseconomies of scale; organizations today are broken into firagments
that emphasize division rather than overall efficiency. Thus,
reengineering fixes these “mistakes” and prepares companies for much
greater levels of productivity.
Dixon and colleagues (1994) interviewed manufacturing
executives in an attempt to define reengineering. These researchers
note that Hammer’ s (1990) original definition (“the use of modem
information technology to radically redesign business processes”)
doesn’ t fit all reengineering efforts. After the interviews, a review of
the literature, and an analysis of 23 reengineering initiatives, these
researchers constructed the following definition:
Reengineering is a radical or breakthrough change in a business
process. Reengineering process design seeks dramatic orders of
magnitude, as distinguished from incremental, improvement in
business value. Key value creation processes involving
manufacturing operations include order fulfillment (the
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
2 0
customer supply chain process), product development, order
creation (selling and configuration), and customer service (post
product delivery processes).
An important definitional element is how and why BPR is distinct
from continuous process improvement. Dixon and colleagues note that
this distinction is difficult to make, especially at the operational level.
They note that TQM often involves a focus on the system rather than
on subunits (Doming, 1984); many continuous improvement
methodologies emphasize radical innovation that should redesign
overarching processes (Harrington, 1987), and some versions of TQM
attempt to place IT concerns at the forefront of the improvement work
(Harrington, 1987; Feigenbaum, 1961). Most BPR schemes share
these elements.
The one element that best differentiates BPR efforts from
continuous improvement, Dixon and colleagues determined, is
“ changing direction”; in each of the 23 cases studied, some goal was
replaced with another. These researchers site several examples:
flexibüity replacing cost reduction, time-to-market superseding
product performance, and cost reduction replacing process
performance.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
21
Rigby (1993) asserts that BPR is really a collection of four much
older interventions: process redesign, structural reorganization,
information measurement, and value refinement. He contends that
process redesign can be traced all the way back to Fredrick Taylor in
the nineteenth century; restructuring goes back to Henri Fayol, Alfired
Sloan and Peter Drucker; information and measurement can be traced
to Georg Siemens’ early work in the middle 1800s; and instilling and
clarifying organizational values was weU in place when Robert Wood
ran Sears and Roebuck in the 1930s.
Another definitional issue is whether reengineering is one
intervention or a range of different interventions. Talwar (1993), in a
review of the reengineering Literature, takes a middle-of-the-road
position and asserts that two forms have emerged. The first, often
called “process reengineering,” looks to redesign individual processes
within the context of the internal organization (rather than the context
of the external environment). The second, known as “business
reengineering,” focuses on creating new competencies by reinventing
the entire company based on a refocused, competitive strategy. This
second approach is superior, Talwar claims, because it emphasizes
keeping up with the environment, instead of doing “more of the same,
only better.” But Talwar notes the key to a successful reengineering
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
2 2
effort (whether of the first type or the second) is top-management
support and a clear recognition that fundamental changes are needed,
and needed quickly.
Schendel (1993) argues that reengineering is an umbrella term
for several more specific approaches to redesign. The first (and most
common) is financial; this type of restructuring involves moving money
from one department to another (e.g., firom R&D to marketing). If
done well, Schendel contends, financial restructuring leads to
company-wide transformation and a stronger focus on vision. Thus,
financial restructuring should be one component of a larger
reengineering effort. Bowman and Singh (1993) note that financial
restructuring has been the most widely documented of the three types,
yet reengineering efforts have changed the way it is implemented in
many companies. If done poorly, financial restructuring can become
downsizing for the sake of downsizing (Bowman & Singh, 1993). The
second type involves restructuring the company’ s portfoHo which
usually means shifting the financial holdings of the company. The
third type is organizational, an effort comparable to Talwar’ s (1993)
process reengineering, which includes shifting resources to create more
streamlined operations in key sections of the organization. Schendel
notes th at the three types of restructuring are coming together in
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
23
practice; a restructuring today often involves financial, portfolio, and
organizational shifts. This trend confirms Hammer and Champy’ s
(1993) contention that reengineering will become more important in
the next decade as international competition increases.
Harrison and Pratt (1993) take a very different definitional
position by arguing that BPR is really one intervention with slight
variations. BPR can be easily identified, they assert, hy the use of
cross-function BPR teams engaged in work redesigning the most basic
assumptions of the organization.
Major constructs
Several major constructs thread their way through the literature on
reengineering. The first of these is the notion of “quick hits” and is
discussed by Buday (1993). He reports on the full-scale reengineering
effort at the California State Automobile Association. Before
launching a comprehensive study that would identify processes that
would be completely redesigned, the reengineering team spotted three
examples of “ low hanging fimit” that produced immediate savings and
gave the overall effort added credibility. These quick hits include
authorizing field officers to give customers proof of insurance without
involving the central office, pushing back expiration time on
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
2 4
membership cards from one to two years, and reducing processing time
on new business applications from six to three days.
A second major construct is the centrahty of information
technology. Short and Venkatraman (1992) studied the role of IT
within Baxter International, which manufacturers and sells hospital
equipment and medical devices. Through interviews with key
personnel, archival studies of corporate reports and secondary sources,
and interviews with supphers, the researchers concluded that the
Baxter reengineering effort was successful because its IT redesign was
focused on external strategy, not just internal efi&ciency. The result
was th at Baxter integrated its electronic ordering, fulfillment,
invoicing and funds transfer system with its customers in order to
become a value added partner, not just an order taker. Short and
Venkatraman describe the result as a “business network redesign,”
which they assert is the next logical step from BPR.
A third major construct is the need to focus on “wholeness”
rather than just on a few major parts of a system. Joiner (1993)
argues that a lack of systemic thinking is detrimental to organizations.
He describes one common organizational symptom—having separate
departments interfacing with the same customer base—in essence
competing against each other for the same business. Such thinking
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
2 5
fails to look at the macro level, which, he asserts, reengineering must
do. The solution for the problem is to work on high-level macro fixes
that “go deep” and permeate to even the smallest processes.
A fourth theme is the tight focus on process flow. Harrison and
Pratt (1993) describe the A T. Kearney methodology, which is a
combination of changing existing processes and redesigning them. In
this methodology, redesigning means essentially recreating the process
firom scratch. The criterion that determines which approach to apply is
whether the processes need minor adjustment or just don’ t work
anymore. Their process is then as follows: (a) setting the direction,
which is a two-to-four week planning period in which a planning team
determines which processes will be redesigned and what method will
be employed; (b) baselining and benchmarking, which consists of
mapping key processes and measuring their effectiveness by surveying
customers and looking for disconnects, as well as exploiting the quick
fixes that the team identifies; (c) creating the vision, which includes
creating new processes and discussing their implementation in such a
way as to work toward organizational implementation; (d) launching
problem-solving projects, which includes sub-teaming high potential
activities, such as redesigning product identification codes; (e)
designing improvements, which involves creating a comprehensive
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
26
blueprint of future changes as well as designing a new technology
architecture; (f) implementing changes, which includes assigning
change accountabilities to hne managers and establishing targets and
timetables; and (g) embedding continuous improvement, which
involves replacing traditional decision-making with a team approach
that will constantly refine processes.
Furey presents a six-step process representative of the Oxford
Associates brand of reengineering. Like Harrison and Pratt (1993), he
focuses on an approach tightly focuses on work process. This system
includes identifying the process’ s customer-driver objectives; mapping
and measuring the existing process; analyzing and modifying the
existing processes; benchmarking the process for innovative, proven
alternatives; reengineering and rolling out the new processes. By
quantifying the reengineering objectives in terms of customer
preference, Furey claims that this approach to reengineering captures
the best of TQM.
Allen and Nafius (1993) also focus on process by discussing one
of the largest BPR efforts undertaken: that of GTE Telephone
Operations. These researchers report that the reengineering effort
was made successful by sticking with a very simple model consisting of
only five phases: mapping “as is” processes, harvesting easy-to-obtain
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
2 7
savings, creating the new organizational vision, planning the roll-out,
and implementing the new design.
A fifth major construct involves cross-functional teams.
Katzenbach and Smith (1993) highhght the importance of teams, and
assert that creating the right teams and supporting their efforts is one
of the most critical decisions in conducting a BPR exercise. Their
advice echoes the McKinsey methodology, and includes; creating the
teams that are sized appropriately for the assigned task, installing
complementary skills that will lead to group synergy, clearly
articulating the team’ s overarching goal and subgoals, guiding the
team to develop a working approach, and assigning the team and its
members accountability for meeting objectives.
Buday (1993) also discusses cross-functional teams as he reports
on the reengineering efforts at Hallmark Greeting Cards, where the
presenting problem was to shorten the required time for new greeting
cards to be designed, printed, promoted and distributed. The other
presenting problem was to cut overall costs. What makes this effort
especially challenging was that Hallmark decided to create cross-
functional teams th at would reduce the two to three year lead time on
new card introduction; in essence, this meant reengineering the
artistic element in the company. This process was done by identifying
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
28
de facto teams and then allowing them to create a needs specification
on new technology that would automate old processes. Buday reports
the effort was largely successful due to effective top management
follow-up and the emphasis on new technology.
Hall (1994) surveyed over 10,000 American employees firom
1987 to 1990 about w hat causes them to be productive or
unproductive. He noted that three conditions must be present in order
for workers to be “fully competent.” These factors include an
environment of collaboration in which people genuinely work together,
overt commitment of everyone on the team, and an environment in
which creativity is encouraged. Hall noted that these factors come
together most often in cross-functional teams.
Hierarchies and communication
Although hierarchical bureaucracies are common throughout the
world, the efficiency of hierarchical organization and its effects on
individual productivity and worker well-being are being questioned.
Ronald Reagan’ s deputy secretary of the treasury coined the term
“corpocracy” to express his concerns over slow-moving and stagnant
bureaucratized organizations (D arm an, 1986).
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
2 9
Miller argues that corporate bureaucracy reengineering
attempts to dismantle what was an unintended consequence of the
division of labor. He depicts the onset of authoritarian control as
another Ford family legacy (1992). He explains that when Henry Ford
raised the daily wage in 1914 from market value ($2.20) to $5.00 per
day for Ford Motor Company workers, he instigated a transformation
of labor from a fluid, competitive, voluntaristic market into a body
deeply committed to a system of political authority. The labor market
became part of a hierarchical, political set of institutions. The result of
th at transformation is that “institutions simultaneously determine the
rules of the game and condition the choices of individuals under the
rules” (Miller, 1992, p. 9).
Braverman (1994) suggests that the hierarchical monopolization
of knowledge controls each step of the labor process and its mode of
execution. The very structure of a hierarchy engenders control and
power relationships, with those at the top controlling those beneath
them, in a pattern that continues down the hne. Those aspiring to the
top positions envision careers in which a linear progression is made
from bottom layers to top layers, gaining control along the way (Weber,
1946). Communication researchers have demonstrated some of the
components of that control in their findings that the higher one is
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
30
located in the hierarchy, the more “direct” his or her influence tactics
(Krone, 1985) and the more she or he appeals to rationahty and
assertiveness to gain comphance (Kipnis, Schmidt, & Wilkinson,
1980).
A consequence of organizational hierarchy is almost inevitable
information distortion. When several managers compete for control,
information becomes equated with power. This is expressed in two
ways. The concept of the “official secret” was invented by, and is
fanatically defended by, bureaucracies (Weber, 1946) making
information a scarce commodity in hierarchies (Miller, 1992). Second,
the presence of as many as 16 hierarchical layers creates a great deal
of room for error in message transmission. What begins as a coherent
message at one end may be filtered and distorted during its progress
through levels of the hierarchy. As the number of hierarchical levels
increases, employees recognize that they receive less feedback from
both supervisors and co-workers (Rousseau, 1978) and individuals
meet face-to-face less and write memorandums more frequently
(Klauss & Bass, 1982).
Organizational leaders often attem pt to compensate for message
distortion through an abundance of both formal and informal rules.
Many bureaucracies keep extensive files regarding what has been said
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
31
to whom at what time and for which purpose (Weber, 1946). The
outcome of these extensive records, orderings, and attempts to
maintain control over message transmission and work production are
rules to govern work, resource allocations, benefits, property rights
(fi*om patents to employee ownership), dress, interpersonal
relationships, and extraorganizational activities (Miller, 1992). A
great deal of discontent stems firom the constraints produced by these
rules as well as from the authoritarian control and information
distortion.
Peters (1992) advocates lifting the “dead weight” of a vertical
hierarchy. He writes: “ ’ Reduce layers’ ? Tlatten the pyramid? No....
Rip, shred, tear, mutilate, destroy that hierarchy” (p. 131). He cites
Rosabeth Moss Kanter in a 1989 PBS television show in which “She
flatly declared that tomorrow’ s winning firms will have ‘ almost no
middle managers’ ... Survivors—managers and workers—will be
‘ oriented toward projects’ ” (p. 145). Peter’ s colorful language about the
inefficiencies of hierarchies is widely quoted by reengineering
consultants.
Along with the move to downsize hierarchies, academics and
practitioners are urging more loosely coupled organizations which
respond quickly to the environment and utilize dynamic and globalized
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
32
networks. Miller (1992) details recent moves toward market and
contract relationships, where “the use of capital equipment may be
achieved by a contractual agreement in which the .s kills of several
specialists are obtained without hierarchical obligation” (p. 16).
Academics, consultants, and managers have become more
suspicious of traditional hierarchies in recent years, and reengineering
is one means to implement a new form of organizational oversight.
“Radical reengineering of organization structure is a necessary
catalyst for achieving a competitive edge in today’ s lightning-fast
playing arena” (Harari, 1992). Some surveys show that as many as
88% of large corporations are involved in business process
reengineering (Bashein, Markus, & Riley, 1994).
Although a flat organization is often a goal of reengineering,
Ostroff and Smith (1992) contend that a flat organization is still more
of a metaphor than a reality in most companies. In fact, these
researchers point to the disadvantages of reducing a traditional
hierarchy, which include losing the functional excellence of a
traditional organization. To correct this problem, many companies are
adopting a horizontal organization, which is built around processes
that link company activities to customer needs. Ostroff and Smith also
present a list of principles that underlie horizontal organizations, the
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
33
key to which is to build the company around semi-autonomous,
accountable teams, rather than individuals. These teams should
include managerial and nonmanagerial activities as often as possible,
and training should be given on a “ just-in-time to perform” basis.
Ostroff and Smith note that their conclusions have become part of
most reengineering interventions.
Bird (1991) adds to the discussion on reengineering and
hierarchy by reporting on a change effort at Chase Manhattan. The
benefits of this change include making bank branches more responsive
to local community needs, gaining a stronger ability to compete with
locally-based financial institutions (such as credit unions), tying
accountabihty and authority together, and creating a healthy
competition among managers. The disadvantages are even more
interesting for communication scholars. They include some
duphcation (since managers focus their energies more tightly, while
fewer people understanding “the big picture”), the tendency to focus
less on the company as a whole, and the weakening of cross-business
communication. Bird advises that structure must fit “with the bank’ s
size, objectives, and desired corporate identity” (p. 70), and that
communication issues remain at the forefront of any change effort.
Bird notes that the reengineering effort has apparently succeeded in
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
34
shifting organizational communication patterns from vertical to
horizontal.
Hazards of reengineering
Heygate (1992) warns against applying elements of reengineering
simply because of their “voguishness.” He advises companies to clearly
define their objectives before launching into restructuring programs of
any kind. Yet any model, he contends, should include central
coordination and “the effective involvement of functional and hne
management” (p. 144), since these characteristics of organizations
have been proven effective. More specifically, Heygate recommends
combining teamwork, “on-the-groimd senior management” (rather
than steep hierarchies), and program managers as actual staff to both
senior executives and hne management.
Hannan and Freeman (1984) assert that restructuring is deeply
injurious, both to human emotions and to processes in the company,
and therefore increases the probabihty that the organization wiU not
survive. This argument is furthered by Amburgey, KeUy, and Barnett
(1990), who propose that companies survive because they use time-
tested routines to accomplish work; organizational restructuring
damages or destroys some of these routines, and if not immediately
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
35
successful at bringing new routines on-line, increases the risk of
organizational death. Anderson (1991) agrees that reengineering is
risky, adding that radical organizational restructuring disturbs the
organization’ s Links to the outside world, again placing the
organization’ s survival in doubt.
Bashein, Markus, and Riley (1994) point to business process
reengineering as senior managers’ choice for achieving strategic goals,
yet some estimates show that as many as 70% of BPR attempts fail. In
an attem pt to determine what preconditions are necessary for BPR
success, these researchers interviewed more than 50 consultants from
26 reengineering consulting firms. The interviews centered around
preconditions to BPR success in the personal experience of the
respondents. The fist of necessary preconditions included senior
management commitment, realistic expectations, empowered workers
in collaboration, strategic context of growth and expansion, a shared
vision, sound management processes, appropriate people participating
full-time, and sufidcient budget.
To not seize an appropriate opportunity to restructure an
organization may also be lethal. Amburgey et al. (1990) propose the
analogy of strong medicine. “Like a powerful elixir, organizational
change may be deadly—but if survived may promise good health. ” The
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
3 6
danger in restructuring, to continue the analogy, is in giving the
wrong medicine at the wrong time.
The drastic changes in reengineering often include layoffs, an
element with potentially powerful effects on all organizational
members. Brockner, Grover, Reed & DeWitt (1990) discovered a
U-shaped relationship between perceived layoff threat and work
performance. At low threat levels, employees did not beheve their
future employment was in jeopardy, and therefore work output did not
increase. At moderate levels, employees beheved that their future
employment was strongly correlated with their work output, and so
they sought to produce as much as possible. But at high levels, many
employees seemed to believe that their layoffs were a fait accompli,
and that no additional effort at work performance would make any
difference.
Reengineering and tbm r.entrahtv of communication
The role of communication is often poorly understood in change
management efforts. Several researchers and consultants point out its
importance and centrality (e.g., Sonnenberg, 1991), but only a few
have really studied its inner workings.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
3 7
As more and more businesses reshape their processes and
hierarchies, it becomes necessary to reexamine communication process
and practice. If hierarchical communication is characterized by
authoritarian control, information distortion, and excessive rules, what
might communication look like in a restructured organization? Jablin
(1987) suggests that research is needed which examines information
adequacy, grapevine communication, modes of communication, and
message content (both task and social) as moderated by the hierarchy.
The communication aspects of reengineering have thus far
received very Limited attention. In one notable exception, Smeltzer
(1991) analyzed the outcomes of various communication channels used
to announce organization-wide change. Semi-structured interviews in
43 organizations indicated that four factors were largely responsible
for organization change being perceived as overly negative. These
were: (a) a large number of inaccurate rumors about the change, (b)
employees learning about the change from a source other than
management, (c) timing (employees reacted most negatively when the
timing was perceived as being more beneficial for management), and
(d) announcements that were overly positive.
Reengineering also changes the emergent communication
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
3 8
networks in organizations. Monge and Eisenberg (1987) urge us to be
sensitive to emergent communication networks and patterns, while
remembering that because they are reactions to change, they may vary
in stability and will not necessarily persist across space and time.
Monge and Eisenberg propose three factors which influence emergent
communication networks during reorganization: environmental (local
and national character, industry and business culture), organizational
(organizational culture, climate, and technology) and individual
(power and poHtics, network roles, professional training).
Overcoming resistance to change in reengineering
Whenever an organization undertakes a major change effort such as
reengineering, there is bound to be resistance. Given that so many
organizational reengineering efforts fail, sites of resistance to
organizational change should be examined. Sagie, Elizur, and
Greenbaum’ s (1985) research in this area suggests that employee
experience is positively correlated with resistance to change. They
write: “[E]xperience with a task increases resistance to change, while a
persuasion strategy which appeals to the self-interest of the worker
rather than the organizational interests, helps remove resistance” (p.
161).
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
3 9
Spector (1989) reports on research about organizational leaders
and the process of overcoming resistance to change. Spector targeted
six companies attempting to fundamentally redefine the relationship
between the employees and the corporation in order to make the
company more competitive. He noted that large-scale organizational
change efforts seem to require change leaders to spread their
organizational dissatisfaction to other powerful individuals in the
company.
Stjemberg and Philips (1993) studied the activities of change
agents in eight organizations over a period of 20 years. Their
observations indicate that large-scale change management efforts
require one person to play the role of “soul of fire, " or champion of the
change. This role is a difficult balancing effort, they assert, because
the soul of fire must maintain that change is necessary (i.e., that the
status quo is insufficient), which often distances him or her firom the
power structure of the organization. At the same time, this person
must constantly maintain support from upper management. The
result is that two dilemmas exist almost all the time in change
management efforts: a learning dilemma, in which people need to
constantly leam while not appearing unknowledgeable to senior
management, and a change dilemma, which must synthesize the need
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
4 0
to change with the need to empower employees to make their own
decisions.
N utt (1988) analyzed 91 case studies involving implementation
tactics. His analysis revealed four major types of these tactics with
very different success levels. Key executive intervention had nearly a
100% success rate, yet was used in less than 20% of the cases.
Persuasion and participation both yielded about 75% success, with
persuasion having the highest usage rate (42%) and participation the
lowest (17%). Implementation by edicts had the lowest success rate
(43%) and was used in 23% of the cases.
According to Cummings and Worley (1993), organizational
change can cause individual resistance due to the high level of anxiety
which accompanies ‘ letting go of the known and moving to an
uncertain future”(p. 148). Large-scale organizational change may
cause individuals within an organization to feel insecure about their
place and contribution in the future. At the organizational level,
Cummings and Worley cite “the habit of following common procedures
and the sunk cost of resources invested in the status quo” as potential
causes and sites of resistance (p. 148). Cummings and Worley also
propose that an organization’ s culture may resist change by
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
41
“reinforc[ing] the status quo, promoting conformity to existing values,
norms, and assumptions about how things should operate” (p. 148).
Bashein, Markus, and Riley (1994) report that while
organizational change efforts such as BPR cause resistance
everywhere in the organization, most resistance comes from middle
managers who are worried about their loss of power. At the individual
level, fear and lack of optimism can be causes of resistance. Like
Cummings and Worley (1993), Bashein et al. mention the potentially
negative impact of organizational culture. At the organizational level,
a culture of consensus decision making can slow or defeat change.
This recurring theme of culture as a site of resistance to organizational
change is echoed in the concerns and experiences of practitioners.
