Participative approaches to organizational design are believed to create a situation that has the potential for aligning diverging perspectives, interests, needs and objectives that exist in the group of people taking part in the effort. We strongly support this notion. What we believe is needed is a set of tools that support the process of building shared mental models between stakeholders of a complex problem, and that enhance communication among them. This is especially the case within the complex processes of organizational change, which many private and public companies are currently undergoing. One such set of tools was developed and implemented through a participative and interactive  organizational prototyping  process we undertook in the case of the reorganization process within the Royal Netherlands Air Force. In this paper we report about this case

Quanjel, Marcel

Wenzler