According to a survey conducted by Wyatt Co., of executives from 531
companies which had undergone restructuring, common barriers to
change include employee resistance and “dysfunctional corporate
culture” (Stewart, 1994). Andrea Sodano and the reengineering
consulting frrm Symmetrix have devised a 17-item scale for
determining readiness for change versus resistance to change
(Stewart, 1994).
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
4 2
Conclusion
This chapter has surveyed the research on large-scale organizational
change, beginning with the question of why organizations change at
all. We then discussed what causes large-scale organizational change
and how such changes can be measured. This took us to a discussion
of BPR in particular—why it developed, what makes it distinct from
other change methodologies, and how it is most often implemented.
Large-scale organizational change often involves the use of
teams. Since this teamwork is central to business process
reengineering and to the research questions of this study, the next
chapter reviews the hterature on teams performing work redesign.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
4 3
Chapter 3: Literature Review: Teams Involved in Process
Redesign
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to review the hterature about groups
involved in process redesign. Since the Hterature about teams is so
rich and complex, this chapter is divided into several sections.
Because these divisions are somewhat arbitrary, they should not be
considered exclusive. In fact, specific theories appear in multiple
sections.
One of the biggest theoretical problems with the research on
teams is that the studies often combine data that were gathered
through quantitative and quahtative methods, including analyses of
cases, data collected by researchers in participant observer roles, as
well as survey and self-report data. While this variety of methods is
an advantage, the lack of rigor in some studies leads to the Hterature
being inconclusive on some very basic issues.
Research studies presented in this chapter are examined for
method type, positive and negative outcomes, conclusions and
limitations.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
4 4
This chapter compares and contrasts specific studies in an
attempt to present the major theoretical issues in the field. Yet it
must be acknowledged th at the research is not consistent in
methodology, type of data considered, or researcher role. Thus, two
studies may seem to speak to the same issue yet be so different in
theoretical approach th at a direct comparison would not be
illustrative. When important, these differences are highlighted.
Teams and the BPR process
Many business process reengineering (BPR) initiatives involve the
formation of teams (Drew & Coulson-Thomas, 1996; Gamble, 1995). The
(1995) reports that most BPR initiatives involve six steps, although the
sequencing of these steps may vary. They include: organizing the BPR
team; budding a customer-oriented model of the organization's critical
core processes (also called a value chain); selecting a critical process to
reengineer, or a series of processes to reengineer; identifying additional
value-added processes related to the selected process(es), and value-added
activities within those processes; benchmarking performance and
performance drivers; and designing and implementing the changed
process or processes. The (1995) also notes that the first step—forming
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
4 5
the BPR team—is a step common to more than 95% of the BPR models
currently in use.
Hales and Savoie (1994) reached a similar conclusion. Using a
content analysis procedure, they found that BPR generally has four
stages, aU of which typically involve at least some team effort. These
stages are: orientation, overall planning, detailed design and
implementation. With the exception of orientation, which is usually
conducted by a team of senior managers, the stages seem to proceed to
closure the fastest when led by a careftdly chosen BPR steering team with
appropriate experience, personahties, roles, areas of expertise, and
necessary commitment to the change process.
Ratham, Mahajan and Whinston (1995), in an attempt to
determine what differentiates a successful BPR from the more than 70%
of attempts that are unsuccessfril, found that one of the biggest roadblocks
to BPR success is coordination gaps in new or improved work processes,
and that formation of cross-functional teams is the most commonly used
method to address this concern in organizations. Based on this finding
and similar conclusions from other researchers, many theoreticians (e.g..
Drew & Coulson-Thomas, 1996) expect the use of teams in organizations
to increase over the next five years, especially as part of work redesign
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
4 6
initiatives. We now turn to a discussion of groups involved in non-BPR
work redesign.
Groups using non-BPR work redesign methodoloeies
While BPR is a widely used framework for groups involved in work
design, several older frameworks have been studied for longer periods of
time. Eaton (1995) surveyed organizations involved in work redesign
using a team-based structure and learned that teams in these companies
form for five main reasons: to coordinate work changes to accomplish just-
in-time production, to carry out statistical control processes, to plan and
implement total quahty management (TQM) initiatives, for general cross
functional coordination as part of organizational restructuring, and for
business process reengineering. Aside from BPR, TQM is currently the
most widely-used framework according to Eaton.
BPR and TQM are based on similar assumptions. First, both often
use teams throughout the process to conceptualize ideal processes (Eaton,
1995; Hiam, 1993). Second, both use established criteria (e.g., the
Baldrige criteria in TQM) in determining when an intervention has
proven successful (Lawler et al., 1992). And third, both use systems
terminology, and often focus on how horizontal systems work together in
achieving organizational goals (Mohr-Jackson, 1993). Since BPR and
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
4 7
TQM share key assumptions, BPR researchers often base much of their
work on the TQM hterature (Naff, 1995).
The TQM hterature is quite diverse, including only a few thorough
studies. Hiam’ s (1993) meta-analysis of TQM research during the years
from 1989 to 1993 resulted in only 20 systematic studies of the
effectiveness of TQM initiatives. While calling for more quahty research
in the field, Hiam did draw two key conclusions. First, he noted that the
number of TQM programs is increasing. Second, he asserted that TQM
programs have several elements in common, such as training, a customer
focus, an attempt at organizational empowerment, and teamwork.
Lawler and his colleagues (1992) assert that their 1990 study of
large corporations was the first truly systematic study on TQM adoption
processes. While producing a number of key conclusions, these
researchers noted one hnk to teamwork—TQM initiatives that integrated
employee involvement programs were more hkely to achieve performance
goals.
Organizations engaged in TQM initiatives often assign teams the
task of redesigning work process. Anderson, Dooley and
Rungtusanatham (1994) surveyed organizations using TQM and learned
that the use of teams does help to reinforce quahty initiatives. A more
complete method of TQM was studied by Carlyle (1994), who noted that
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
4 8
Team Innovation Process (TIP) tended to lead to desired quality outcomes.
This process includes a number of systematic steps, including creating a
cross-functional work team, conducting a cultural assessment, performing
a needs assessment, benchmarking, and having groups define quality
targets in the form of specific and measurable goals.
Kim, Pindur and Reynolds (1995) studied the use of work redesign
as part of TQM as a business strategy in the public sector and noted that,
for most pubhc-sector organizations, the best predictor of whether TQM
will lead to the expected outcomes is the organizational culture. Their
research indicates that organizations valuing teamwork over individual
decision-making will likely be more satisfied with the outcome of TQM.
They also note that more research should be conducted that would
illuminate the causal link between the team structure in the organ ization
and the success of TQM, but assert that the number of intervening
variables (including type of organization, history with change
management efforts, and commitment to organizational values) make
such research difficult.
In a similar hne of research, Mohr-Jackson (1993) interviewed 54
corporate executives in an attempt to identify organizational moderators
to success of TQM programs. The resulting hst of organizational barriers
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
4 9
included departmentalization, rule formation, centralization,
bureaucracy, and cultures that are not supportive of teamwork.
Bookman (1994) reports on recent research indicating that TQM
may be too ‘ left brained” for some teams in high-technology organisations,
especially those involving computer graphics and anim ation Bookman
discusses the phenomenon in several Sihcon Valley companies in which
group interaction degenerates into probing questions about what really
makes a goal SMART (an acronym for “specific, measurable, attainable,
relevant and time-bound” ), rather than discussion around setting goals
and planning for their implementation. These team obstacles to
achieving TQM results have been widely discussed in TQM hterature
(e.g.. Hoover, 1995; Shaw, Day & Slavinskas, 1995; Lowther, 1994).
Most of the research to-date has focused on whether the use of
teams in work redesign helps or hinders the change efforts. Little
research has explored the inner workings of the teams to determine
barriers to effectiveness (Walker, 1994). The next section discusses the
perceived benefits of teams.
The perceived benefits of teams during work process redesign
Harrison, Conn, Whittaker and Mitchell (1994) and Hayes (1995) present
hterature reviews on why the team structure is so widely used during
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
5 0
BPR. Their work highlights some of the key benefits of teams, including:
teams involve more employees in decision-making; teams lead to better,
more actionable decisions; teams create greater ownership in the decision;
teams lead to work processes that integrate production, sales and
distribution; and teams improve overall profitabihty on processes over
which the team has oversight. These perceived benefits explain much of
the attraction companies have to the team structure during periods of
work redesign.
Kezsbom (1995) asserts that the perceived benefits of BPR teams
can be attributable to the fact that most are cross-fimctional. Her list of
perceived benefits thus stems firom a discussion of cross-fimctionahty, and
includes: better decisions, less tendency to fall into the negative pattern of
groupthink, better integration of group outcomes, lower absenteeism,
improved quahty, and less competition between functional areas of the
organization (Ranney & Deck, 1995).
Team s working toward consensus
Tompkins and Cheney’ s (1985) discuss the notion of concertive control,
which occurs when employees identify with (Burke, 1966) organizational
values and then use these values as decision-making criteria. Bullis
(1991) extended this research to the team level by examining concertive
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
51
communication patterns in meetings at the U.S. Forest Service. By
analyzing a partial transcript of a series of meetings involving two
management groups, a regional line officer and his staff, Bullis identified
ways that management controls permeate to the group level. First,
leaders cite decision-making criteria that come firom upper management,
and later suggest that these comments were actually made by meeting
participants. Second, when employees used syllogisms using values other
than those endorsed by the organization, managers would often negotiate
with the employee and thus steer him or her hack to accepted decision
making criteria. And third, one of the few times concertive control
seemed to fail occurred when participants based decisions on cultural
rather than organizational values, and managers were unable to
successfully negotiate.
In a similar line of research. Barker and Tompkins (1993) tested
the notion of concertive control through ethnographic study, interviews,
and quantitative data fiom the Organizational Identification
Questionnaire. In this case, individuals’ identification with the team was
greater than the identification with the organization; one’ s tenure with
the organization correlated with the amount of organizational
identification.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
52
Eyo (1993) conducted focus groups of employees and managers in a
multinational corporation who were active in TQM quality circles. Eyo
examined transcripts for “ rhetorical visions” (Bormann, 1972), which are
broad views about truth that help to coordinate people’ s actions in
organizational contexts. He identified two such visions that cut across aU
organizational levels—participative productivity and victimage. The first
of these, participative productivity, is the befief that quality drcles were
forums where employees could use their talents and really make a
difference; this notion thus helped employees work well together and
ultimately achieve consensus. We now turn to a discussion about the
main types of teams: self-directed and self-managed.
Self-directed and self-managed teams: Disagreements over autonomv
One distinction in the hterature is between self-directed teams and self-
managed teams. Tompkins (1995) notes that self-directed teams should
include the notion of autonomy, and this idea often runs counter to the
reahty of hfe in organizations, which includes strategic direction set by
senior management. The notion of a self-managed team, in contrast,
focuses on managing internal interactions, setting up and enforcing rules
of conduct, motivating group members, and accomplishing goals often set
outside the group. Self-managed teams, Tompkins asserts, provides a
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
53
better blueprint for a team-based organization, as it builds on the idea of
delegated goals rather than more complete autonomy. Groups involved in
process redesign would likely be self-managed teams, since the outcome of
their efforts would, in most cases, have to be compatible with the inputs
and outputs of other systems.
Consistent with Tompkins' work, Manz and Neck (1995) assert
that self-directed teams often have too many decisions to make, too much
to regulate, and not enough direction; the result is often the groupthink
syndrome, characterized by a limit to discussed alternatives, a lack of
critical examination, a bias toward not seeking expert opinion, and an
overconfidence in the group's ability to make a sound decision (Janis,
1982). Manz and Neck surveyed teams involved in various tasks,
including process redesign, and noted that the touted benefits of teams—
reduced absenteeism, lower turnover, higher productivity, better quahty
control, increased motivation, and better overall decision-making—occur
more firequently in an environment of self-managed teams. In addition,
groupthink is less of a problem in organizations populated by self
managed (as opposed with self-directed) teams, since the teams have a
better-defined authority structure (i.e., management initiatives and
management review). To contrast the benefits of self-managed teams
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
5 4
with the problems of groupthink, Manz and Neck refer to the internal
process of self-managed teams as “teamthink.”
Yet there is still widespread use of self-directed teams. Zuidema
and Kleiner (1994) note that, in non-hierarchical organizations, many
decisions, including those involving core strategy, are often delegated to
relatively low-level work groups. While the resulting lack of structure
may be troublesome to some people in these teams, others find the
relative autonomy to be a motivator. Zuidema and Kleiner surveyed
organizations using self-directed teams and concluded that those
organizations which have modified their compensation systems to reward
self-direction, and those whose management supports the team
environment, have the best results. Irwin and Rodne (1994) found that
managerial commitment to the self-directed team concept is the most
powerfid predictor of whether this structure survives; the second most
significant predictor in Irwin and Rodne's work was the amount of
training the group recdves in decision-making, conflict resolution, and
group communication.
Another reason why self-directed teams are popular despite their
potential problems is presented by Crom and France (1996). In their
research, they detail several cases involving fight manufacturing
companies. These firms all used cross-functional, self-directed teams as
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
55
part of loosely organized BPR initiatives (“micro reengineering,” according
to Davis and Davidson, 1991.) Several of the teams were assigned
somewhat vague tasks, such as the need to reduce scrap. These teams
tended to work remarkably well, Crom and France contend, when they
felt free to “go after sacred cows,” “cut across aU departmental and
divisional hnes,” and “go after results no matter the political cost.” While
this advice can be politically dangerous in most organizations, Crom and
France assert that the use of self-directed teams can be one of the best
ways to solve organizational problems that have proven to be stubborn.
Another branch of the research on self-directed teams explores why
some groups apparently bum out. Chaudron (1995) studied several such
groups in a team-based manufacturing company and, through quahtative
interviews and quantitative surveys, he tried to determine what factors
were causally linked with the groups' chfficulties. (Consistent with much
prescriptive hterature on teams, this approach is decidedly unscientific.)
Chaudron concluded that the groups' lack of motivation had been a
problem for some time but became a crisis when members of the group
reported feehng an almost total lack of senior management support.
Other factors associated with burnout included an inaccurate
measurement system that failed to recognize outstanding team
performance, a lack of focused management direction, and few incentives.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
56
Stall another branch of this research explores how team leaders
work inside and outside the group to secure top management support for
the work of the team. Jaycox (1996) studied successful team leaders from
several team-based organizations and asserts that leaders' abilities to
enroll management in the work of their teams are the biggest
determinants in whether a BPR succeeds or bums out. Jaycox also
reports that leaders appear to play a major role in helping team members
commit to the change initiatives. This research runs counter to some of
the prescriptive advice about BPR, which often includes the need for an
organizational crisis and the need for senior management to link the
crisis with a strong need for organizational change (see Davis &
Davidson, 1991).
Another line of research in the area of self-directed teams is the use
of internal facilitators to help teams work through obstacles, establish
priorities, set and maintain norms of conduct, and ensure that the group's
outputs are consistent with the charter from the organization (Ray, Hines
& Wilcox, 1994). Training internal facüitators requires several steps in
which an internal needs assessment is conducted, candidates are chosen,
a mentoring system is established, and new facUitators are evaluated and
developed. Ray, Hines and Wilcox (1994) note that, while many
organizations have anecdotes involving the benefits of internal
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
5 7
facilitators, more research is needed about how internal facüitators affect
inter-group communication patterns and decision-making.
Since the research on self-directed teams is so diverse, several
attempts have been made to draw together its commonalties. One
such study was performed by Goodman and colleagues (1988), who
performed a review of meta-analyses and concluded that the use of
self-directed work teams (including the use of such teams during work
redesign) did positively impact productivity; in addition, these
researchers noted several studies concluded that self-directed teams
increase adherence to safety measures.
Cummings, MoUoy and Glen (1977) noted that 11 out of 58 case
studies involving self-directed work teams resulted in greater
autonomy for employees and heightened task variety. Cummings and
MoUoy (1977) reviewed 16 case studies and noted that nine out of ten
case studies reported increased productivity, five of eight
demonstrated improved attitudes, five of six reported lower costs, and
two of three noted increased morale. We now turn to a discussion
about obstacles that hinder groups in performing work redesign.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
58
Cnmmnn obstacles fn tj>am work redesign
Much of the hterature involving teams and work design focuses on
‘ lessons learned,” often consistin g of a generahzable problem and how one
or more teams overcame the obstacle. Perhaps the most common such
problem is discussed by Groff (1995), who reports one difficulty some
members of cross-ftmctional BPR teams have in m aking the transition to
being part of a large-scale change management effort. Goff cites research
that says, in general, about one-third of employees makes the transition
relatively quickly, about one-third make it “ eventually” (generally less
than one year), and about one-third never make the transition. IS people
who have the hardest time in transitions seem to be m ainfram e
programmers, who were once autonomous, and are now asked to team
with non-IS individuals in planning and implementing changes involving
chent/server technology. Goff notes that statistically more employees with
a mainframe background are in the group that never make the transition
To encourage managers and employees to make the leap to the
change initiatives (Goffs first and second groups), a number of
organizations are implementing a pay for performance system. One type
of pay for performance is termed “ pay for applied services,” and focuses on
rewarding quantifiable added value. McNemey (1995) discusses pay for
apphed services, and presents a case study involving a BPR initiative in
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
59
an insurance company, in which the goal was to reduce the time required
to process basic forms. After forming BPR teams around the critical core
processes, senior management believed that some of the teams were
attempting to derail the change process by not participating. To counter
this resistance, senior management implemented pay for applied services,
and set up specific metrics to reward teams and team members if key BPR
milestones were met. McNemey notes that after this intervention was
complete, the resistance level fell and most groups met their targets.
What makes pay for applied services different firom more traditional pay
for performance is that the former focuses on activity rather than pure
outcome. McNemey notes that rewarding people for results assumes that
the people understand the causal link between BPR and key result
indicators. By setting up a solid BPR framework and rewarding people
for action consistent with that framework, McNemey asserts that a
higher number of reengineering initiatives woidd succeed.
Another widely used method of overcoming resistance is
constructing BPR teams using pre-assessment and selection of
individuals hkely to work together well. Kirksey and Zawacki (1994)
discuss one such assessment technique used at the Hamilton Standard
Commercial Aircraft Electronics Division of United Technologies. In this
process, an assessment center gathered the names of individuals who
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
6 0
were recommended for change management teams by their supervisors,
or who self-selected for assessment. People were then given a battery of
personahty and aptitude tests, including the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
personahty assessment. Based on the results of these instruments, the
assessment center's stafT then assigned candidates to work groups. The
work groups spent one fidl day in business games and simulations, with
their behavior videotaped. These tapes were later reviewed by the
assessment center and, together with work history and the other
instruments, candidates were either rejected or added to the pool of
change management personnel available for work on platform teams and
in other cross-functional groups. Kirksey and Zawacki assert that this
method of overcoming BPR resistance in teams works well if the
organization has a large pool of relatively well-educated and flexible
people.
A similar problem in BPR teams is the tendency of key team
members to not conceptually understand the nature of work redesign.
The result of this problem, if not corrected, is a “ reengineered” system that
either doesn't work, isn't truly reengineered, or doesn't link with other
processes. Zigon (1994) discusses this problem and presents several
organizations' methods of dealing with this issue. Zigon reports on
several American oil companies which set up specific and detailed metrics
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
61
to track how well process redesign teams were accomplishing their
assigned tasks. Zigon notes that this feedback to management was
critical in detecting BPR efforts that were off-course so that consultants
could be sent into the teams to guide them back on course. In one
company, the metrics included survey data from team members about
group conflict, the relative contributions of each member, and how well
discussions stayed on topic. This company used these data as part of a
weekly bonus system. Zigon notes that several problems in this system
still need to be addressed, including how to preserve the confidentiality of
the evaluation process.
A very different problem, and one attempt at resolution, is
presented by Vince (1995), who discusses the nature of emotional
outbursts in some work design groups. He notes that a growing number
of consultants work with team members to create drawings of processes,
includmg symbols and even squiggles to represent work process and the
accompanying emotions. When used effectively, Vince asserts, drawings
help bring a sense of closure to the emotional issues that are an integral
part of the BPR process. Also important is that using these artistic
methods helps maintain the group's energy level and sustain continuity
from one meeting to the next.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
6 2
A somewhat more conservative method of resolving BPR
roadblocks is presented by Walker (1994). He reports on the practice of
virtually interactive brainstorming (VIBS), which reportedly can dehver
results similar to those of more conventional brainstorming methods.
Unique to VIBS is that participants do not have to be in one location, and
the method doesn't necessarily involve expensive technology, such as
teleconferencing. In its most simplistic form, VIES alters the last three
steps of the traditional brainstorming cycle to include providing a
temporary electronic mailbox facility, communicating essentials to team
members, collecting alternatives and obtaining a consensus on the best
solution through repeated ranking. Walker reports research from several
aerospace companies which used VIBS in conjunction with a mainstream
BPR process. His research shows that VIBS does provide results as
satisfactory to participants as traditional brainstorming, provided that
the brainstorming process has been sufficiently clarified by the fadlitator.
Two very common problems in BPR teams are staying focused on
the topic and developing continuity from one meeting to the next. This
problem is discussed by Aiken, Hasen and Vanjani (1996), who also
discuss group decision support software (GDSS) usage as a solution. They
note that most GDSS is useful for virtual groups, or for groups that
cannot meet in person on a regular basis. But for more traditional
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
6 3
meetings, GDSS serves a role sim ilar to the role texts played in Hansen's
(1995) research. Aiken, Hasen and Vanjani report that, while GDSS can
be helpful in guiding group process and facilitating discussions leading to
consensus, GDSS is most often used as a tool for quickly revisiting past
decisions and “ parking lot” ideas. Thus, the GDSS fimctions of agenda
coordination, key topic monitoring and producing progress reports are
used most often.
Another common problem in BPR teams is related to the
complexity and vagueness of reengineering. Rentsch, H effner and Duffy
(1994) report on research related to group members' experience level with
project teams which shows how groups can be constructed with
experience as a chief criterion to increase the chance of reengineering
success. Their study indicates that the more experience individuals have
with teams, the more abstract and concise their conceptualizations of
teamwork become. And since many project teams are engaged in very
abstract and complex tasks, such as work redesign, creating teams with
experienced people becomes an important consideration. These
researchers also provide empirical evidence of a somewhat common-sense
conclusion: teams achieve their objectives most often when team members
have the requisite experience. This conclusion is especially important in
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
6 4
work redesign situations, when the nature of the group's task is very
comphcated and mistakes are easy to make.
A final problem in work design teams is that individual
participants often don't know what role to play. Several studies have
attempted to delineate important group roles, with the research objective
being to better educate participants about these roles. One typology is
presented by Rodne and Irwin (1994). Their schema is espedally
relevant to work redesign because they distinguish between task and
process roles. Task-oriented roles include “shaper,” which focuses on
creating rough ideas and solutions; “ innovator,” which makes the ideas of
others more relevant to tasks; “analyzer,” which clarifies the problem to
be solved; and “ implementor,” which lays out and executes the plans. On
the process side, Rodne and Irwin present four roles: “networker,” which
bridges one team's work with others; “ harmonizer,” which focuses on
maintaining good working relationships; and “gatekeeper,” which acts as
a buffer to group and organizational authority figures. Rodne and Irwin
call for more research on how educating work redesign teams on roles will
affect group output.
While the hterature on teams and work redesign is rich with case
studies and prescriptive advice peppered with a few statistics, a great
need exists for more rigor in this line of research. Specifically, a need
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
6 5
exists for longitudinal quantitative studies focusing on the variables of
team composition, team interventions, training, team interaction,
organizational setting, and team output (Kessler, 1995; Dimancescu &
Dwenger, 1996). With this addition, teams, managers and consultants
would be better prepared to assist with work design. We now turn to a
discussion of other considerations of teams involved in work redesign.
Other considerations with work redesign teams
With the prevalence of teams used in work design, and with the
increasing amount of work redesign, several special topics are gaining
interest in the team hterature. One is the move toward creating cross
functional, cross-organizational teams as part of BPR processes, according
to Dimancescu and Dwenger (1996). These teams, which are most often
part of large-scale BPR exercises in middle and large firms (i.e.. Fortune
2000 and Fortune 500 companies), most often bring together supphers,
customers, and other strategic partners. While it is often impractical to
include customers in steering groups, Dimancescu and Dwenger assert
that BPR has a higher success rate when customers are “kept in the paper
trad,” meaning that they receive agendas, minutes and major reports.
Another issue that is entering the discussion on teams and work
redesign is the tendency for BPR steering teams to require key members
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
6 6
to play several roles. McCarthy (1996) presents a case study in one
organization in which a key manufacturing process was reengineered,
leading to the head manufacturing engineer also becoming the
manufacturing director. McCarthy reports that as the organization-wide
reengineering exercise continued, this individual found him self in the
contradictory position of juggling both management initiatives to change
designs and representing engineers who felt the design changes would
lead to higher defects. Eventually, the individual lost favor with
management for not being more responsive to customers, while his direct
reports lost confidence in him for not being a stronger advocate for
engineering. McCarthy reports on some research supporting the notion
that this scenario is a common occurrence and should be studied in more
detail.
A third special consideration is how cross-functional teams are
creating IS apphcations in their meetings—a task previously performed
mainly by groups composed almost entirely of technical people. Ballou
(1994) presents an often-cited case study firom Allstate Property &
Casualty Company, in which a cross-functional team (including members
firom sales, underwriting, legal, systems, operations and accounting) came
together as part of a mandate firom management to reengineer the hilling
process. What makes this case somewhat unique is that the group used
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
6 7
the Information Engineering Methodology (EEM) to allow the group to
design the reengineered apphcation during meetings. Similar to work
conducted by Hansen (1995) on texts, Ballou notes that the lEM method
makes the process of BPR much more concrete and manageable, since
each meeting results in a product that is testable right away. Thus, each
meeting starts with test results from the previous meeting's work.
A final issue that has received considerable hterature coverage
over the past several years is the role of diversity in change management
processes. Caudron (1994) presents research on the role of diversity in
change management teams. She reports that current diversity training,
which focuses on participants discussing their prejudices toward one
another in an open and safe environment, can actually reinforce
stereotypes and get in the way of change management. The goal of
diversity training in the context of BPR is to elim inate possible
obstructions to good group working relationships, and a useful method is
to couple development interventions with influence training (Kaye, 1996).
The result is often a work force that is more assertive, more able to
capitalize on their aptitudes, and more w illing to work in groups
(Caudron, 1994). Thus, certain types of diversity training can help groups
involved in BPR work to overcome stereotypes and focus on task issues.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
6 8
Additional evidence su^ests that groups are more efiPective when
they have diverse compositions. For example, members with diverse
personal attributes tend to produce better decisions than do homogeneous
groups (Shaw, 1991; McGrath, 1984).
And yet the research about the role of demographic diversity in
teams is unclear. Much of the research has been inconsistent
(Terborg, Castore & DeNinno, 1976), while some indicates that group
cohesiveness diminishes as heterogeneity increases (Hill, 1982).
Conclusion
This chapter reviewed the literature on the role of teams during work
redesign efforts, as well as the process teams used in moving toward
consensus in BPR situations. The next chapter sets up theoretic
framework and presents three specific research questions that this
study will consider.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
69
Chapter 4: Theoretic Framework and Method of Inquiry
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to present a theoretic framework and a
method of inquiry for this study. Since part of this study includes an
examination of two competing theories, this chapter presents each
theory, analyzes the vahdity of each, compares and contrasts their
theoretic propositions, and presents the research questions.
P u nctuated eguilihrium paradigm
The paradigm of punctuated equihbrium has recently received
considerable attention (Tyre & Orhkowski, 1994). This paradigm
examines phenomena by exam ining periods of dramatic change that
interrupt periods of calm. Gersick (1991) examines this line of research
in detail and shows how it can be used to order the data from a variety
of fields, including biology (e.g., Gould, 1989), sociology of science
(Kuhn, 1970), and psychology (Levinson, 1986). The paradigm has
also been used to explore different levels of analysis within the study
of organizations, including groups (Gersick, 1988, 1989) and entire
organizations (Miller & Friesen, 1980; Tushman & RomaneUi, 1985).
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
7 0
Theorists who subscribe to punctuated equilibrium often
differentiate this model from gradualist change systems. In models of
gradual change, systems are thought to accept change at almost any
time, provided that each change is fairly small; large changes are
thought to consist of a series of smaller, incremental changes (Gersick,
1991). By contrast, punctuated equilibrium assumes that, during
relatively large segments of time, “change is actively prevented, rather
than always potential but merely suppressed because no adaptive
advantage would accrue” (Gould, 1989, p. 124).
The model of punctuated equilibrium has three main
components: periods of equilibrium, deep structure, and periods of
revolutionary change (Gersick, 1991). Of these three components,
periods of equihbrium arguably get the most attention from scholars of
this paradigm (Kuhn, 1970). Equihbrium is characterized by two
conflicting forces—one that wiU keep the system in harmony with its
environment, and the other to keep the basic system intact. During
these periods, minor changes in the system may occur, provided that
the basic relationships of key system components wfll not change.
Gersick’ s (1991) analogy to illustrate this point is that the basketball
hoop may be raised or lowered by a few inches, but the basic rules of
the game won’ t change. The punctuated equihbrium model assumes
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
71
that most change results from minor fluctuates in the environment;
the minor changes in the system thus occur to keep the basic system
intact.
For a system to he in equilibrium with its environment implies
that it is well adjusted to the environment. Thus, resisting internal
change may be thought of as a method of increasing the odds of
survival, since change would substitute a w in n in g formula for one that
is unproven.
Within human systems, major (i.e., nonincremental) change is
avoided for three reasons: cognition, motivation and obligation
(Tushman & RomaneUi, 1985). Cognition refers to the tendency of
human systems to not even recognize phenomena that are inconsistent
with an established paradigm (Kuhn, 1970). Motivation relates to the
tendency of a structure to try to preserve itself, such as Gersick’ s
(1989) work indicating th at groups often fail to make progress on their
assigned projects in order to necessitate the continued existence of the
group. Obligation refers to the network of connections within the
environment that support a system’ s survival and may try to intervene
in the system to restore its prior state (Tushman & RomaneUi, 1985);
one appropriate example is a suppUer that alters a product but is
persuaded to change back by its customers’ negative feedback.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
72
The force that imderUes periods of equilibrium is called deep
structure. Deep structure refers to components of a system that are
differentiated and th at “work” (Gersick, 1991), meaning they interact
with the environment in such a way that the differentiation enables
system process and m aintains its own existence (Prigogine & Stengers,
1984, p. 154 and 287). Gersick (1991) surveyed punctuated
equihbrium hterature in the social and natural sciences, and using
commonalties in definitions, composed this description of deep
structure: “Deep structure is a network of fundamental,
interdependent choices,' of the basic configuration into which a
system’ s units are organized, and the activities that maintain both this
configuration and the system’ s resource exchange with the
environment” (p. 15).
Within systems composed of people working toward some
common goal, such as groups within organizations or organizations as
a whole, deep structure highhghts those choices people make in
coordinating their behavior to advance toward the objective. In
writing about groups, Gersick (1988) asserts that deep structure is the
framework of integrated webs of performance strategies, interaction
patterns, assumptions about and approaches toward a group’ s task
and environment. In dealing with organizations, Tushman and
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
73
RomaneUi (1985) identify deep structure with strategic orientation,
which is composed of five elements: core beliefs and values regarding
the organization; products, markets, technology and competitive
timing; the distribution of power; the organization’ s structure; and the
nature and type of control systems.
A system’ s deep structure works as a tightly integrated unit to
transform available inputs into outputs through a process (Tushman &
RomaneUi, 1985). Any major change to the deep structure would
break up this synergy, and quite possibly result in the demise of the
system. It is for this reason, punctuated equilibrium theorists (Gould,
1989; Gersick, 1991) maintain that systems are highly resistant to
large change. Yet if the system does change—either because the
environment demands a change or for some other reason—then the
change is often sudden and radical.
These periods of rapid and dramatic change, often referred to as
periods of revolution, compose the third major concept within the
punctuated equilibrium model. Deep structures have inertia, both to
prevent any new alternatives that would underm ine its survival and to
bring any deviations back into Une. Thus, a period of rapid and
radical change must, by defin ition, destroy one deep structure and
replace it with another. Tushman and RomaneUi (1985) describe the
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
74
process in relation to periods of organizational revolution:
“reorientations are relatively short periods of discontinuous change
where strategies, power, structure, and systems are fundamentally
transformed toward a new basis of alignment” (p. 173).
It is in understanding periods of transformation that
punctuated equilibrium scholars perhaps find their greatest
disagreement with gradualists, who generally hold that sudden,
dramatic change is the result of incremental alterations that have
been somehow stored and all happen at once (Gersick, 1991; Kuhn,
1970). The punctuated equilibrium thought is that one deep structure
is completely destroyed, leading to a brief but measurable period of
total uncertainty, followed by the establishment of a new deep
structure, which results in a new period of equilibrium (Gersick, 1991).
Yet the question remains about why revolutions happen at all.
Some gradualists argue (see Gould, 1980) that punctuated equilibrium
is illogical, since a system that is able to remain constant during a long
series of minor environmental changes should also be able to avoid a
short period of rapid change (which could be thought of as lots of Httle
changes happening at once). Yet the punctuated equilibrium theory
states that systems do reach a point of disharmony with the
environment in which they have to reinvent themselves (i.e., change
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
75
fundamentally at the level of deep structure) or die. Gersick (1991)
reports that revolutionary change under the punctuated equilibrium
model happens for two possible reasons: (1) some internal change
disrupts the deep structure’ s relationship with the environment,
necessitating in large-scale change, or (2) some environmental change
threatens the system’ s abihties to obtain necessary resources.
Because human systems in equihbrium often fail to recognize
phenomena inconsistent with their deep structure (Kuhn, 1970),
revolutions are preceded by triggers that overcome this resistance.
There are two types of such triggers. The first one, as described by
Kuhn (1970) and Tushman and RomaneUi (1985), is characterized by a
sudden increase in awareness of anomahes as viewed by the dominant
paradigm. The stage is then set for non-traditional thinkers to create
a new paradigm that better explains the troubling phenomena. In
science, this process usuaUy involves the introduction of new scholars
into the debate who were never proponents of the old paradigm. In
groups and organizations, the anomahes often involve the
identification of performance pressures—evidence that the old value
chain is no longer ahgned with the economic environment of
competitors and the market. Gersick (1991) summarizes this first
trigger by noting th at unless the new phenomena kill the system, they
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
76
gain more and more attention until some method can be found to deal
with them. This almost always means either fine-tuning the current
deep structure or scraping one deep structure in favor of a new one;
the first response prolongs equilibrium while the second one creates
revolution.
The second trigger is participants’ acute awareness that time is
running out. In Gersick’ s (1988) research, group participants found
that projects with life spans between one hour and several months
reliably created revolutions around half way through the projects’ life
expectancy. While the exact behaviors that signal the end of one
period of equilibrium and the start of revolution differ with the length
of the project and the project’ s objective; the general process includes
participants feeling that the approaches they chose for the first half
are no longer effective.
During periods of revolution, an important issue is how human
systems continue to function, since their deep structure is, at a
minimum, under assault. Gersick (1991) highlights four mechanisms
that both allow the system to function and assist in managing the
transition. The first is the role of emotion. Human systems seem to
gain useable energy by recognizing the revolutionary trigger—either
anomalous phenomena or a time crunch—and deciding to act in a way
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
7 7
to S t i l l accomplish the goal. Isen (1984) notes that groups often make
a series of quick decisions when they notice that time is short.
Specifically, they may drop agenda items, resolve power disputes, come
to quick consensus and plan future actions. The emotional energy
derived from the revolution is thus enough to sustain the human
system during its move to the next equilibrium.
A second mechanism that allows human systems to remain
functioning is contact with the environment. Gersick (1991, 1988) and
Levinson (1978) note that groups and organizations seek assurance,
assistance and advice from externals—such as consultants and
external supervisors—during revolutions. Systems normally resistant
to outsiders may become more willing to welcome external input
because of the confusion and emotional distress inherent in
revolutions.
A third mechanism identified by Gersick (1991) is cognition and
the dynamics of insight. Scholars in several disciplines (Gersick, 1991;
Gould, 1989; Prigogine & Stengers, 1984) note that a revolution moves
from an unconnecting of the old paradigm to complete uncertainty to a
basic insight that will crystallize into the new period of equilibrium.
Yet the dynamics of insight are not nearly as predictable as the
dynamics of equilibrium , and some systems may move from one insight
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
7 8
to another before forming the new equihbrium. In most cases, the
trigger to the revolution contains the insight that will become the next
equihbrium, as in the famous case of Galileo's experiments
documenting phenomena difficult for the Church to explain; in time,
the basic assumptions of his experiments became the basis for the new
equihbrium (Kuhn, 1970).
Within human systems, models emphasizing punctuated
equihbrium often refer to choice categories that are made, but allow for
virtually unlimited specific choices (Gersick, 1991). Thus, a
punctuated equihbrium model of a smaU group wifi emphasize when
key decisions are made, and what types of decisions are made at which
temporal juncture, yet would hkely not refer to group progress in
simphstic forms such as “forming, storming, norming, and performing"
(Gersick, 1991; Tuckman, 1965).
It is for this reason that the punctuated equihbrium model is
such a powerful lens through which to view organizational
transformation phenomena. In the case of change efforts involving
technology, such as reengineering, evidence of such punctuated
equihbrium-style behavior changes have been documented (Kelly and
McGrath, 1988; McGrath, 1991; McGrath and Kelly,
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
79
1986). Specifically, when a certain activity begins, how long it lasts,
and so on are partially determined by how the participants can
coordinate their behavior. These processes are well explained by the
punctuated equilibrium paradigm (Sviokla, 1996).
Yet one shortcoming of the punctuated equilibrium framework
is that time is central, and this approach can seem simplistic when
studying a dynamic process like human communication. Some
scholars have thus used a hybrid approach that combines punctuated
equilibrium with a more complex firamework (Sviokla, 1996). We now
turn to discussion of a second framework used in this study.
Frequent revolutions as windows of opportunitv
A second theoretic firamework is presented by Tyre and Orlikowski
(1994). This theory is similar to punctuated equilibrium in several
ways. First, it argues that the notion of gradualism is an inaccurate
model to explain organizational change. Second, the paradigm
highlights relatively short periods in which a system may accept
dramatic changes. And third, the paradigm contrasts these “windows
of opportunity” with longer periods of time in which the system wül
likely reject change.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
8 0
Yet the paradigm is also different in three key ways. First, Tyre
and Orlikowski assert that punctuated equilibrium assumes
organizational consistency, and thus draws attention to the relatively
rare times when the organization seems to not be constant. The
“windows of opportunity” framework, in contrast, assumes that change
is more common than stability, and thus even periods that may appear
to be in equilibrium are still changing in dynamic ways but hard to see
ways. Second, punctuated equilibrium uses time as the independent
variable. The paradigm thus concludes that, given a long period,
revolutionary change will Likely occur. Tyre and Orlikowski have a
very different focus by centering on the inputs of any period of time.
They thus conclude that the window of change opportunity is either
open or closed because of what preceded the moment of investigation.
Third, Tyre and Orlikowski focus their study on how people interact
with new technology.
Like Gersick, Tyre and Orlikowski argue that the prescriptive
notion of continuous, linear improvement in installed technologies
(Rogers, 1983; Hughes, 1971) is not supported by organizational
practice. Behavioral science research at the individual level suggests
that people initially pay great attention to technology, but that they
soon “chunk” routine behavior into quasi-unconscious clusters that
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
81
require little attention (Langer & Imber, 1979; KruglanskL & Freund,
1983). Once people reach this lower attention level, their ability to
innovate is reduced. Thus, a limited “window of opportunity" (Tyre &
Orlikowski, 1994) exists in which technology can be implemented and
refined before users become less likely to recognize and respond to
technological limitations (Katz, 1982; Hackman, 1990).
This pattern helps explain why technological in n ovation is
uneven. People are highly conscious of their behavior for only a brief
period. During this time, they are much more able to modify how they
accompHsh tasks than when using the technology becomes routine.
This “window of opportunity” is a period of relatively low productivity,
however, since people’ s awareness is focused on how they work, rather
than what they are trying to accomphsh. Thus, attention becomes a
major construct of the windows of opportunity framework.
Yet the installed technology does continue to change as
implementers upgrade software to new versions, automate manual
processes through more intricate machinery, and conduct even basic
maintenance. Rice and colleagues assert that people wül “reinvent”
existing technology when faced with new procedures or when the
technology is modified, even shghtly (Rice & Rogers, 1980). Putting all
this together. Tyre and Orlikowski predict that a long “window of
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
8 2
opportunity” for behavioral change opens once substantially new
technology is introduced. Once groups or users become accustomed to
the new equipment or processes, they chunk their behavior and their
awareness of their specific actions diminishes. As the technology is
incrementally refined (e.g., interim updates of software), shorter
windows of opportunity for further behavioral change will appear.
Tyre and Orlikowski (1994) looked for this pattern in three
organizations. The first, a European-based manufacturer of precision
metal components, was installing new process technologies, including
metal turning equipment, assembly inspection systems, and handling
systems. Through semi-structured retrospective interviews,
multiparticipant discussions, and questionnaires, the researchers
noted that in 86% of the cases, they observed the expected pattern—a
relatively long “window of opportunity” occurring right after the
installation of new technology followed by a series of shorter windows
as technical upgrades were made. During each window of opportunity,
people changed how they interact with the technology.
The second organization, a multinational software consulting
firm, was introducing Computer-Aided Software Engineering (CASE)
tools, which amounted to a new process technology to automate
software production in that organization. Through an in-depth field
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
83
Study conducted over eight months (including review of company,
project and technology documents), the researchers noted that four out
of five groups (80%) produced the expected pattern.
The third organization was a research university in the
northeast which was installing a new personal computer environment,
including word processors and e-mail systems. Through structured
and unstructered interviews, as well as observation of five projects, the
researchers noted that 65% of the users interviewed reported or were
observed to demonstrate the “windows of opportunity” pattern.
It is important to note that in three studies. Tyre and
Orlikowski measured two levels of analysis—individual and group. In
the first and second organizations, they studied groups, and their
samples included 41 project groups and five project groups,
respectively. In the third study, they analyzed the individual level,
with their sample consisting of 51 users. The researchers point out
that to analyze both groups and individuals in the same context would
be difficult and may be overly intrusive.
Tyre and Orlikowski have five main conclusions. First, they
found evidence for a tradeoff between production and adaptation to
technology: the latter includes learning new tasks or refining the
technology to increase efficiency and effectiveness. The balance seems
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
8 4
to tip in favor of adapting to technology when the users’ or groups’
estabhshed routines no longer mesh with the technology, and they are
forced to adapt. This notion is very similar to deep structure, which
Gersick (1989, 1991) and Levinson (1986) note is most often abohshed
and a new structure created when the old no longer functionally
interacts with the environment. However, this framework also differs
from punctuated equihbrium in one central way—since several
windows of opportunity accompany any change of technology, this
theory would predict that any deep structure wouldn’ t become
entrenched until after all the windows of opportunity had closed.
Punctuated equihbrium, by contrast, would predict that the revolution
would not stop until a new deep structure had formed that could
survive until the next major revolution.
Second, the researchers note that patterns of behavior relative
to technology tend to congeal and become constraining over time For
example, they noticed on several occasions that people and groups
attempted to relate to new technology (e.g., a decentralized personal
computer environment) as they related to older technology (e.g., a
centralized mainframe system). These behavior patterns can only be
changed, it appears from their research, when the technology is
changed. This conclusion is particularly appropriate to BPR, since
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
8 5
many reengineering scholars and consultants posit that implementing
a new technology backbone is central to the change effort (Groenfeldt,
1997).
Third, expectations often change to match experience. Tyre and
Orlikowski generalized that people’ s expectations are based on their
immediately prior experience of similar technology. As users become
accustomed to the new systems, they form their expectations of future
incremental updates on the basis of what they currently use. This
conclusion is significant because the researchers assert that when
expectations and experience match, development of skills often does
not occur.
Fourth, the researchers found evidence that team membership
and enthusiasm often erode as production needs increase. This
conclusion is a particular problem for reengineering, which often seeks
to increase production (i.e., through increased cycle time, decreased
inefficiencies and tighter coordination across departments) through
teams (Kolodny, Liu, Stymne & Denis, 1996).
Fifth, the researchers predict that the “windows of opportunity”
pattern will appear in many non-technology situations. In fact, they
predict that this may be a more accurate way to describe general
organizational change than either the gradualist framework or
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
8 6
punctuated equilibrium. We now turn to a discussion of other
frameworks.
A middle-of-the-road framework
It is important to note that while punctuated equilibrium and
“windows of opportunity” contrast in several key ways, these theories
do not represent the only options in explaining organizational change.
Brown and Eisenhardt (1997) have proposed another framework for
the study of organizational change based on a multiple case design in
which preliminary findings were only considered generalizable if they
could be “replicated” in later studies (Yin, 1984). A total of six high-
technology company cases were developed, encompassing 81 taped
interviews. The resulting framework did not conform to either the
gradualist notion of change nor the punctuated equilibrium paradigm.
Rather, the framework they developed highlighted continuous
reinvention, in which the organization was always in transition from
one deep structure to another.
While Brown and Eisenhardt assert that this type of change is
radically different from punctuated equilibrium-type change, two
caveats are important. First, these researchers studied high-
technology organizations. By the researchers’ own admissions, this
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
8 7
industry changes much faster than other industries; any high-
technology organization that did not constantly reinvent itself would
soon be bankrupt, they noted. Second, the punctuated equilibrium
framework can, in fact, explain this type of organizational change.
Gersick (1991) noted that all deep structures vary in their degree of
entrenchment. That is, the deep structure preserving the Church’ s
worldview of crystal heavenly spheres in Galileo’ s time is much more
entrenched than, say, the notion that personal computers should have
hard disk drives. The latter deep structure is relatively young and
most people agree it won’ t last forever. Thus, it would take relatively
little stress to alter the deep structure of a young paradigm. One could
even imagine scenarios in which the stress was such that deep
structures formed and unformed very quickly; such a theory may well
explain Brown and Eisenhardt’ s observations.
Relevance to reengineering
Punctuated equihbrium, with its focus on moments of radical change,
is especially suited for the study of key reengineering phenomena.
This is true for four reasons. First, reengineering seeks to radically
redesign processes. Several punctuated equihbrium scholars (Gersick,
1991; Kuhn, 1970) assert that radical redesign is at the heart of
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
8 8
periods of revolution. Thus, examining the ways that a deep structure
is replaced by another gets at the core of reengineering.
Second, several of the original thinkers who pioneered
reengineering now assert that the manager-employee relationship
must be redesigned for reengineering to be successful (Hammer &
Champy, 1993; Hammer, 1996). The punctuated equilibrium
paradigm explains such relationship shifts very effectively by
highlighting how radical a revolution can be. In fact, punctuated
equilibrium scholars often point to relationship shifts as an example of
a phenomenon they are uniquely equipped to study (Kuhn, 1970;
Levinson, 1986).
Third, punctuated equihbrium is similar to theory of negotiated
order, which several theorists have noted is an effective framework
with which to view organizational change (Gersick, 1991; Levinson,
1986; Day & Day, 1977; Nathan & Mitroff, 1991). The theory of
negotiated order views organizational rules as evolving through
continuous interaction. While negotiated order does not necessarily
highhght periods of revolution, it does view phenomena as “works in
progress” (Deetz, 1992), which are constructed and maintained by
consent (Deetz, 1992; Foucault, 1979, 1980).
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
8 9
Similar to negotiated order theory, researchers using the
punctuated equilibrium framework may choose to interpret a
reengineering effort as a function of the interactions of the managers
and employees in which managers and employees must work together
in overt ways to establish norms of conduct and acceptable rules for
accomplishing group tasks. This process is described well by Donohue
and Roberto (1993): “Individuals actively shape the social order by
constantly testing and stretching the limits without actual, overt
negotiation” (p. 177). This process consists of one person setting a
Limit, another testing the limit and the group deciding if the new limit
is acceptable (Shim an off, 1980). This description parallels the
prescriptive advice of reengineering consultants, who often recommend
that steering teams should set their own boundaries, to establish their
own norms, and govern their own interactions (Chaudron, 1995).
How organizations change is at the heart of the reengineering
literature. It is thus important to test whether punctuated
equilibrium provides an accurate description of the change process, or
if “windows of opportunity” is a more valid framework. Thus, this
study uses a punctuated equilibrium framework while also allowing
for the fact that some scholars dispute its central theoretic proposition.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
9 0
We now turn to the topic of organizational genres, which is another
component in this study’ s design.
Orgamzational genres
Since Aristotle’ s time, rhetoricians have used genres as a means of
classifying types of rhetorical discourse. In the literary tradition,
genre generally refers to a means of organizing written works in terms
of form and class (Yates & Orlokowski, 1992; e.g., Holman, 1972).
In the last several decades, rhetoricians have tried to become
more rigorous with the definition of genre. Simons (1978), for
example, defined a rhetorical genre as “a distinctive and recurring
pattern of similarly constrained rhetorical practices. ” Using a
definition based more n function. Mailer (1984) defined genre as
“typified rhetorical actions based on recurrent situations. ” These
definitions, and many others that follow in the tradition of rhetorical
situations, follow Bitzer’ s (1968) concept of “situation,” which is
composed of an exigence (something needing to be done), an audience
(who must be altered or influenced) and constraints (“persons, events,
objects, and relations which are parts of the situation because they
have the power to constrain decision and action needed to modify the
exigence”).
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
91
Yates and Orlikowski (1992), who followed the scholarship of
Miller and Bitzer, propose genres of organizational communication.
Their scheme provides a means of examining organizational practices
(e.g., meetings or telephone calls) and artifacts (e.g., annual reports,
memos or telephone message slips) within the context of socially-
created rules.
Within the framework of organizational communication, Yates
and Orlokowski write that a genre can be thought of as “a
communicative action invoked in response to a recurrent situation.”
Drawing on Giddens (1984), they further posit that genres are enacted
through rules, which associate elements of form and substance with
recurrent situations. In a meeting, for example, elements of form
might include an informal seating arrangement, a printed agenda, and
a person designated as note-taker. Elements of substance could
include the content of the agenda, the content of specific discussions,
and the notes taken in the meeting. Recurrent situations might
involve the reading of the minutes firom the last meeting, discussion of
old business, and an overview of the agenda.
Two specific concerns about genres of organizational
communication involve level of abstraction and normative scope. The
level of abstraction refers to the relationship of genres and sub genres.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
92
For example, Yates and Orlikowski note that the recommendation
letter may be considered a subgenre of the business letter, but that
this distinction is relative, is based on time and context, and should be
made based on actual usage; so if all recommendation letters in a set of
data were positive, “positive recommendation letters” would not be
considered a sub genre of recommendation letters, since the two
sub genres would be identical. Normative scope refers to the similarity
in practices or artifacts necessary for elements to be considered a
genre. The researchers note that genres must emerge from some social
community, but that the community need not be large. Also, the
community members themselves should identify the emergent genre as
distinct from other genres, or as a sub genre of existing genres.
With these constructs in place, Yates and Orlikowski assert that
genres are formed in an attempt to create convergent behavior
between members of a group and that, once formed, the genres take on
a kind of regulating power. That is, if a member takes an action that
is out of line with an identified genre, the community will either
punish the individual, excuse the error, or modify the genre. Thus,
each time an organizational artifact is produced, the group must
decide if it meets the requirements of the genre and, if it does not,
what actions to take as a result.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
93
An important distinction is between an artifact, as a common
study within rhetorical analysis, and a ritual, which is a common
element of study in cultural analysis (Deal & Kennedy, 1982). An
artifact is often considered something tangible, such as a memo, a
report, or even a message slip. A ritual is part of an on-going
communication process, and represents the system that produces an
artifact. Thus, a routine meeting is a ritual and may produce many
artifacts, such as minutes or memos.
Yet this distinction is not entirely relevant within
organizational genre analysis. According to Yates and Orlikowski, a
genre is a more global concept that includes both rituals and artifacts.
Since it operates at a more abstract level, genre analysis allows for a
greater range of comparison and contrast between these elements. To
continue the meeting and memo example, genre analysis might look at
the genre rules th at govern meetings as well as those rules that
regulate written material; thus, these two sets of rules can be
compared and even synthesized.
The notion of organizational genres brings together two
important strands in the study of reengineering—the notion that
group members m ust produce new ways of communicating with
themselves (i.e., produce and maintain new types of communication, or
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
94
genres) and the idea that power is central to the process. Yates and
Orlikowski also discuss organizational genres in much the same way
as Gersick discusses deep structures—both are maintained by use,
both are somewhat slow to change (although Yates and Orlokowski do
not discuss revolutions), and both are deeply embedded in the way
people behave.
Devitt (1991) presents a method to study organizational genres,
which she calls “ intertextuality.” In a research study using the
method, she gathered documents from several tax accounting firms
and divided these into 13 genres based on their commonalties. Devitt
then sent a copy of her coding scheme to representatives of the firms,
who made minor changes to her genre categories; in most cases, she
accepted the changes. The researcher then performed a series of
follow-up interviews to explore the function of each genre category,
and performed a simplified content analysis on her notes. Finally, she
noted how the content and form of each genre supports its function.
For example, she noted that research memoranda had the highest
average number of references to Internal Revenue Service
publications, which makes sense in that research documents attempt
to answer specific technical questions within government guidelines
while communicating credibility.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
95
Yates and Orlikowski discuss several important topics that need
to be researched in greater detail. The one they discuss at the most
length is the relationship of power and changes to genres. To
illustrate this point, they report on one of the few studies that
examined this relationship—the nineteenth century case in which the
president of the Illinois Central Railroad wanted his middle managers
to provide financial analyses of proposed track improvements, so he
mandated that their written proposals (a genre) include the expected
return on investment (ROI). Ultimately, his tactic failed because the
middle managers did not understand ROI (Yates, 1989).
These researchers call for more study in the way that power,
socially constructed rules, and genres interrelate. This study seeks to
provide some insight into these processes.
Area and method of inguirv
This study probes into how reengineering teams use power in their
internal communication to produce, change and maintain written
organizational genres. To gain some insights into this area, the study
examines whether genres develop in periods of revolution (as the
punctuated equilibrium firamework would predict) or in “windows of
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
96
opportunity” as Tyre and Orlikowski may predict. Specifically, the
study has three research questions:
1. How do these uses of power serve to coordinate the effort of the
group and create artifacts that converge into genres?
2. Do genres evolve slowly, punctuated by periods of rapid and radical
change, or do they change in smaller and more firequent periods of
change?
3. How do organizational genres serve to produce greater group
coordination and thus help to accomplish the goals of the
reengineering process?
Data analvsis
Consistent with Tyre and Orlikowski, and several studies in the
punctuated equilibrium framework (e.g., Tushman & Romanelli,
1985), this study utilizes two kinds of analysis. First, the researcher
observed the steering team of a divisional reengineering effort at this
division. This meeting, which included the divisional manager, his
direct reports and other people key to the change effort, was the forum
for discussing macro issues as well as making decisions that would
filter down to other groups and teams throughout the organization.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
9 7
This qualitative approach is consistent with the work of many scholars
studying organizational change (Eisenhardt, 1989; Miles &
Huberman, 1984; Pettigrew, 1990; Strauss & Corbin, 1990).
Second, the researcher examined all project-specific
documentation relating to the reengineering effort, including meeting
notes, company communications, “as is” assessments, value chain
diagrams, and other material designed to educate meeting participants
on current practices, lessons learned from other organizations,
advances in technology, and options for the change effort in the
division. This step was consistent with Orlikowski (1996) and other
studies examining longitudinal reengineering effectiveness.
Third, the researcher created organizational genres using the
techniques described by Yates and Orlikowski (1992) and Devitt
(1991). This step included looking for commonalties in form, content
and function, as well as general design.
Fourth, the researcher noted how genres formed and changed
during the course of the reengineering effort, and at which points the
most changes occurred. This work led to the creation of a set of
interview questions to probe the relationship of power and genres.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
98
Fifth, the researcher performed eight structured interviews with
meeting participants and then performed a content analysis on the
resulting interview transcripts.
Sixth, consistent with Devitt (1991), the researcher performed a
more global analysis of the relationship between genre function and
content within the context of the interview content analysis. This step
resulted in several summary tables th at help to answer the interview
questions.
Conclusion
This chapter summarizes theoretic debate about organizational
change—specifically, whether change occurs gradually, in radical
revolutions punctuating long periods of calm, in gradually diminishing
waves (or “windows of opportunity”), or in some other pattern. Based
on two well-supported but competing theories—punctuated
equilibrium and “windows of opportunity”—the chapter then proposed
a series of research questions which will test which pattern of change
best fits a steering team during a reengineering exercise. The research
questions also probe into the relationship of power and the formation
and maintenance of organizational communication genres.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
9 9
These research questions should serve to gain insight into the
process of organizational change, as well as the central role of
communication. Documents produced during reengineering are not
end points in the process, but rather tools to help the group work
toward fundamental shifts in highly complex operations. Thus, this
study probes into the ways that groups progress through comphcated
tasks, coordinate the behavior of individual members, while working
toward a specific and important goal.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
100
Chapter 5: Genres and Power in Practice
Introduction
This chapter presents the data used to answer the research questions.
As explained in the last chapter, the data are in three primary forms—
documents, interview notes and meeting notes/transcripts. The
documents fall into two categories: items produced during the
reengineering process and those produced after the major round of
visioning meetings (June 19 through September 1, 1995, a total of 39
meetings). The process documents tend to be less formal, include more
errors (such as typos, flow chart lines that do not point to the right
item, etc.), and have a much greater diversity in format, font selection,
writing style, the use of color, and length. The implementation reports
are remarkably similar; all use the same style of cover page, similar
fonts, comparable flow diagrams, and the same system of thumb-tab
indexing. Appendix A presents an overview of the process documents
broken down by genre with a description of the function of each genre,
the references to other genres, changes within a genre during the
progress of the reengineering meetings, and implications for this
study. Because the implementation documents are so similar, a genre
analysis would not have been useful. However, the genre innovations
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
101
in the process documents were compared to the final documents as a
test for which innovations became entrenched.
The notes from the meetings, which were entered real-time in a
laptop computer, include comments about documents, how the
documents were evaluated, and any side comments (e.g., ‘ T like how
engineering did their report; let’ s use this format.”) that the researcher
could hear. The notes were then analyzed to make two
determinations: (1) which innovations were discussed (and thus
overtly recognized): aud (2) how the innovations were evaluated within
the power structure of the group.
Structured interviews were conducted with the eight core team
members about 18 months after the conclusion of the vision in g
reengineering meetings. Each member of the core team plays a major
management role in the division; each is considered a senior person in
the division. Appendix B contains the interview questions and
Appendix C presents a matrix of the responses.
The data indicate that a total of ten genres formed during the
reengineering exercise. The first genre consists of seven reprints of a
company newsletter; the intended audience is the 700+ employees of
the division. This genre, which had the widest readership of any in
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
102
this study, used the overt power of the divisional director to give
credibility to the reengineering activities and to the other genres.
Genre two consists of three documents produced for the entire
team that highlight key change elements. As a document created and
m aintained by ISS, this genre demonstrates both the power of an
outside consultant and the internal attempts to minimize that power.
Documents in this genre became longer as ISS accommodated changes
from the group, but the overall format changed very little, despite
some comments in the meetings th at the format didn’ t reflect the
organization very well.
Genre three includes three documents that highhght gaps in the
current processes that must be closed before the BPR exercise can
move forward. Documents in this genre were all created for discussion
in one day, and thus did not demonstrate change.
Genre four consists of nine documents produced by ISS and
manufacturing to summarize the change process. This genre shows
how rules from the outside consultant were synthesized with those
from relatively powerful groups inside the organization to share power.
As a symbol of this synthesis, the "Copyright ISS” designation
disappeared after the first two documents.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
103
Genre five includes five documents from various subteams on
the overall process design (the “as is”). This genre showed very rapid
development as the group established and enforced norms of behavior.
Perhaps most telling is that one of the first subteams to present a
document in this genre did not provide copies for everyone in the
meeting, and several negative comments critiqued this choice. Later
documents were provided to everyone.
Genre six includes five team reports on inputs, outputs, and
enablers. This genre was discussed very quickly and provided
relatively httle insight.
Genres seven, eight, nine, and ten consist of relatively few
documents that changed Httle during the BPR. Thus, they provided
relatively Httle insight.
This chapter now turns to a discussion of the research questions
and how they were answered, at least in part, by an analysis of these
genres. Comments from the interviews and later documents are also
included in this discussion.
Research question one: Power causing convergence into genres
This research question explores the role of power in forming genres.
As a mature organization with a rich history, this corporation exhibits
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
104
several characteristics of power that are directly applicable to the
fonnation, modihcation, and maintenance of genres. The data support
three main observations: (1) that genre setting, as a practice, is deeply
intertwined with the power hierarchy of the organization; (2) that
adopting or refining a genre requires an overt use of power, and is
itself a powerful act; and (3) that senior management remains
powerful in genre creation as long as it uses its power in a prudent
manner.
Genre setting and a power hierarchv. Genre four demonstrates
a hierarchy of power at work in the division. This genre, which
includes nine summary and assessment documents produced by ISS,
changes considerably over the course of the reengineering process.
The early documents contain the phrase "Copyright 1995 ISS” at the
bottom of each page and demonstrate a look that is unique from every
other genre. Specifically, these early documents contain large
amounts of white space (often more than 75% of the page), use dip art
(e.g., images of people scratching their heads, images of personal
computers, line drawings of lightning bolts, etc.), and have relatively
little information on each page. Almost immediately, ISS dropped the
copyright notice and began adding more information in less space.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
105
These documents use a combination of functional imagery (especially
flow diagrams) with “cute” (a word used by several people in the
meeting) notations, such as clouds representing contact with the
customer. Around this period, several other genres (especially five and
six), which were produced by internal personnel, show several other
innovations, including the use of color.
Later documents in this genre demonstrate a second major
change. Specifically, ISS documents become almost indistinguishable
from those produced by the manufacturing personnel internal to the
organization. There are several inferences to be drawn. First, while
ISS has considerable power to set genre rules (as evidenced by genre
two), its power appears less than that of manufacturing. It is also
interesting to think of these two formats (that is, early genre four
documents produced by ISS and documents in various genres produced
by manufacturing) as competing rules. The deep structure of
manufacturing appears more resilient than ISS. Second, ISS’ s early
documents appear intentionally distinct firom organizational
documents (as evidenced by the copyright notice), and this runs
counter to the organizational culture, which is document-intensive and
where each page does not usually contain information about the
source. Thus, the early decision to drop the copyright notice can be
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
106
interpreted as a way to come into compliance with overarching genre
rules. Third, ISS obviously spent considerable time consciously
evaluating which rules to submit to and which it would intentionally
violate (e.g., some of the specifics of the genre two format). This
conclusion appears to reinforce Tyre and Orlikoski’ s (1994) claim that
participants’ attention is much more focused on the form of
communication during a transition than after the transition is
complete.
The power of adoption. Genre seven, which is made up of team
input, output and enabler reports, includes one of the rare instances in
which the manufacturing group adopts an innovation. Specifically,
their July 25 report uses almost the same format, font selection and
scale as some of ISS’ s intermediate reports in genre four. Several later
documents from other groups also adopt the same look. It can thus be
hypothesized that manufacturing’ s alteration of its own formats sent a
powerful signal that some of ISS’ s recommendations were acceptable.
Once this signal was sent, other groups were quick to foUow.
A b a la n d n g act for management. The interviews with core team
members suggest that the divisional director, Tim Wong, played a
critical role in the reengineering process, and that Dr. Wong’ s adept
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
107
and prudent use of power was central to the success of the process.
This power was evidenced in three ways.
First, Dr. Wong gathered the senior managers in the division
together on a regular basis to discuss the state of the division. Three
participants noted in the interviews that Dr. Wong almost certainly
knew where these discussions would lead, but that he took the time for
genuine consensus to be achieved.
Second, Dr. Wong interrupted the scheduled meeting agenda on
seven occasions, according to the researcher’ s notes. On each occasion.
Dr. Wong said that he beheved it was important to have a
“conversation” (his word each time) with the team about something on
his mind. The result of each “conversation” was that some behavior
was avoided, repeated, or initiated. Early in the process (on the third
meeting), for example, Dr. Wong interrupted the meeting when a
participant (not a member of the core team) expressed the view that
the BPR was taking a lot of managers’ time and that the day-to-day
concerns of the division might be neglected. Dr. Wong’ s “conversation”
was that the core team participants “had better start delegating'’ their
day-to-day responsibilities so they could put their energies toward the
reengineering intervention. A second noticeable example of a
“conversation” occurred in a meeting that started on a Friday, about
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
108
half way through the process. Dr. Wong seemed noticeably agitated
that several core team members were absent. During his digression,
some of the attendees noted that a few core team members were ill.
Dr. Wong urged the participants to attend the meetings if at all
possible and to delegate more so that they could get more rest. (As a
side-point, it could be argued that these “conversations” represent a
genre. Yet because the conversations do not occur at regularly
scheduled times—that is, they are not planned—and because these
conversations are not immediately recognized as being distinct from
the other BPR activities—they are not separated as a genre in this
study. Rather, the overt use of power is compared with changes in
genres in an attempt to gain insight into the unstated rules at work in
organizational change teams.)
Third, Dr. Wong initiated the division-wide reengineering
meeting by addressing all the supervisors and managers. During this
discussion, he asserted that the consulting firm was the “traffic cop,”
and organizational employees are the “truck drivers.” Thus, he
positioned the reengineering process as being owned by the
organization. During this meeting, he also issued an ultimatum by
declaring that people who tried to “drag their feet” or resist the
reengineering process would be “ left at the train station,” because “the
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
109
train is leaving whether you like it or not.” Dr. Wong thus used his
authority to issue what amounted to an ultimatum In summary, the
data support three main observations: that genre setting is deeply
pohtical and embedded in an organizational power relationship, that
adopting or refin in g a genre requires an overt use of power, and th at
senior management plays a difficult but important role in the power
relationship. We now turn to the second research question.
Research question two: How genres form, ch an ge and are m ain tain ed
This research question investigates how genres form, change and are
maintained during the reengineering team meetings. Of specific
concern is whether they change using the punctuated equilibrium
pattern or the “windows of opportunity” pattern. The punctuated
equihbrium theory would hypothesize that changes would occur in
bursts, with long periods of stability; in addition, punctuated
equihbrium would predict that there would be forces acting to cause
changes but that the genre would resist changes until a revolution
would occur. In contrast, the “windows of opportunity” theory would
predict that changes would occur in waves, with each wave being
shghtly less intense and shorter-Hved than the wave it follows; in
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
110
addition, “windows of opportnnity” would predict that people’ s
attention, conversations and other resources would focus on the form.
The data show five important patterns in how genres form,
change and are maintained. These patterns are: (1) genres require a
great deal of effort before changes are noticed, yet the new genre is
slow to stabilize; (2) ISS has a unique ability to shape, maintain and
upset genres; (3) genre innovations that are outside a certain range
are almost immediately dismissed; (4) there is a correlation between a
group’ s abihty to create genre innovation and its willingness to accept
innovations firom other groups; and (5) a single document that is
referred to regularly may sustain a genre. We now examine the
details of these findings.
Slow to change, slow to stabilize The data show a mixture of
punctuated equilibrium and “windows of opportunity” tendencies.
Specifically, the genres show an initial flurry of rapid changes once
they are created, especially in the case of genre three (which was
created by management’ s mandate). The fact that the initial genre
rules changed again very quickly would seem to support the “windows
of opportunity” theory. Yet once a genre became estabhshed (as in the
cases of genres one, four and five), it seemed to resist changes (such as
innovations by non-powerful groups, or samples from the consulting
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
Ill
company that appeared quite different). This observation would seem
to support punctuated equilibrium theory.
Yet the situation may not be as clear-cut as it seems.
Punctuated equihbrium scholars (e.g., Kuhn, 1970) note that the
longer a deep structure is in place, the harder it is to change. This
theorietic proposition is supported by the fact that estabhshed genres
were slower to change. Thus, the observed diminishing waves of
change may be consistent with the punctuated equihbrium framework.
The most serious conflict between the two theories is whether
incremental changes are actively resisted or if they impact a system as
a small series of change waves. Genre one does not change in terms of
format during the entire reengineering project, even though the
content shifts from general explanatory to a call for individual
responsibihty. Yet genre four is hkely an estabhshed genre that ISS
has used before, and it changes quickly. Thus, how estabhshed the
genre is does not appear to be a vahd predictor of the genre’ s
acceptance of innovation. Rather, the fact that genre one was
supported by the highest power in the division (Dr. Wong, who praised
this pubhcation in several of the reengineering meetings) while genre
four was only supported by an external consultant suggests that power
is an intervening variable in genre change.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
112
The slow rate of change was confirmed by the interviews. All
the interviewees noted that the BPR took longer to start than people
had expected, and that the organization was still somewhat resistant
to the work cell culture (one of the important BPR outcomes) in several
areas. Of specific interest is the series of discussions Dr. Wong
initiated with the senior managers. Several participants noted that
one function of these discussions was to achieve change in the th in k in g
of senior divisional managers, and that this step took more than one
year to complete.
The interviews and meeting notes also show evidence of some
punctuated equihbrium tendencies, as well as “windows of
opportunity” elements. Interviewees spoke to two issues. First, they
noted that the division’ s culture was very slow to change, and what
change has occurred has been very costly in terms of time; specifically,
they assert that Dr. Wong’ s year-long discussions yielded an important
but relatively simple change: the acceptance that a BPR intervention
is needed. Second, they note that the first round of meetings was
successful in that they resulted in the creation of a new vision, but
that the process was enormously time and labor-involved, as evidenced
by the voluminous documents firom this series of meetings.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
113
Considering all these points, it appears th at “windows of
opportunity” provides a better explanation of how established genres
continue to drift after a major change. That is, this theory correctly
predicts that changes occur in waves as the new format becomes
entrenched. It also appears that “windows of opportunity” was the
better theory for explaining how people’ s attention shifts during a
change effort. Yet the data appear to support punctuated
equilibrium’ s major theoretic proposition—th at an estabhshed genre
will be very resistant to change; the data do not appear to support the
“windows of opportunity” contention that this resistance is overstated
by punctuated equilibrium theorists.
The genre-setting power of ISS. Genre two demonstrates that
the external consulting firm had a unique ability to cause changes to
genre rules. Specifically, the integrated change element identification
hst took the place of gap analyses of individual teams. Even though
this document subsumed power firom some of the subteams, group
participants referred to it positively and later documents from the
teams do not include the same information, thus implying that they
gave up the control of the genre to ISS.
An interesting side note is that the ISS personnel had a cubical
right next to the main meeting room, with one of the few laptop
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
114
computers to ever be brought into the meetings. Thus, they were
literally positioned to be able to produce documents more quickly than
organizational employees. The practicality of their setup may have
influenced meeting participants to accept that ISS was the logical
group to take over this role. Still, genre two includes some of the most
powerful documents in the entire reengineering effort (documents that
record process changes that individual departments need to make to
comply with the BPR initiative).
Changes too far outside genre rules comnletelv rejected. Genre
five, which includes team reports on overall process design, includes
one document that gives insight into how the group deals with
documents that are far outside the rules of a genre. One group was
assigned the task of integrating the continuous measurable
improvement (CMI) program into the BPR initiative; the schedule from
ISS called for them to present their recommendations on the same day
several other early documents from genre five were also presented.
The CMI team didn’ t prepare a written handout, but rather had a
transparency that they showed to the team on an overhead projector.
The team responded negatively to this approach, and after the
presenter of the CMI group had marked up the overhead with an ink
pen, Tim Wong asked him to copy the overhead for everyone. The
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
115
subteam complied with the request, and their future presentations
included the familiar style of handouts, which included a cover page,
flow diagrams, and process numbers. In sum, their innovation was not
adopted by any other group, and was received poorly by the overall
team. This negative feedback was apparently strong enough to
encourage their future work to abide by genre rules.
A correlation between innovation and acceptance In genre five,
one interesting correlation can be observed. The contract flowdown
and quahty team was the first group to use color, and color was
quickly adopted by the fixed assets/facihty group. This latter group
also produced an innovation in genre six by creating their own format
for their team report. This observation is even more interesting when
it is observed that some groups (e.g., manufacturing and engineering)
did not produce a single notable innovation. It can thus be
hypothesized that the tendency toward innovation correlates with the
tendency toward adoption of innovations.
A seminal document, and the preservation of a genre. Genre
seven includes documents created by ISS to analyze the division’ s
current and proposed value chains. These documents were affixed to
the waU in the team room for several months, and mention of them
was made in the BPR Bulletin on several occasions. In addition, this
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
116
document was reproduced in some of the implementation manuals
(e.g., the MA-3M Work Cell Implémentation Sychronous Workshop:
Summary Report manual produced on January 28, 1997).
It is also important to note that the format of this document was
used in a number of later documents in genres three and five. A
possible conclusion is that because the content of the document was so
important to the reengineering effort, its format benefited from the
association. Thus, the acceptance of its content also increased the
chance for adoption of some of its genre rules. In summary, the data
support some elements firom punctuated equilibrium and some firom
“windows of opportunity,” yet in general, “windows of opportunity”
appears to gain the most support from this study. In particular, the
data support the pattern of diminishing waves of change, rather than
infrequent revolutions. We now turn to the third research question.
Research question three: Genre.s and group rnnrdinatinn
This question explores how genres help to coordinate the efforts of
groups, and thus help them to accomplish their goals. To answer this
question, the documents themselves were analyzed to look for evidence
of convergence. Also, the meeting notes offered insights about how
consensus on key issues occurred relevant to the formation of genres.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
117
And finally, the interviewees were asked about two issues relevant to
this research question—how the group had overcome its obstacles, and
exactly how the documents had been used. All of this data forms the
basis of three conclusions: (1) creating a radically new genre requires
an extremely overt use of power, and this use of power may create
changes in other genres; (2) groups report that adhering to genre rules
is costly in time and effort; (3) participants report that an “excessive”
amount of time is spent simply keeping one’ s hbrary of key documents
up-to-date; and (4) that documents and their corresponding genres did
drive much of the actual discussion in team meetings.
The power of using a com nletplv different genre. On August 16,
1995, the scheduled discussion was replaced with Tim Wong giving
some “thoughts” and having a “conversation” with the group about
several of his concerns. Specifically, he asserted that the group was
not paying enough attention to train in g and development issues,
forecasting factors, and making sure the new system could provide
ready access to financial information. To accompany this discussion,
he typed up a few of his “thoughts” in very large type (24 point) and
distributed them to the group on a single sheet of paper. Later
documents (e.g., the Engineering BPR EG-2 Best Practices Conference
manual produced on February 26, 1997) show that, while his format
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
118
was not adopted, the content of his concerns were incorporated into the
documents. A possible inference is that, by violating the genre rules of
the reengineering process. Dr. Wong drew more attention to the
document he created than he would have if he had edited and
distributed a more standard document (e.g., a work flow diagram from
genre five). The “windows of opportunity” theory would lend support
for this conclusion.
A follow-up question would be why no other group created
additional documents in this genre. A possible explanation is that the
use of a genre occurs within a power context, and thus a group would
be claiming a certain level of power by doing so. Since Dr. Wong was
overtly using his authority as director, it can be concluded that no
other team members felt that they had enough power to effectively use
this genre.
High work load. The interviewees were universal in noting that
creating the documents took a tremendous amount of time and effort.
The participants were mixed with regard to whether this high work
load was worth the effort; the responses ranged from “absolutely worth
the effort” and “critical to the success of the reengineering effort” to “a
waste of time” in describing the payoff.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
119
Concern over misplaced effort. A number of participants said
that they based some of their work on documents created by other
people—a statement which would seem to imply that the documents
were useful in creating coordination between people. Yet several
interviewees noted that they spent a great deal of time keeping track
of all the paper. A common response was that they spent time making
sure they had the latest version of key documents, and they were
relieved to leam that the latest copy of documents is on the local area
network.
Relation between documents and discussions. Several
interviewees expressed the view that the real benefit of the meeting
was the chance to spend a great deal of time “sloshing through the
tough questions” (in the words of one interviewee) with the divisional
manager. In fact, several participants ranked the value of this
discussion time over the actual outcome of the reengineering effort
(i.e., specific decisions regarding process change).
Yet the notes firom the meeting indicate that people’ s discussions
were shaped by the documents in several ways. First, the phrase
“walk us through this [document]” was used by meeting participants
when they were given a new document, indicating that the document
guided at least part of the subsequent dialogue. Second, on many
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
120
occasions, discussions were punctuated with the assertion that the
group would be guided if it referred to a specific document, implying
that documents were a better source of meeting information than
people’ s memories. And third, documents were used as bookends of
daily discussion on many occasions; that is, the group would start a
day’ s meeting by reviewing a document, which brought up many issues
that had been discussed the day before, and the group would often
conclude a day’ s work with reviewing a summary document.
In summary, the data suggest that genre maintenance is costly,
both in terms of time and materials. Yet payoff is greater group
coordination and regulation of power.
Conclusion
This chapter reviewed the data used in this study. The next
chapter presents conclusions based on the data, and outlines
Limitations of the study and discusses directions for future research.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
121
Chapter 6: Summary, Conclusions, and Im plications
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to review the study, formulate
conclusions about the data presented in chapter five, and discuss
implications for further research. In general, the data firom chapter
five provide insight into each of the research questions, yet more
research is needed in several key areas to fully answer the questions.
Results of the analysis
The data firom this study demonstrate that genres are extremely useful
as tools in change management. Four major benefits of genres
emerged firom this study. First, groups create genres through a system
of negotiated order, and then these genres help the participants to
focus on the content of the change itself. Thus, genres are useful in
regulating group behavior.
Second, they serve as memory for a group engaged in
challenging tasks. Documents created in a genre are both expressions
of the genre rules and content shaped by the rules. Documents and
genres thus help to link the work of one meeting with the next,
providing a thread of continuity for a multi-meeting process.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
122
Third, genres serve group process by acting as a delegating
force. In the case of this organization, the reengineering process could
be considered a highly complex set of interdependent rules (e.g., work
in progress should not sit idle, work processes should be streamlined,
and errors should be minimized through prevention rather than
resource-intensive inspection) apphed to existing work processes.
Genres thus serve the group as a test of whether the reengineering
rules have been apphed correctly, with the group acting as a check on
the rules. In this way, genres help reengineering teams to remember
all the BPR rules and make sure they have used them appropriately.
In that sense, the division delegated the rules to ISS, which delegated
them to genres.
Fourth, genres serve as a method of work in g with a priori
assumptions. In the case of reengineering, these assumptions include
the notion that work can be represented with flow diagrams, that
reducing steps is (in many cases) synonymous with work
simplification, that work simplification is a preferred outcome, that the
flow of work can be altered through planning, and that communicating
planned work alterations is a necessary step in implementing the
changes.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
123
Yet genre creation and maintenance requires considerable
effort, both in terms of time and in the use of power. This study
demonstrates that people are highly aware of the time requirements
involved in coordinating their work with the work of others and that
they don’ t usually consider this use of time worthwhile. People are
somewhat less aware of the power dynamics of genre creation and
maintenance, but when specifically asked about the use of power, they
regard its use as justified to keep everyone on track. We now turn to a
discussion of each research question.
Research Question one. Research question one deals with how
groups use power to create, change and maintain genres. The data
lead to five conclusions.
First, there exists a power hierarchy in the division, and this
hierarchy helps explain how and when innovations occur, and why
some are accepted while others are rejected. This conclusion is based
on several points of data from chapter five. One of the most significant
is that ISS was chosen above the competing consulting firms,
according to several interviewees, because of its flexibility in modifying
its forms and reengineering procedure; without this adaptability, the
organization would have been unable to negotiate genre rules. Another
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
124
relevant point of data is that genre one was supported by the highest
power in the division (Dr. Wong, who praised this pubhcation in
several of the reengineering meetings) while genre four was only
supported by an external consultant; genre one is still viable within
the division, while genre four was very short-hved. Finally, it is
interesting to note how quickly other teams were to adopt innovations
once the manufacturing group adopted them. It would thus appear
that with Dr. Wong is the most powerful person in the division when it
comes to estabhshing and maintaining genres, whose power is followed
by the manufacturing group, and then by ISS; other groups appear
less powerful than ISS.
Second, genres are supported by a complex set of rules, which is
a deep structure from punctuated equihbrium theory. The data from
chapter five clearly show that people’ s willingness to innovate with a
genre, or to adopt innovations for a genre, are determined by the
genre’ s age and the degree of entrenchment. This is the same
prediction Gersick (1989, 1991) made of deep structure. Furthermore,
Gersick pointed out that a deep structure exists within the invisible
world of rules and relationships, yet its effects can be seen by looking
at artifacts. This description parallels the predictions that Yates and
Orlikowski (1992) made of genres. The important point that this
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
125
conclusion can offer the first research question is th at a genre appears
to follow the same power dynamic as deep structure.
Third, management can create genres by fiat, but must make
sure people have the requisite training necessary to use the genre's
rules. Yates and Orlikowski (1992) report on a previous attempt by a
senior manager to force all his managers to report a return on
investment (ROI) analysis by creating a genre that included this
information. The attempt failed because the managers lacked training
in ROI thinking. In the case of this organization, the divisional
director created a genre and asked for several changes in other genres,
all of which were successful because the changes were in line with
people’ s abilities and training. These two sources of data appear to
confirm this conclusion.
Fourth, power has a strong effect on genres when it is not used
very often. The data concerning the divisional director’ s infrequent
but efiective interruptions of the visioning process are confirmed by
the interviewees, many of whom noted that Dr. Wong’ s patience with
the year of informal discussions and with the latitude he delegated to
the core team he helped the BPR initiative achieve its high level of
success. Several interviewees commented that if Dr. Wong would have
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
126
been more autocratic that the result would have been a faster but
much less effective outcome.
Five, permanent changes to genre rules appear to require
considerable time, even when significant power is used in the change
process. In the case of this organization, even those changes that Dr.
Wong directly requested took months to become entrenched. However,
several genres were created by ISS and the effect was almost
immediate. It can thus be concluded that an individual or group with
relatively low power can create a genre easier than an individual or
group with relatively high power can change a genre. We now turn to
the second research question.
Research question two. Research question two involves how
change occurs, whether the punctuated equilibrium theory or the
“windows of opportunity” pattern has more validity when it comes to
shifts in genre. The data do not strictly conform to one pattern, but
show evidence of both patterns. Yet some clear conclusions can be
drawn.
The punctuated equilibrium pattern was confirmed in several
ways. First, genres consistently showed no change, even under
powerful pressure, then changed suddenly. Second, the more
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
127
entrenched a genre appeared to be (and the older it was), the greater
the time and power was necessary to change it. Third, recommended
innovations that were too far outside norms were immediately
rejected. Each of these findings confirms predictions of the punctuated
equilibrium theory.
The “windows of opportunity " theory was also confirmed in
several important ways. First, as theory predicted, instabihty, once it
occurred in a genre, did not immediately form a new stable pattern;
rather, several changes occurred in rapid succession. Second, people
report that their attention was more focused on form than content
during a change in genre (as evidenced by people’ s complaint that
getting the right format took unnecessary time and was not valuable).
Third, people report that their attention was less focused on
documents’ form when the genre had become entrenched.
The format of genre three is a telling example of how the data
seem to confirm aspects of both punctuated equihbrium and “windows
of opportunity.” The format of this genre emerges without precedent,
is subsumed by genre two, then doesn’ t change. So in terms of
stability, punctuated equihbrium seems the better explanation. Yet
“windows of opportunity” offers useful insights about how people’s
attention will be focused during change management activities.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
128
A final conclusion about how genres change is that a single
seminal document can preserve a genre, as was the case with genre
seven. This example parallels a conclusion firom cultural historians
that a single piece of hterature can preserve rules of g ra m m a r and
thus slow language change, as was the case in English with the advent
of the King James Bible in 1611 and the Oxford English Dictionary in
1879 (Burke, 1985). Proponents of punctuated equilibrium often cite
these hterary examples.
In summary, it appears that “windows of opportunity" provides
a better explanation of how estabfished genres continue to drift after a
major change. That is, this theory correctly predicts that changes
occur in waves as the new genre form becomes entrenched. It also
appears that “windows of opportunity" is the better theory for
explaining how people’ s attention shifts during a change effort. Yet
the data appear to support punctuated equilibrium’ s major theoretic
proposition—that an establish genre will be very resistant to change;
the data do not appear to support the “windows of opportunity ”
contention that this resistance is overstated by punctuated equilibrium
theorists. We now turn to a discussion of the third research question.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
129
Research question three. This question deals with how genres
work to help coordinate effort and thus achieve team goals. The data
in chapter five offer conclusions that are perhaps obvious, yet two are
especially worth emphasis.
First, a successful direct use of power will lead to advocated
changes becoming entrenched in the rules of a genre. In the case of
Tim Wong’ s “conversation” about the need for the reengineering
process to include training and development needs, for example, the
result was that “training” appeared as an external system on several
flow diagrams, with multiple finks to internal division processes.
Second, genres do help to drive discussion in reengineering
meetings, but their value may be underestimated by meeting
participants. There is an obvious dichotomy between the researcher’ s
meeting notes—which show that documents and genre rules contribute
enormously to meeting agendas, side conversations, and continuity
from meeting to meeting—and comments from interviewees, which
assert that the documents produced in meetings appeared to be ends
in themselves and, from a few participants, not worth the effort to
create them.
Third, it is not an exaggeration to say that this reengineering
effort was accomplished through organizational genres. The data
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
130
show that the format of this reengineering process, which was created
by ISS and modified by personnel in the organization before adoption,
was the backbone of the process. Several participants report not
completely understanding how each step led to the next, but that they
felt ownership when they saw the final result. We now turn to a
discussion of the imphcations of this study.
Imnhcations
An overall theoretical imphcation that emerges from this study is that
genres are quite useful in achieving group coordination, yet the
creation and maintenance of genres requires considerable power. This
use of power has not been sufficiently explored in the Hterature (with
Yates and Orlikowski as a notable exception).
A second theoretical imphcation is that much of group process is
explained by negotiation about genre rules, and the accompanying
power structure. The theory of organizational genres is thus a useful
lens through which to view group process.
Several practical imphcations are also important. First, storing
forms electronically and giving everyone access to these forms also
makes sense and helps to counter the objection that keeping track of
the current form is not worth the effort. Several core team members
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
131
report feeling frustrated about the document-intensive nature of the
process until they realized that the forms were available on the local
area network. Such availability, and early communication about this
availability, emerge as wise strategies.
Second, consultants and internal change management leaders
should talk with team members about the value of the paperwork part
of a change management exercise. That wasn’ t done here, and the
result was two common responses from participants. The first
response is that the reengineering effort was equivalent to the
documents produced, as if the change existed only in document form.
This view is troublesome because it would weaken a team’ s ability to
follow through on the implementation steps. The second view is that
the amount of documents produced was an almost total “waste of trees”
(in the words of three interviewees, indicating that perhaps this was
the topic of frequent discussions outside the meetings). This notion is
problematic because it may lessen the amount of effort that goes into
producing documents, or that people may only put in enough effort to
achieve some level of impression management.
Third, the flexibility of ISS is laudable, and this approach
should be adopted by other firms. Several interviewees reported that
ISS won the reengineering contract in this organization because of the
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
132
flexibility the managers of the firm showed in working with engineers.
A less adaptable reengineering system (which, in its worst case, would
simply be a “workbook” of pre-determined forms) would not have
allowed for the many digressions that organizational managers report
were extremely important to the overall success of the project. Also,
the fact that ISS was willing and able to modify its use of templates
gave some genre-setting power back to the organization, and this
power shift helped create ownership among the internal managers.
Limitations
There are several important limitations in this study. First, the
creation of the genres was not verified through interrater reliability.
The reason for this limitation is that function partially constitutes a
genre, and function can best be determined by someone who has been
in the meetings for which the documents were created. Thus, another
rater would not have access to enough background to make an
adequate determination. Still, this concern has merit, since there was
no check on the researcher’ s coding scheme. Future research designs
should incorporate a team of raters who, at a minimum, would attend
portions of the meetings prior to determining genres.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
133
Second, this study did not assess politics that occurred outside
the steering team. Research cited in the teams chapter indicates that
many group decisions are, in fact, made outside the meeting. Beyond
the interviews, the study made no attem pt to work with this data.
Third, this study did not consider organizational genres that
existed prior to this reengineering exercise. It is likely that these
genres imposed significant constraints on the development of genres
during the reengineering.
Fourth, this study didn’ t reach into implementation meetings at
the subteam level. The visioning part of this process was predictably
successful because the philosophical shift was made in Dr. Wong’ s
informal meetings that began a year before the BPR. This was not
done (and probably could not be done) at the subteam level, since time
was limited and the anti-change bias was reported by core team
members to be greater in the middle manager layer.
There are also two important caveats to this study. This
organization, as a culture, is rare in th at it still has elements of a para
military organization, in the sense of a highly structured chain of
command that was developed during the Cold War and modeled after
the mihtary (Deady, 1994). The fact th at genre creation worked so
well in this environment is at least partially attributable to the fact
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
134
that there was a clear hierarchy, and the rules of the culture insisted
that the hierarchy be at least tacitly obeyed at the senior level.
A second caveat is that this study is not widely generalizable to
other reengineering groups for obvious reasons—Dr. Wong’ s unique
and impressive managerial style, along with ISS’ s unusually adaptive
consulting orientation, are not often repeatable in most BPR
initiatives. Also, this organization was in a genuine crisis and such
crises have been associated with higher BPR success. Thus, the
momentum derived from this situation is an important variable not
present in many reengineering interventions.
Directions for future research
More data are needed to fully answer the research questions. With
regard to the first research question (how power serves to coordinate
the effort of the group and create artifacts that converge into genres),
future research is needed that will probe into the role of pohtics
outside a steering committee. Especially important is the role that
image maintenance plays in individuals’ attempts to gain a positive
reputation with influential decision-makers (Kaye, 1996). Future
research is needed to examine genres using a 360-degree feedback
model; that is, a diverse group of stakeholders should be interviewed
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
135
about what a genre is, what it does, how it relates to other genres, and
what rules govern its appropriate use. By involving larger groups of
respondents, the interviews would become a more useful research
device.
With regard to the second research question (how genres
change), more research is needed to probe whether the punctuated
equihbrium model or the “windows of opportunity" framework offers
greater usefulness in explanation. Two steps are needed to accomphsh
this goal. First, more genres are needed to provide more units of
analysis (Orhkowski, 1996). Second, more attention needs to be paid
to two critical points of change within genres—the weakening of a
genre before a change (Gersick, 1991) and the “settling” of a genre
after a major shift. Punctuated equihbrium would assert that the
weakening would consist of growing dissatisfaction with the current
genre, then a sudden and dramatic change; “windows of opportunity”
would look for minor shifts preceding that large change. After the
major shift, punctuate equihbrium would look for the new genre to
begin developing resistance to change. One study design that would
provide insight into this area would be a written transcript of meetings
in which young and old genres were both discussed. Comments
calling for change could be tabulated and compared with the age and
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
136
use of the genre. In this steering team, meetings tended to discuss
either older genres or newer genres, but not both.
Of the three research questions in this study, the research sheds
more insight on the third (how organizational genres produce group
coordination) than any other. Still, this research can be extended in
several ways. First, genre creation and maintenance, by its very
nature, excludes certain innovations (such as those from the
facility/fixed assets group in this study). A key question that requires
additional study is what potential contributions are thus lost, or not
offered at all, because of the censoring nature of genre discussions?
And related to this concern is that the now famous research from
group theorist Irving Janis (1982), who found that groups can become
too cohesive in their inner relationships, and then make extremely
poor decisions (such as Japan’ s decision to attack Pearl Harbor, which
Janis traces to his notion of group think). In business terms,
group think in a reengineering situation is potentially disastrous. A
key research issue is thus how the extremes of groupthink can be
avoided and fringe contributions can be considered rather than
immediately rejected.
Second, in a less organized setting (in terms of hierarchy and
power), the power dynamics of genre creation may create factions, each
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
137
following their preferred genre rules. That event did not occur in this
situation because of the clear and respected authority of Dr. Wong.
But in situations where genre creation may have a splintering effect,
rather than a coordinating effect, how can change agents use genre
rules to achieve consensus? This question also is deserving of study.
Third, the power dynamics would have been very different in
this situation if the senior managers in the organization were not first
brought on board philosophically by the year of informal meetings.
Research into how genre creation and maintenance occurs in
situations hostile to the change effort is also needed.
Conclusion
This chapter presented a summary of the study and a set of
conclusions to answer the three research questions. The chapter also
presented practical and theoretical implications of the study, as well as
a discussion about needed future research.
This study advanced the knowledge about organizational genres
and their relation to organizational uses of power. In summary,
genres’ pervasiveness and utility in accomplishing organizational
change efforts has been underestimated in the literature. Hopefully,
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
138
more study will illuminate how genres can be used to create more
effective and efficient organizations.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
■ o
o
Q .
c
g
Q .
■ o
CD
U )
W
o'
3
Appendix A: Analysis of Genres D uring the Prim ary Reengineering Meeting
8
c 5 '
3
3"
CD
CD
■a
o
Q .
c
a
o
3
■a
o
CD
Q .
T3
CD
(/)
(/)
Gonro
Num bor
Ono
Nnmo
Gonornl
om ployeo
com m unie
a llo n s
Two Intograteci
change
olom onl
idontificati
D escription Num bor
of
sam p les
Open Line
reprints
and BPR
B u lletin s
Three
docum ents
created for
the A ugust
Overt
U so(s) of
pow er
A udience
T hese
docum ents
(]uote Tim
Wong
(referred to
as Dr.
W ong),
along w ith
reengineeri
ng experts,
such as
M ichael
H am m er.
The
docum ents
also convey
the current
organizatio
nal crisis.
The
division us
a w hole.
T his
docum ent
replaces the
sap
Function
The entire
team
R eferences to
oth er genres
To
com m unicu
to that: (1)
the
reengineeri
ng is
im perative
to the
survival of
the
division; (2)
th at the
steerin g
team is
progressing
as planned;
(3) th at the
team 's
w ork m ay
be view ed
in th e w ork
room any
tim e (thus,
the work
isn't being
kept secret)
To
sum m arize
the gap
a n a ly ses in
Several
references to the
em ployee
n ew sletter
(E xpress Lino).
T he docum ents
also report that:
"employees
[may] see charts
and other
d ocum ents
describing
variou s on going
B PR -related
efforts and
activities."
C hanges during
reengineering
process
The articles
becom e
increasingly
inclusive o f the
division's
em ployee base.
For exam ple,
the A ugust 8
headlin e o f BPR
B ulletin read:
"It's everyone’s
resp onsibility to
com m u n icate."
•in
T his
docum ent-
its several
v ersio n s— is u
The docum ent
becam e
considerably
longer once
Im plications
T his gonro:
(1) p oin ts to
th e oth er in
group gen res
as being
im portant;
(2)
com m unient
e s m uch o f
the sam e
content
w ith ou t all
the detail;
(3) places
the
em p h asis on
form, not
content.
T hus, the
im plication
is th at form
is im portant
w hen the
work is le ss
dem anding.
T h is again
sh ow s the
genre-
settin g
w
v £ >
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
g
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
C/)
8
( O '
3 .
3 "
CD
CD
T3
O
Q .
C
a
o
3
T3
O
CD
Q .
T3
CD
(/)
(/)
(iim ro
N um ber
Thr
on list
Four
N am e
Gap
A nalyses
ISS
s u m m a r i o
s a n d
a s s o B s m o n
I s
Deseriplion N um ber
of
sam p les
30 and
Soi)lom ber
1 m eetings,
printed in
landscape.
T hree
docum ents
created for
the A ugust
15 m eeting
analyzing
gap
an alyses
Thick
docum ents
w ith an ISS
cover page.
The
internal
Overt
IJse(s) of
pow er
an alysis
docum ents
from
individual
team s.
ISS created
an agenda
for the
m eeting
that
included
tim e lim its
on the
participant
s.
The rest is
declarative.
Several
early ISS
docum ents
have
agend as
w ith strict
A udience
The en tire
team
The entire
team
Function R eferences to
other genres
one
docum ent
sum m ary of the
gap a n a ly sis
inform ation.
The sam e
num bering
schem e is used.
To com pare
the division
vision to
the "as is."
To
sum m arize
work,
presen t
expert
opinion.
The CRFQ
group reprinted
th e 8/8 version
of the division
Vision process
flow (created by
ISS).
T his genre w as
created by
m andate from
Tim W ong and
ISS, w ho asked
each team to
com pare the
vision process
flow to th e "as
is."
The Septem ber
13 docum ent
preprints a
num ber of
docum ents from
m anufacturing
C hanges during
reengineering
process_________
everyone s
ch an ges and
ad d ition s wore
incorporated.
But th e basic
form at did not
change.________
pow er of
ISS, since
the basic
form at w as
not altered.
N one, since th is
genre w as
created for one
day's discu ssion.
The copyright
ISS notice w as
dropped after
the first tw o
docum ents.
Later
Im plications
T his genre
sh ow s the
variety th a t
e x ists w hen
a genre is
created by
m andate
w ith ou t
exact
precedent.
M anufacturi
ng h as more
pow er to set
genre ru les
than others.
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
g
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
o'
3
8
" O
CD
3 .
3"
CD
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
a
o
3
T3
O
(D
Q .
T3
CD
(/)
(/)
Gonro
Num bor
Fivo
Nnmo
docum ents
wore
printed in a
com binatio
n of
landscape
and
portrait.
Team
reports on
overall
process
design (as
is)
D escription N um ber
of
sam |)les
D ocum ents,
printed in a
com binatio
n of
landscape
and
portrait,
th at show
as is
process
Overt
IJse(s) of
pow er
tim e lim its
on both ISS
and the
division
presenters.
The group
disregarded
m ost of
th ose, and
ISS
dropped
them
through the
m iddle of
the
roongineori
ng exercise.
ISS used
th is device
again on
th e final
docum ents.
D eclarative
■\udience
The entire
group
Function
feedback,
and next
stops
To show
how
individual
p rocesses
link w ith
the overall
the division
m odel.
R eferences to
other genres
a n d IS S
C hanges during
reengineering
process
The Info &
Financial
S y stem s group
m odeled th eir
form at after
m anufacturing's
earlier work.
docu m ents m ore
closely resem ble
docu m ents from
th e d ivision—
le s s w h ite space,
flow ch arts th at
em p h asize
functionality.
L ater
docum en ts
(after about
A u gust 15) are
alm ost
in d istin gu ish ab l
0 from early
m anufacturin g
docum ents.
T he earliest
docum ent in
th is genre cam e
from th e CMl
group. They
handed out
copies o f a
m arked up
overhead. T his
approach w a s
Im plications
C M l’s
experience
sh ow s th e
w eigh t
people place
on the rule
to have
handouts.
Also,
facility/fixed
CD
■ D
O
Q.
C
g
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
( /)
8
" O
3 .
3 "
CD
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
a
O
3
" O
o
CD
Q .
■ D
CD
(/)
(/)
Monro Nnmo D oscription Num bor Overt Au(lien( 0 Function Ifoforonces to C hanges during Im plications
Num bor of
sam p les
U so(s) o f
power
other gen res reengineering
process
ch arts w ith not u sed by any a sset's w ork
accom pany! other group m ak es
ng text. during the another
Tho group reengin eering attem p t at
w orking on practice. innovation
tho CMl th at w a s not
group didn’t On 7/25, tho adopted,
have a facility/fixed w hich w e
handout, so a sse t group can infer
th ey h anded out a m ean s th at
dolivorod color docum ent. a rule e x ists
com m ents T his approach placing m ore
orally w ith w a s not im portance
an overhead adopted, and on content
th at they th eir la ter work and
m arked up is in black and standards.
during tho w h ite. C ontract
preson tatio now down w as Since
n. They tho only oth er contract
thon copied group to use flow down &
th is color (on 7/24). quality u sed
overhead color th at
and w a s quickly
distributed adopted by
it to tho facility/fixed
larger a sse ts, it’s
group. p ossible th at
th is group is
quick to
accept the
innovations
of others.
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
g
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
C/)
8
■ D
CD
3 .
3"
CD
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
a
o
3
T3
O
(D
Q .
T3
(D
(/)
(/)
(lunro
N um bor
Six Toam
reports on
inputs,
ou tp u ts
and
onablors
Seven
N am e
ISS V alue
Chain
A nalysis
Description
A
com m unient
ions plan
report (7/7),
m anufantur
ing design
team (7/25),
facility
design team
(7/25), A
com binatio
n of
landscape
and portrait
w as used.
N um ber
of
m illes
Two charts,
printed in
landscape,
th at show
the value
chain
process list
and the
order
fulfillm ent
value chain
onablors
5
( )vert
U se(s) of
power
A udience
D eclarative
lim ited
The entire
team
D eclarative
and
p resen ts a
sum m ary
The en tire
team
Function K eferonces to
oth er genres
To show the
inpu ts,
ou tp u ts and
onablors of
each step in
the process
The order
fulfillm en t
valu e chain
onablors
docum ent is
com plete,
tho other
gives much
more d etail
in the first
h alf than
th e second
half. T hus,
th ese
docum ents,
taken
The
m anufacturing
toam u sed the
sa m e form at as
ISS.
F acility/F ixed
a ss e ts developed
th eir own
form at w hich no
oth er group
adopted. Later
ch arts from
facilities u sed a
form at sim ilar
to
m anufacturing
C hanges during
reengineerin g
process_________
G roups w en t
from
high ligh tin g
toam m em bers
to ju st relaying
content
P rocesses are
num bered.
T h is docum ent
w as revised and
m odified in
several later
d iscu ssion s.
The form at did
not change.
Im plications
T his sh ow s
th a tI S S has
real pow er
to set genre
requirem ent
s in form at,
font and
overall style.
It also
sh ow s th at
m anufacturi
ng w as
quick to
accept th is
form at.
T his
docum ent
sh ow s the
pow er o f the
ISS function
in th is
effort. The
reengineerin
g team
accepted
th is
docum ent as
one of its
guiding
in stru m en ts.
C D
■ D
O
Q .
C
g
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
C/)
Oonro
N um bor
8
■ D
CD
3 .
3"
CD
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
a
o
3
T3
O
(D
Q .
T3
(D
(/)
(/)
Eight
N am e
tho
division
Overview
flow charts
D oscription N um ber
of
sam p les
Two charts,
printed in
landscape,
one
show in g tho
as is"
process flow
and one
show in g tho
now vision
for tho
process flow
( )verl
I Ise(s) of
pow er
T his
docum ent,
w hich w as
created by
tho ontiro
steoring
toam tho
previous
w eek , is at
tho h igh est
possible
level. Its
process
num bers
th u s direct
other
d ocum ents
and genres,
A lso, tho
docum ent
decid es
w h at is
valu e added
The en tire
team ;
rem ote
au d ien ces
include
\udionco unction Roforoncos to
oth er genres
together,
pow erfully
entail more
work that
the group
has not yet
done. It
sots on
agenda
To
coordinate
the
roongineori
ng process
at the
high est
possible
functional
level
C hanges during
reengineering
process_________
The process
num bers w ere
gath ered from
the group’s
know ledge; yet
th ose num bers
coordinate w ith
oth er docum ents
and genres
Those
docum ents wore
both d istribu ted
on 8/16, and
th u s did not
change.
Im plications
T his
docum ent is
a pow erful
bookm ark in
the
reengineerin
g process. It
w as referred
to
throughout
tho
d iscu ssion s
and w as
pin ned up
on tho
bulletin
board. Also,
the
division's
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
g
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
C/)
CD
8
■ D
( O '
3 .
3 "
CD
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
a
o
3
T3
O
(D
Q .
T3
(D
(/)
(/)
(’ lonro
N um bor
Nino
Ton
D ocum ent
flow down
and
quality
Nam o
Com m unie
ations
from tho
D irector
Doscrijjiion
A
docum ent,
printed in
portrait,
that
exp lain s
how tho
contract
flow down
process can
bettor
ensure
quality
Two
docum ents
from Tim
Wong. Tho
first show s
tho key
objectives of
th e division
roongineori
ng exercise.
Tho second
sh ow s
several "key
items" (his
N um ber
of
sam p les
Overt
U so(s) of
pow er
and w h at is
non-value
added but
'xZ.
nocossar
The
docum ent
ta k es a
directive
tone; also,
the
docum ent
tries to
correct a
m isconcopti
on about
w ho is tho
process
ow ner
The en tire
toam
T hose are
arguably
tho m ost
pow erful
docum ents
in the
entire
roongineori
ng process
A udience
The ontiro
group.
Function R eferences to
other genres
E ducational C ites process
num bers (4.II,
4.3)
To steer the
steerin g
team to: (1)
"get on
board"tho
roengooring
effort and
(2) to
im plem en t
key
principles
(such as
"inspire
com m itm en
C hanges during
reengineering
process_________
The docum ent is
d ated 7/25. No
changes
No direct
references
N one.
Im plications
T his
docum ent
doesn't alter
the
structure o f
other
genres, but
does
attem pt to
alter the
content of
other
docum ents.
T im ’s
d ocum ents
are tho only
in tho
reengineerin
g exorcise to
con sisten tly
use 14-24
point typo,
im plying
their
im portance
and tho fact
th a t they
146
1 1
t a o ü
i l
X . o
w c X
m
Z'o
j 1
c
o
II
II
il
U
C
iî
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
147
Appendix B:
Interview questions
Preface: The purpose of this study is to gain insight into how teams
work toward consensus during reengineering efforts. Even though
the reengineering process isn’ t yet complete (and in some ways is
moving slower than expected), I’ m focusing primarily on the core
team BPR meetings from last summer, which started with
mobilizing the project through recommendations and road map.
This interview will last about 15 minutes. AU information gathered
during this project wiU remain conffdential, meaning that names
and responses wiU not be connected. 1 appreciate your time and
your candor.
1. Even though the process isn’ t yet complete, how would you rate the
overaU effectiveness of the reengineering effort at this division to
date?
2. How successful were the meetings from last summer? Why?
3. Considering these meetings as a process, how was the format of this
process developed?
4. Did the process change during the meetings? If so, how? If so,
why?
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
148
5. Every team process has obstacles to work through. How did the
team last summer move through its problems?
6. The meeting included people from different levels of the company.
Did this fact influence how you contributed to the meetings? If so,
how?
7. On of the items I’ m focusing is on is the use of handouts and other
documents produced during reengineering efforts. Thinking of the
documents specifically produced in these meetings, were they
useful? In what ways?
8. What documents did you create or help to create for the meeting?
To what extent did you build upon the work of other documents?
9. To what extent did you refer to other documents in this process?
10. Anything else?
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
CD
" D
O
Q .
C
g
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
( /)
Appendix C: Interview Response Sum m ary
8
■ D
CD
3.
3"
CD
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
a
O
3
" O
o
CD
Û .
■ D
CD
(/)
(/)
Person How would How Considering Did the Every The On of the What To what Anything
you rnlo the successful these process team meeting items I'm documents extent did else?
overall were the meetings as a change process included focusing is on did you you refer to
elTectivenes meetings process, how during the has people from is the use of create or other
s of tho from last was the meetings? obstacles different handouts and help to create documents
reenginoeri summer? format of this If so, how? to work levels of the other for the in this
ng effort at Why? process If so, why? through. company. documents meeting? To process?
tho division developed? How did Did this fact produced what extent
to date? the team
last
summer
move
through its
problems?
influence
how you
contributed
to the
meetings?
If so, how?
during
reengineering
efforts.
Thinking of
the documents
specifically
produced in
these
meetings,
wore they
useful? In
what ways?
did you build
upon the
work of other
documents?
Person 1 I'm Good to the ISS As wo put We didn't Initially, it They weren't I produced I would go No. In
cautiously extent that structured tho meat always was a useful. It's a some of the to the z: retrospect.
optimistic; they got us to tho sessions. on the totally hindrance. thick stack; 1 subteam drive and if we wont
wo re on tho converge on but I wasn't bones. agree, but because don't think it reports. 1 look at the back to do
right track. the vision. in the inner maybe it Tim some of the really helped. used the ISS electronic it again, I
Wo’ ro Some of tho circle on that changed encourage subtoams We issued so formats. version, just think we
struggling a mtgs were a decision. somewhat. d us to were many according to to make could have
little bit little long- But tho work intimidated versions, that their sure 1 had boon
right now winded; wo essence toward a by the it was hard to standards. I the right better at
with didn't was really point makeup of keep track of produced a one. It was time
unrelated manago our what ISS where wo the which was few gap useful to be managome
problems. mooting time and Tim could visioning current. It analyses. able to view nt. Early
But I think as woll as we Wong accept team. But just got too things. So 1 on, we
we re on could have. presented what once we much. The would say wasted a
track, It got us to from the happened. established value behind that lot of time
considering understand start. We didn’ t working that lost its because the and
the the process, have to relationship moaning when electronic resources.
V O
7 }
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
g
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
( / )
8
■ D
CD
3 .
3"
CD
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
a
o
3
T3
O
CD
Q .
T3
CD
(/)
(/)
Person 2
problems
wo ve hud.
thouiîh,
which W H S
essentiul.
You've got
to look at
tho overall
picture. We
spent close
to a year
They were
very
successful in
getting our
senior people
to
Two places.
Tim Wong,
when ho
camo hero,
had already
implemented
Not really.
We had to
back up a
fow times.
Wo sot up
places in
agree
100%. Tim
encourages
debate,
which
helps.
When we
would
loavo tho
room, we
would
havo
closure,
oven
though wo
don't win
100%.
The main
thing wo
usod was
to not put
a timetable
on things.
s, it brought
in useful
viewpoints.
No one said.
I'm the
leader, we'll
do it my
way." We
left our
titles at the
door as we
moved
along. We
got real
buy-in by
involving
people at all
levels. I've
said u lot of
cliches here,
but it really
worked this
way.
Historically,
this division
has had
much loss
politics than
other
it's Monday
morning and
you get a now
stack. There
was so much,
you never
made it
through
everything.
Three
different
handouts.
Express Line
goes out with
paychecks
Very, very
few. There's
a reason for
that. In the
process of
launching tho
version was
available, 1
probably
referred to
other
documents
a lot, more
than I really
had to, but
tho
computer
made it
easy.
Not really
at all., since
the
documents I
created
tried to
ISS gave
us a lot of
forms to
fill out,
and thon
would give
us more
forms the
next week
and say
the first
stack
wasn't
something
we needed
to do at all.
Hut Tim
would help
us. When
he wasn't
involved,
things
floundered
as we got
on
tangents.
Wo
learned a
lot, both
from a
business
side and a
personal
side.
Two and
half years
into the
rooningeor
ing effort, I
think wo 'ê
CD
■ D
O
Q.
C
g
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
( /)
8
" O
3.
3"
CD
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
a
O
3
■ D
O
CD
Q .
■ D
CD
(/)
(/)
horo trying understand a successful tho process We wanted companies every I'Viday. BPR, we had mesh the have 10-
to niiso what we HPR with to get lo let I’ m familiar At the very to sot tho overall 16% of the
pooplo's wore trying another feedback, everyone with. superficial new course vision with people in
ownronoss to do. Tho fly division. Ho and during speak their There’ s level, that has and how to our current tho
thnt in the hod 0 mental those piece. Wo almost a been critical. get there. At situation. division
something ointment was roadmap that points we absolutely family Additionally, the same That was who aren’t
had to bo the middle worked. He saw the forbade atmosphere wo pass out a time, we had less detail- on board
done—that managers— essentially soft spots. people to here. Our green sheet. to keep the oriented with tho
wo weren’ t that’ s where acted as a The censor working That has been old ship and so 1 reengineer
in a viable we had the facilitator. biggest each other. relationship loss effective. afloat. didn’ t have ing.
position largest group Ho facilitated was By the with the because the Between tho to refer to They’ re
anymore. that didn’t discussion of communica time we union has people who two things. as many not
That’ s part buy into it. division staff tion. were done. been haven’ t bought Tim and I current lighting it,
of tho All of us about what everyone excellent. into the agreod that 1 BPR but they’ re
roongineori (sonior mgrs) kind of a folt we had probably reengineering would focus documents. not on
ng. About are probably division we come to the best at just threw it on immediate board
18 months guilty of not wanted to be consensus. this away. We also problems. either.
ago, we communicati in. While ho Consesus organizatio published the They think
launched ng down knew what for us n. There notes from tho Tim will
tho enough. As worked and means was not meetings. I loavo
roongineori background. what didn’ t. being so resentment think that was eventually
ng ofTort midyear, we ho lot the you can I think. The a waste of and that
trying to get had to division staff live with fact that we paper, I think. things will
everyone completely find their it—it cut through Internally, it go back to
trained, shut down own way. We doesn’t all levels was the way
starting major did bring in mean showed important— they were.
with the production in an outside 100% people that even critical. That's
sonior staff. travoling consultant— Bgrooment. wo woro It forced dishearten
We got wave tubes ISS. They The price serious people to look ing. Are
down to the for 6-7 had the you pay for about an into tho issues there
union level. months. At thought of this open door very deeply. I areas
We tho sumo helping us approach policy. think we went within the
convinced time, tho along, but is time. into tho paper division
about 80% space market not being business, and where it’ s
of tho was overly that was more
people. We improving. directive. unnecessary. successful?
then started At the same In tho
with tho time, we power
actual wore trying supply
roongineori to implement area, it’ s
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
g
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
C/î
8
■ D
( O '
3 .
3 "
CD
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
a
o
3
T3
O
(D
Q .
T3
(D
(/)
(/)
niî, stnrlmg
with tho
work coll
concept. In
tormB of m il
that, wo'vo
gotten somo
good pooplo
in
leadership
positions—
the system
wo chose
soomod to
work. Wo
hmvon't had
timo to put
in all tho
training wo
need to do.
Wo also
havo people
who are
good loaders
but not as
tochnically
compotont
as we'd liko.
Overall, I’ d
say wo re at
about G O -
70% of
whore we'd
liko to bo
today. Wo
haven’t
mado all tho
milostonos
wo should
have made;
a now culture
and handle
all tho
managomont
issues. Wow!
It was quite a
year.
probably
most
successful.
It started
there. Tho
activities
that go on
there
aren’t us
complicate
d. As a
result, the
responsibil
ities for
creating
hardware
woro
easier to
implement
in the
work coll
concept.
Much
easier than
TWT
(traveling
wave
tube).
TWT has a
few too
many
concert
violists in
it.
lo
to
7 ]
CD
■ O
O
Q .
C
g
Q .
■ O
CD
C /)
( g
o"
Z5
8
5
c B '
Z5
CD
CD
■ O
O
Q .
C
a
O
Z5
■ O
O
CD
Q .
O
C
■ O
CD
C /)
( g
o"
Z5
tho main
reason—the
lack of
traininu.
Person 3 I would say I thought It came from The First of all. It was At least for I was more of ISS was I don’ t
it’ s going those worked Tim, he’ d process tho toam absolutely this the cop. taking tho think so.
slower than quite well. been through really was necessary. organization. guiding tho lead. My only
we hoped. The visioning it tho other didn’ t small— You don’t documents are process. preparing comment
We’ve mado process wont way— change. there were got the critical— tho is that this
progress, very well. starting with Reinassanc only 30 perspective absolutely worksheets. is a
but we re That’ s tho "as is" and e(used to people all the essential. The This sort of difficult
not there easy part, then going to be called involved in levels of the consultants process process.
yet. We though. The visioning. ISS) the organixatio didn’t quite requires Maybe
have somo implement is ISS wanted followed visioning n unless realize that that. You wo re half
real success tho tough to use a through process. they’re until we wore can’t we
with work part. If wo standard pretty To some represented into tho recreate the through
cells in did it over textbook well. Tho degree. . Also, you process. They process
some areas again, I don’ t approach. visioning they were need said "fill out every time.
and not in think we’ d do They tailored process hand- everyone this form and
others. it any other it to Tim’ s worked picked to involved to give an
We’re way. Doing modol. very well. bo got answer that
approaching visioning predispose credibility. looks like
50% of first was d to We really this." They
employees helpful. reengineer opened up didn’ t realize
being in ing as a knowing how complex
true, solution. who was our operation
functioning Tho senior thoro, since was. I think.
work cells people wo knew if anything.
in the full were they would the format
sense. already carry out wasn’t rigid
prepared. the message enough. You
for over a to their have to give
year, to coworkers. people
know that samples, pre-
we didn’ t defmod forms.
have Then people
choice but will think
to about the
drastically content and
change. not about how
%
CD
■ O
O
Q .
C
g
Q .
■ O
CD
C/)
C/)
CD
8
CD
3 .
3 "
CD
CD
■ O
O
Q .
C
a
O
3
■ O
O
CD
Q .
■ O
CD
( / )
C/)
Tim spent
a year
preparing
tho staff,
for over a
year.
to express the
content.
Particularly,
people from
different parts
of the
organization
require a
format that
guides people.
Person 1 Very This was My The I would I consider Was it worth At tho time. Quite a bit Going back
good/very definilely tho recollection process attribute that a tho effort? it was useful. ef referring to the
successful. right thing to was that wo stayed our success positive. As When you look Looking back. It beginning.
do. had our own pretty to all the a division back at the back,I was at the there are
mootings much on effort wo staff, we are volume of probably forefront of two
oven before schedule. did, that poorly documents, I didn't read as our minds issues—
ISS. They and Tim's informed. think wo could much as I then. It one design
started about leadership. When wo have done a produced. I quickly and one
six months or We had start better job of think it was went down implement
more before been bringing in how the too much. to zero. ation. Tho
the visioning meeting people from information There was implement
process. Wo regularly other levels. was compiled too much ation had
hod been to make we had and and we several
exploring— sure we bettor disseminated. became too false
what's our were on insight into After the first tired. starts. But
culture, track. Wo the pass, no one now it's
what’ s our were more strengths used the working
personality? cohesive. and documents fabulously.
What do wo We put a weaknesses. any more. I attribute
believe in, lot of time These are Pretty soon. that to the
etc., etc. in together the people one team work we
Then, the as a group. who are wasn't reading did in
reengineerin We felt we doing the the work of design. 1
g started were all day-to-day other team. think wo
with—what's together. work. Case had to
our If wo had in point; my become a
commitment. just own toam. work coll
having started When we culture.
double duty with the are talking
(maintaining visioning. about the
L A
4 ^
■ o
I
I
C /)
o'
3
CO
8
c 5 '
3
CD
C
p .
3 "
CD
0
■ o
1
c
a
o
3
■o
o
&
o
c
(/)
w
o '
3
Person 5 Wo wouldn't
bo horo if
wo hadn't
dono it, but
wo havo a
long way to
g o
Wo'vo boon
doing that for
a whilo
boforo thoso
mootings.
Thnt part of
it—tho part
in tho
summer of
1995—was
worthwhile
the old
system while
wo would bo
creating tho
now one),
making sense
of tho now
vision, otc.
That was all
without ISS.
Tom and ISS
worked to
generate tho
scheduled
mootings. I
had tho
fooling thnt
ISS was very
instrumental.
I roally don't
recall. Wo'vo
boon working
tho process
for two years.
Wo started
tho visioning
process with
Tim just
after his
arrival
Wo'vo
changed it
several
times.
Tim's
mootings
woro very
useful.
we
wouldn't
have been
so
successful.
Wow—that
was two
years ago.
I
remember
wo had a
lot of
discussion.
It was tho
basic CMl
tools.
Today,
working
through
tho
problems
is a way of
life. You
focus on
creating
win-win
material
tracking
system, I
was amu'/.ed
how little I
know.
This is tho
right way to
do business.
Wo dross
alike, wo
don't wear
ties. Wore
trying to
tear down
the barriers
between
mgmt and
non-
managomon
t.
I got handouts
all tho time. I
produce
handouts
daily. I hope
they're useful;
I spend my
timo
producing
them.
I helped on
lots of them.
I referred to
things
throughout
tho process.
Tho process
improvomon
t stuff—I
produced a
complete
package for
pooplo.
Documents
liko tho
ones wo
produced
are
absolutely
critical.
Pooplo
undorosti
mate how
useful they
are. It's
port of
business
today,
especially
during
process
improvomo
nts. Put
there's so
U l
7 D
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
g
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
C/)
8
ë'
3
3 "
CD
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
a
O
3
" O
O
CD
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
C/)
for people.
This is on
going all
the timo.
much for
so long, it's
hard to
recall.
Person G Success has 1 think the It wasn't Not roally. It has a lot It was both It was huge. Some, I As a I would
many visioning Tom. It But it's of different a strength We killed a lot never went communient really love
dimensions process was wasn't that important component and a of trees. back. It was ion exercise to get the
—how do very much ISS. to know s. We weakness. Personally— more of a with my results of
you successful. Mostly it was that wo woron’ t It makes and I can't record, so staff, I this study.
convince We created a Tim, investigato doing so the judge for that we could would refer We re not
people that baseline that delegating to d3-4 good. We communient anyone else— recreate a back But I done. In
this is what really Tom and ISS. companies. wore (the ion clearer. those prior roally didn't our
wo should synchronized Tim had a until ISS division) Communica documents did meeting. If I in terms of planning.
do. At a top people. nice style. finally won being tion is an little. The wanted to producing wo were
level, we like a out. We beaten up. obstacle by value was in discuss tho moro more
are philosopher knew we prior to itself. In the discussion. vision with documents optimistic.
successful, talking. had a Tim. The that sense. But the someone. I'd for the core We
in tho sense Having an winning previous it was a documents use the team. underesti
that the intellectual process division strength. If weren't for handouts. I mated the
majority connection to before we manager we had it to me—I'm never really length of
seem to people was started. was being do again, I division staff. needed it. time it
agree with important. chewed up. think we The because really
the He really and he should do it documents there was a takes to
methodolog jolted people made the the same help to lot of shift
y. There's a into wanting confronta ti way. It communicate wordsmithin people's
lot of silence to succeed. on public. takes a beyond g that went attitudes
throughout We all longer time division staff. on. The and
the staff. wanted for a large I remember idea—the behavior.
Tho top something group to stacks and footprint of Tho status
leadership, I better. become stacks that tho vision— of tho
mean. They Tim came convinced. just went in was in my vision is
go ahead with a and in this the trash. But mind the first not as
silently. solid sense it was I think wo meeting. A successful
doing record, and a weakness. tried to lot of things 1 as we'd
whatever we all Transitionin overcommunic used;I lot of like it to
the can, hut wanted to g people ate, just to things I be. Were
they’ re not succeed. from the old make sure we didn't. so behind
completely He seemed state to the got the in our
sold on tho magnanim new state message deliveries
idea. Those ous. 1 was just took a through to to our
U l
o >
157
g i = c J=
i l
=• o i l l
Ë.-g:S
- 2 I J " f I T I ° • - s i
° g
a e -g
A i
A u
l i i l}5
= c -
[iiiû ! ■ £ Il i l l
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
CD
" D
O
Q .
C
g
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
C/)
CD
8
■ D
( O '
3 .
3 "
CD
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
a
O
3
■ D
O
CD
Q .
■ D
CD
(/)
(/)
successes.
Person 7 Because ef Successful I'll have lo Actually, 1 think It was 1 think that, as I produced There was This BPR
where wo’ ro but brutal. think about no. A few that, first absolutely a specific TONS of constant is an
al, tho It's a process that. There sessiens of off, Tim the right effort is going documents. referring incredibly
snags we hit we had te go was a getting picked the thing to do. on, they are It's hard to back to key difficult
early en are through, and steering everybody' right Going very valuable. remember documents. process.
settling they were committee s buy in. person to through it. But it's nearly individual especially One thing
down. successful in that was set but that champion the levels impossible to documents. the wo could
tho sense up to lay out was fairly the changed keep But yes, 1 did visioning havo done
that wo a high level minor. change. Whatever everything produce summary. better is to
really began process and There Tom is level you and everyone many. reinforce
to think appoint were a very don't up to date. 1 with our
differently. champions to couple of meticulous include will sit here now. process
We also run focus . He is cause you and think. champions
redesigned everything. sessions. absolutely trouble gees, is there a that wo
the entire And with the where we tho person down the way we can shouldn't
value chain. consulting talked to move road. summarize abandon
which was from ISS, about you everything old
important. that's how it whether through we've dono in processes
The meetings was we'd really this kind of just a few until new
were brutal developed at do the major pages? Maybe ones are in
because of a really high BPR or change. wo should do place and
the detailed level. just talk He's that. Tho proven.
nature of the about it. 1 dogmatic ability to refer We
processes. don't think in his back to the experience
and the that was in approach vision is great. d a lot of
tendencies the to keeping But hero we that. We
for people to original it going. are two years were
have to plan. Also, Tim's later, it's fighting on
radically backing tough to three
change their helped a remember the fronts at
thoughts. tromendou
s amount.
His
leadership
is great,
and his
ability to
pick Tom
was
first
workshop.
the same
time—
doing the
BPR,
keeping
everything
running,
and fixing
tho
L A
00
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
g
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
C/)
CD
8
3 .
3 "
CD
CD
■ D
O
Q .
C
a
O
3
" O
O
CD
Q .
■ D
CD
C/)
C/)
essential. problems
that came
up as a
result of
premature
implemtna
tion. It's
liko trying
to fit an
elephant in
tho trunk
of a car—
just when
you got tho
head in,
the tail
pops out.
Person 8 Wo arc still I'd like to go Well, it's No. You've got Tho pooplo looking back, I created a 1 spent most When 1
recovering back now and homemade Actually, it to hold on at tho not a whole few sheets of of my timo had to
from the renew this A bunch of us changed to the middle have lot. It served paper that thinking interrupt
financial process. If got together very little. principles the most to as a way to guided a about where the
burden of wo hadn't and figured it It was and goals. lose. So wo keep us on conversation individual process—
having to dono this, out. It's a really a Otherwise, needed to. track. Also, or two. pooplo were thoso were
shut down we'd be in combination buying in tho in ossonco, we'll havo to in their difficult
our systems trouble now. of a fow process; convorsati work from recreate tho thinking. moments
(an It was books, wo know on tho bottom process, and So 1 roally for me.
unrelated successful. articles and from tho completely and the top. now wo didn't havo Now I wish
technical my own start what digresses. Wo needed already have to go back I hadn't
problem). oxporionco. it would Tho loader to bring tho documents and review intorrupto
Wo were hit For example. look like. really has them into it. in the tho d as much
with a wo docided to put a lid computer. Hut handouts. as I did.
choice: do not to spend on by sotting up But the fact B utl
wo jump to timo on the digressions tho format in that they're hated to
tho new "as is." We advance. there is 8 0 0 pooplo
system jumped to invaluable. walking
prematurely tho vision. 1 think wo down tho
or do wo thon to tho need to wrong
return to gap analysis. recreate the track.
antiquated process.
systems?
U l
s û
1 6 0
ill
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
161
R eferences
Aiken, M., Hasan, B., & Vanjani, M. (1996). Total quality management: a
GDSS approach. Information Systems Management, 13, 73-75.
Alderton, S. M. (1982). Locus of control-based argumentation as a
predictor of group polarization. Communication Quarterly, 30,
381-387.
Alderton, S. M. & Frey, L. P. (1986). Argumentation in small group
decision-making. In R. Y. Hirokawa and M. S. Poole (Eds.),
Communication and group decision-making (pp. 157-173).
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Alderton, S. M. (1980). Attributions of responsibilty for socially
deviant behavior in decision-making discussions as a fimction of
situation and locus of control of attributor. Central States
Speech Journal, 34, 88-95.
Aldertson, S. M. & Frey, L. P. (1983). Effects of reaction to arguments
on group outcome: The case of group polarization. Central
States Speech Journal, 34, 88-95.
AUen, D. P. & Nafius, R. (1993). Dreaming and doing: Reengineering
GTE telephone operation.
Amburgey, T. L., Kelly, D., & Barnett, W. P. (1990). Resetting the
clock: The dynamics of organizational change and failure.
Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, pp. 160-164.
Anderson, J. C., Dooley, K., & Rungtusanatham, M. (1994). Training for
effective continuous quahty improvement. Quality Progress, 27,
57-61.
Anderson, P. (1991). The hazards of reorganization. Working paper,
Cornell University.
Anthony, W. P. (1978). Participative management. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
162
Argyris, C. (1957). Personality and organization. New York: Harper
& Row, 1957.
Bak, C. A., Vogt, L. H., George, W. R., & Greentree, R. I. (1994).
Management by team: an innovative tool for running a service
organization through internal marketing. The Journal of Services
Marketing, 8 , 37-47.
Ballou, M. C. (1994). Allstate pulls together to redevelop billing process;
firm finds strength in unity. Computerworld, 28, 78.
Bambarger, B. (1994). Coming Asahi \fideo Products Co. eliminates cost
of errors for $2 million savings. Industrial Engineering, 26, 28-29.
Barker, J. R. & Tompkins, P. K. (1993). Organizations, teams, control
and identification. Paper presented at the Speech
Communication Association Annual Meeting, Miami, FL.
Bashein, B.J., Markus, M.L., & Rüey, P. (1994, Spring). Preconditions
for BPR success and how to prevent failures. Information
Systems Management, 7-13.
Berger, C.R. (1992). Communication theories and other curios.
Communication Monographs, 58, 101-113.
Bird, A. (1991). Organizational flattening within the U.S. banking
industry. The Bankers Magazine, 774(4), 67-70.
Bitzer, L. F. (1968). The rhetorical situation. Philosophy and
Rhetoric, 1, 1-14.
Bookman, B. (1994). Teams, cow paths and the innovative workplace.
The Journal for Quality and Participation, 17, 70-72.
Bormann, E. G. (1972). Fantasy and rhetorical vision: The rhetorical
criticism of social reality. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 58, 396-
407.
Bowman, E. H., & Singh, H. (1993). Corporate restructuring:
Reconfiguring the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 5-
14.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
163
Braverman, H. (1994). The real meaning of Taylorism. In F.Fischer &
C. Sirianni (Eds.), Critical Studies in Organization &
Bureaucracy (rev. ecL), ^ p . 55-61). Philadelphia: Temple
University Press.
Brockner, J., Grover, S., Reed, T.F., & DeWi1 :t, R.L. (1992). Layoffs, job
insecurity, and survivors’ work effort: Evidence of an inverted-u
relationship. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 413-425.
Brown, S. L. & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1997). The art of continuous
change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in
relentlessly shifting organizations. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 42, 1-34.
Buday, R. S. (1993). Reengineering one firm’ s product development
and another’ s service delivery. Planning review.
Budiansky, S. (1992, December 7). Flying blind into a turbulent
future. U.S. News & World Report, p.58.
BuUis, C. (1991). Communication practices as unobtrusive control: An
observational study. Communication Studies, 45(3), 254-271.
Burke, J. (1985). The day the universe changed. Boston: Little,
Brown.
Byers, P.Y., & Wilcox, J.R. (1991). Focus groups: A qualitative
opportunity researchers. The Journal of Business
Communication, 28, 63-78.
Canary, D. J., Brossman, B. G., & Seibold, D. R. (1987). Argument
structures in decision-making groups. Southern Speech
Communication Journal, 53, 18-37.
Carlyle, B. (1994). A high tech firm's experience with the team
innovation process. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 17,
73.
Carrey, T. (1996). From zero to teamwork: a manufacturing journey.
Hospital Material Management Quarterly, 17, 67-71.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
164
Caudron, S. (1994). Diversity ignites effective work teams. Personnel
Journal, 73, 54-61.
Chaudron, D. (1995). An effective quality team. Not! HR Focus, 72, 6-7.
Coch, L. & French, J. R. P. (1948). Overcoming resistance to change.
Human relations, 1, 251-255.
Collins, B. & Guetzkow, H. (1964). A social psychology of group
processes for decision-making. New York: Wiley.
Crom S., & France, H. (1996). Teamwork brings breakthrough
improvements in quality and climate. Quality Progress, 29, 39-42.
Cummings, T. G. & MoUoy, E. S. (1977). Improving productivity and
the quality of work life. New York: Praeger.
Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C.G. (1993). Organization Development
and Change (5"^ ed). St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Company.
Cummings, T. G., Molloy, E. S., & Glen, R. (1977). A methodological
critique of fifty-eight selected work experiments. Human
Relations, 30, 675-708.
CupeUo, J. M. (1995). The gentle art of chartering a team. Quality
Progress, 28, 83-87.
Cushman, D.P., & King, S.S. (1993). High-speed management: A
revolution in organizational communication in the 1990s. In S.
Deetz (Ed.), Communication Yearbook, 16 (pp. 209-236).
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
D arm an, R. G. (1986, November). Business, government, and
education: The end of the rope-a-dope. United States Treasury
News, 24.
Davis, S. & Davidson, B. (1991). 2020 vision. New York: Simon &
Schuster.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
165
Day, R. & Day, J. V. (1977). A review of the current state of
negotiated order theory: An appreciation and a critique.
Sociological Quarterly, 18, 126-142.
Deady, T. (1994). Hughes layofiEs look not to be the last for industry.
Los Angeles Business Journal, Sept 19. No 37. Vol 16, pg 11.
Deetz, S. A. (1992). Democracy in the age of corporate colonization:
Developments in communication and the policits of everyday life.
Albany: State University Press of New York.
Devitt, A. (1991). Intertextuality in tax accounting: Generic,
referential, and functional. In C. Brazerman and J. Paradis
(Eds). Textual dynamics of the professions. Madison, WI: The
University of Wisconsin.
Dimancescu, D., & Dwenger, K. (1996). Smoothing the product
development path. Management Review, 85, 36-41.
Donnelly, R. G., & Kezsbom, D. S. (1994). Do project teams "walk their
talk"? Survey research on project team effectiveness. Transactions
of the American Association of Cost Engineers, 38, HF2-HF9.
Donohue, W. A. & Roberto, A. J. (1993). Relational development as
negotiated order in hostage negotiation. Human
Communication Research, 20(2), 175-198.
Drew, S., & Coulson-Thomas, C. (1996). Transformation through
teamwork: the path to the new organization? Management
Decision, 34, 7-17.
Eaton, A. E. (1995). New production techniques, employee involvement
and unions. Labor Studies Journal, 2 0 , 19-41.
Ellis, J.E. (1994). McDonnell Douglas: Unfasten the seat belts.
Business Week, February 14, 1994, p.36
Eyo, B. A. (1993.) Innovation and the rhetorical vision ofvictimage in
an authoritarian organizational culture: A case study. Paper
presented at the Speech Communication Association Annual
Meeting, Miami, FL.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
166
Farrell, C., & Mandai, M.J. (1992). The Cold War’ s grim aftermath.
Business Week, February 24, 1992, p.78.
Finn, L., Fulgoni, P., & Reynard, S. (1995). Data tools for problem
solving. CMA—the Management Accounting Magazine, 69, 18-21.
Fisher, B. A. (1970). The process of decision modification in small
discussion groups. Journal of communication, 2 0 , 51-64.
Flinders, D.J. (1993). From theory and concepts to educational
connoisseurship. In D.J. Flinders & G.E. Mills (Eds.), Theory
and concepts in qualitative research: Perspectives from the field
(pp. 117-128). New York: Teachers College Press.
Fontana, A. & Frey, J.H. (1994). Interviewing: The art of science. In
N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative
research (pp. 31-376). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other
writings, 1972-1977. (C Gordon, L. Marhsall, J. Mepham, & K.
Soper, Trans.; C. Gordon. Ed.) New York: Pantheon.
Foucault, M. (1979). The birth o f the prison. Hammondsworth,
England: Penguin.
French, W. L. & BeU, C. H. (1978). Organization development:
Behavioral science interventions for organizational improvement.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Frost, C. H., Wakely, J. H., & Ruh, R. A. (1974). The Scanlon plan for
organizational development: Identity, participation, and equity.
East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press.
Furey, T. R. (1993). A six-step guide to process reengineering.
Planning review.
Gamble, B. M. (1995). There is more to staying competitive than simply
merging people with technology. Information Strategy: The
Executive's Journal, 11,48-56.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
167
Gersick, C. J. G. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a
new model of group development. Academy o f Management
Journal, 52,9-41.
Gersick, C. J. G. (1989). Marking time: Predictable transitions in task
groups. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 274-309.
Gersick, C. J. G. (1991). Revolutionary change theories: A multilevel
exploration of the punctuated equilibrium paradigm. Academy
of Management Review, 16, 10-36.
Giddens, A. (1979). Central Problems in Social Theory. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Giddens, A. (1982). Profiles and Critiques in Social Theory. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Glaser, B.G. & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory.
New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Glenn, R. R., Hines, J., & Wilcox, D. (1994). Training internal
fadhtators. Training & Development, 48, 45-48.
Goff, L. (1995). Retooling success. Computerworld, 29(11), 132.
Goodman, P. S. & Kurke, L. B. (1982). Studies of change in
organizations: A status report. In P.S. Goodman and Associates
(Eds.) Change in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gould, S. J. (1980). The panda's thumb. New York: Norton.
Gould, S. J. (1989). Punctuated equihbrium in fact and theory.
Journal of Social Biolotical Structure, 1 2: 117-136.
Gould, S. J. (1989). Punctuated equihbrium theory in fact and theory.
Journal of Social Biological Structures, 12, 117-136.
Hales, H. L., & Savoie, B. J. (1994). Building a foundation for successfiü
business process reengineering. Industrial Engineering, 26, 17-19.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
168
Hall, J. (1994). Americans know how to be productive if managers wül
let them. Organizational Dynamics, 22(3), 33-46.
Hammer, M. (1990). Reengineering work: Don’ t automate, obliterate.
Harvard Business Review, 68(4), 104-113.
Hammer, M. (1996). Beyond reengineering: How the process-centered
organization is changing our work and our lives. New York:
Harper Business.
Hammer, M. & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the corporation: A
manifesto for business revolution. New York: Harper Business.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and
organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49, 149-
164.
Hansen, C. J. (1995). Writing the project team: authority and
intertextuahty in a corporate setting. The Journal of Business
Communication, 32, 103-122.
Harari, O. (1992, June). Imperatives for deflating the fat organization.
Management Review, 61-62.
Harbrecht, D. (1994, March). Clinton’ s tu y American’ pitch keeps
paying off. Business Week, pp.28-29.
Harrison, D. B. & Pratt, M. D. (1993). A methodology for
reengineering businesses. P lanning Review.
Harrison, D. B., Conn, H. P., Whittaker, B., & Mitchell, J. (1994).
Mobilizing abilities through teamwork. Canadian Business
Review, 2 1, 20-23.
Hayes, F. (1995). IS, users take team approach: business process re
engineering gains popularity, improves efBdency. Computerworld,
29(43), 89.
Hemmer, T. (1995). On the interrelation between production technology,
job design, and incentives. The Journal of Accounting and
Economics, 19(2-3), 209-245.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
169
Herndon, S.L. (1993). Using focus group interviews for preliminary
investigation. In S.L. Herndon & G.L. Kreps (Eds.), Qualitative
Research: Applications in Organizational Communication.
Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.
Heygate, R. (1992). Accelerating front-line change. TheMcKinsey
Quarterly, 1, 134-147.
Hiam, A. (Ed.). (1993). Does quality work? A review of relevant
studies. (Report No. 1043). New York: The Conference Board.
HiU, G. W. (1982). Group versus individual performance: Are iV-t-1
heads better than one? Psychological Bulletin, 91, 517-539.
Holman, C. (1972.) A handbook to literature (3 '^ '* ed). New York:
Odyssey Press.
Hoover, H. W. (1995). What went wrong in U.S. business's attempt to
rescue its competitiveness? Quality Progress, 28, 83-87.
Huse, E. F. & Cummings, T. G. (1985). Organization, development
and change. St Paul, MN: West.
Irwin, D., & Rodne, V. (1994). Self-directed work teams: coming soon to
an organization near you. CMA - the Management Accounting
Magazine, 6 8 , 10-13.
Isen, A. (1984). Toward understanding the role of affect in cognition.
In R. Wyer & T. SruU (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition, vol.
3: 179-236. Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.
Jablin, F. (1987). Formal organization structure. In F. Jablin, L.
Putnam, K. Roberts, & L. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of
Organizational Communication (pp. 389-419). Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.
Janis, I. (1982). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign
decisions and fiascos. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
170
Jaycox, M. (1996). How to get nonbelievers to participate in teams.
Quality Progress, 29, 45-49.
Johannson, H.J., McHugh, P., Pendlebury, A.J., & Wheeler, W.A.
(1993). Business process reengineering. Chichester: John Wiley
& Sons.
Joiner, B. (1993). Journal of business strategy. Nov/Dec. v 14(6).
Katz, D. & Kahn, R. L. (1978). TTie social psychology of organizations
(2"‘ i ed.) New York: Wiley.
Katzenbach, J. R. & Smith, D. K. (1993). The rules for managing
cross-functional reengineering teams. P lan n in g review.
Kaye, B. (1996). Up is not the only way: A manual for workforce
development. Palo Alto: Davies-Black.
Kesler, G. 0. (1995). A model and process for redesigning the HRM role,
competencies, and work in a major multi-national corporation.
Human Resource Management, 34(2), 229-252.
Kezsbom, D. S. (1995). Making a team work: techniques for building
successful cross-functional teams. Industrial Engineering, 27, 39-
41.
Kim, P. S., Pindur, W., & Reynolds, K. (1995). Creating a new
organizational culture: the key to total quahty management in the
pubhc sector. International Journal of Public Administration,
18(4), 675-709.
Kimberly, J. R. (1976). Organizational size and structuralist
perspective: A review, critique, and proposal. Administrative
Science Quarterlym 21, 571-597.
Kipnis, D., Schmidt, S., & Wilkinson, I. (1980). Intraorganizational
influence tactics: Explorations in getting one’ s way. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 65, 440-452.
Kirksey, J., & Zawacki, R. A. (1994). Assessment center helps find team-
oriented candidates. Personnel Journal, 73, 92.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
171
Klauss, R., & Bass, B. M. (1982). Interpersonal communication in
organizations. New York: Academic Press.
Kerb, L. J. (1996). Merger mania: Should the Pentagon pay for
defense industry restructuring? Brookings Review. June 2 2 .
Vol 14. No. 3. Pg.22
Krone, K. (1985). Subordinate influence in organizations: The
differential use of upward influence messages in decision
making contexts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University
of Texas at Austin.
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Lawler, E. E., m , Mohrman, S. A., & Ledford, G. E., Jr. (1992).
Employee involvement and total quality management. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Lawrence, P. R. (1990). Why organizations change. In Allan M.
Mohrman, Jr. et al. (Eds) Large-scale organizational change.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lesly, E. (1994, March). The nimble giants. Business Week, p.64.
Levinson, D. J. (1986). A conception of adult development. American
Psychologist, 41, 3-13.
Levy, A. (1986). Second order planned change: Definition and
conceptualization. Organizational Dynamics, Summer 1986, 15,
5-20.
Locke, E. A. & Schweiger, D. M. (1979). Participation in decision
making: One more look. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw
(Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 265-339).
Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Lodahl, T. M., & Kejner, M. (1965). The definition and measurement
of job involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, 24-33.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
172
Lowther, N. (1994). Mastering meetings. American Printer, 213,
Luby, R. E., Peel, D., & Swahl, W. (1995). Component-based work
breakdown structure. Project Management Journal, 26, 38-43.
Lyman, D., & Richter, K. (1995). QFD and personality type: the key to
team energy and efifectiveness. Industrial Engineering, 27, 57-60.
Maier, N. R. F. (1963). The definition and measurement of job
involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, 24-33.
Mandel, M.J., & Smart, T. (1993, May). The defense shift hits main
street. Business Week, p.34.
Manz, C. C., & Neck C. P. (1995). Teamthink: beyond the groupthink
syndrome in self-managing work teams. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 10, 7-15.
McCarthy, J. (1996). Concurrent engineering: a case study. R&D, 38,
29-32.
McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
McNemey, D. J. (1995). Compensation case study: rewarding team
performance and individual skUlbuüding. HR Focus, 72, 1-3.
Melcher, A. J. (1976). Participation: A critical review of research
findings. Human resource management, 15, 1 2-2 1 .
Miller, C. R. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of
Speech, 70, 151-167.
Miller, D. & Friesen, P. (1984). Organizations: A quantum view.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Miller, G. J. (1992). Managerial dilemmas: The political economy of
hierarchy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
173
Miller, K. I. & Monge, P. R. (1986). Participation, satisfaction, and
productivity: A meta-analytic review. Academy o f Management
Journal, 29, 727-753.
Mitchell, T. R. (1973). Motivation and participation: An integration.
Academy of Management Journal, 16, 660-679.
Mohr-Jackson, I. (1993). What will help or hinder TQM? In H. L.
Gallo (Ed.), Profiting from total quality (Report No. 1048). New
York: The Conference Board.
Monge, P. R. & Miller, K. I. (1988). Participative processes in
organizations. In G. M. Goldhaber & G. A. Barnett, Handbook
of organizational communication (pp. 213-230). Norwood, NJ:
Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Monge, P., & Eisenberg, E. (1987). Emergent communication networks.
In F. Jablin, L. Putnam, K. Roberts, & L. Porter (Eds.),
Handbook of Organizational Communication (pp. 304-342).
Newbury Park: Sage.
Morgan, D.L. (1988). Focus groups as qualitative research. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M. & Porter, L. W. (1979). The
measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-247.
Nassutti, C. P., & Jones, R. J. (1996). A victorious retreat. Journal of
Accountancy, 181, 70-74.
Nathan, M. L. & Mitroff, 1.1. (1991). The use of negotiated order
theory as a tool for the analysis and development of an
interorgani zational field. Journal of Applied Behavioral
Science, 27, 163-180.
Neff, K. C. (1995). Teams approach to credit management gaining
popularity. Business Credit, 97, 35-36.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
174
Nutt, P. C. (1988). Tactics of implementation. Academy of
management journal, 29, 230-261.
Ostroff, F., & Smith, D. (1992). The horizontal organization. The
McKinsey Quarterly, 1, 148-168.
Pearlstein, S. (1992, December 14). Differing on defense: Martin
M arietta wants to grow; General Dynamics wants to shrink.
The Washington Post, p. FI.
Pendleton, A. (1994). Structural reorganization and labour
management in pubhc enterprise: A study of British Rad.
Journal of Management Studies, 34, 33-55.
Peters, T. (1992). Liberation management. New York: Fawcett
Columbine.
Phillips, S. (1994). Teams fadhtate change at turbulent plant. Personnel
Journal, 73(10), 110-116.
Philhps, S. N. (1996). Team training puts fizz in Coke plant's future.
Personnel Journal, 75,87-90.
Poole, M. S. (1981). Decision development in small groups I: A
comparison of two models. Communication Monographs, 48, 1-24.
Poole, M. S. (1983). Decision development in small groups II: A study of
multiple sequences in decision making. Communication
Monographs, 50(3), 206-232.
Poole, M. S. & Roth, J. (1989). Decision development in small groups IV:
A typology of group decision paths. Human Communication
Research, 15ÇS), 323-356.
PR Newswire. (1994). Dr. Fong named to head Hughes-Torrance
Operation. May 19. Section: Pg. 0519LA023.
Prigogine, I. & Stengers, I. (1984). Order out of chaos: M an’ s new
dialogue with nature. New York: Bantam books.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
175
Putnam, L. L., Van Hoeven, S. A., & Bullis, C. A. (1991). The role of
rituals and fantasy themes in teachers’ bargaining. Western
Journal o f Speech Communication, 55(1), 85-103.
Ranney, J., & Deck, M. (1995). Making teams work: lessons from the
leaders in new product development. Planning Review, 23, 6-13.
Rathnam, S., Mahajan, V., & Whinston, A. B. (1995). Fadhtating
coordination in customer support teams: a framework and its
imphcaüons for the design of information technology.
Management Science, 41(12), 1900-1921.
Redding, W.C. (1992). Response to Professor Berger’ s essay: Its
meaning for organizational communication. Communication
Monographs, 59, 87-93.
Rentsch, J. R., Heffiier, T. S., & Duffy, L. T. (1994). What you know is
what you get from experience: team experience related to
teamwork schemas. Group & Organization Management, 19(4),
450-474.
Roberts, B. (1995). Just team work. PC Week, 1 2, E1-E2.
Rocine, V., & Irwin, D. (1994). Make team members responsible for team
effectiveness. CMA - the Management Accounting Magazine, 6 8 ,
28.
RomaneUi, E. & Tushman, M. L. (1994). Organizational
transformation as punctuated equihbrium: An empirical test.
Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1141-1189.
Rossant, J. (1994, March 23). The Saudis are buying—but with whose
money? Business Week, pp.28-29.
Rousseau, D. M. (1978). Characteristics of departments, positions, and
individuals: Contexts for attitudes and behaviors.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 521-540.
Ruh, R. A., White, J. K., & Wood, R. R. (1975). Job involvement,
values, personal background, participation in decision-making.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
176
and job attitudes. Academy of Management Journal, 18, 300-
312.
Sagie, A., Elizur, D., & Greenbaum, C.W. (1985). Job experience,
persuasion strategy and resistance to change: An experimental
study. Jounml of Occupational Behavior, 6, 157-162.
Schendel, D. (1993). Introduction to the summer 1993 special issue on
‘ corporate restructuring’. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 1-
3.
Schine, E. (1991, January 14). Defenseless against cutbacks. Business
Week, p.69.
Schuler, R. S. (1980). A role and expectancy perception model of
participation in decision making. Academy of Management
Journal, 23, 331-340.
Seibold, D. R., McPhee, R. D., Poole, M. S., Tanita N. E., & Canary, D.
J. (1981). Argument group influence and decision outcome. In
G. Ziegelmueller & Rhodes (Eds.), Dimensions of argument:
Proceeding of the second summer conference on argumentation
(pp. 663-692). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication
Association.
Shaffer, M. K., & Pfeififer, I. L. (1995). A blueprint for training. Training
& Development, 49, 31-33.
Shaw, D. V., Day, D. 0., & Slavinskas, E. (1995). Learning from
mistakes: Hospital teams discovers valuable lessons after TQM
effort disbands. Quality Progress, 28, 45-49.
Shaw, M. E. (1981). Group dynamics: The psychology of small group
behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Shimanoff, S. B. (1980). Communication rules: Theory and research.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Short, J. E. & Venkatraman, N. (1992). Beyond business process
reengineering: Redefining Baxter’ s business. Sloan
Management Review. Fall.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
177
Smeltzer, L. R. (1991). An analysis of strategies for announcing
oranization-wide change. Group & Organization Studies, 16, 5-
24.
Smith, A. (1994). Towards teamsmanship, away from leadership.
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 22, 9-
10.
Smith, L. (1992, June 29). Coping with the defense build-down.
Fortune, p.88.
Sonnenberg, F. (1991). Internal communication: Turning talk into
action. The Journal of Business Strategy. Nov/Dec, 1991.
Spector, B. (1989). From bogged down to fired up: Inspiring
organizational change. Management review.
Stewart, T.A. (1994, February 7). Rate your readiness to change.
Fortune, pp. 104-110.
Stjemberg, T. & Philips, A. (1993). Organizational innovations in a
long-term perspective: Legitimacy and soids-of-fire as critical
factors of change and viability. Human relations, 46, 1193-1219.
Talwar, R. (1993). Business re-engineering: A strategy-driven
approach. Long Range Planning, 26(6), 22-40.
Terborg, J. R., Castore, C., & DeNirro, J. A. (1976). A longitudinal
field investigation of the impact of group composition on group
performance and cohesion. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 34, 782-790.
The, L. (1995). Behind good products are methods that work.
Datamation, 41, 63-65.
Thornton, S. J. (1993). The quest for emergent meaning: A personal
account. In D.J. Flinders & G.E. Mills (Eds.), Theory and
concepts in qualitative research: Perspectives from the field (pp.
68-82). New York: Teachers College Press.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
178
Tompkins, J. A. (1995). The Genesis Enterprise, part three: the new,
team-based organization. Modem Materials Handling, 50, 32.
Tompkins, P. & Cheney, G. (1985). Communication and unobtrusive
control in contemporary organizations. In R. McPhee and P.
Tompkins (Eds.), Organizational communication: Traditional
themes and new directions (pp. 179-210). Beverly Hills, CA:
Sage.
Tushman, M. L. & RomaneUi, E. (1985). Organizational evolution: A
metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation. In L. L.
Cummings and B. M. Straw (Eds.), Research in organizational
behavior, vol. 7: 171-222. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Vartabedian, R. (1991). John McDonneU’ s bumpy ride. Los Angeles
Times.
Vince, R. (1995). Working with emotions in the change process: using
drawings for team diagnosis and development. Organisations &
People, 2, 11-17.
Vroom, V. H., & Yetton, P. W. (1973). Leadership and decision
making. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Walker, R. G. (1994). VirtuaUy interactive brainstorming. Industrial
Engineering, 26, 20-21.
Weber, M. (1946). Essays in sociology (edited and translated by H. H.
Gerth & C. Wright Mills) Oxford University Press.
Yates, J. (1989). Control through communication: The rise of system in
American management. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins
University Press.
Yates, J. & Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). Genres of organizational
communication: A structurational approach to studying
communication and media. Academy of Management Review,
17, 299-321.
Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly
HiUs, CA: Sage.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
179
Zigon, J. (1994). Oil company leam s to measure work-team performance.
Personnel Journal, 73, 46-48.
Zuidema, K. R., & Kleiner, B. H. (1994). New developments in
developing self-directed work groups. Management Decision, 32,
57-63.
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (Q A -3 )
/
/.X
%
1 . 0
i.i
1 . 2 5
iflâ IJâ
|[f m
* 0 m i l 2 . 0
1.8
1 .4
1 . 6
150mm
V
»
O
/ /
/
%
/A P P L IE D A IMXIGE . Inc
1653 East Main Street
_ _ _ _ ^ Roctiester, NY 14609 USA
Ptione: 716/482-0300
------- Fax: 716/288-5989
O 1993. Applied Image. Inc.. A il Rights Reserved
R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.

Asset Metadata

Creator Logan, David Coleman (author)

Core Title Business process reengineering as communication genres in space electronics

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Communication

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag business administration, management,engineering, industrial,OAI-PMH Harvest,speech communication

Language English

Advisor Riley, Patricia (committee chair), Cody, Michael (committee member), Cummings, Tomas G. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c17-318692

Unique identifier UC11353648

Identifier 9835089.pdf (filename),usctheses-c17-318692 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 9835089.pdf

Dmrecord 318692

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Logan, David Coleman

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA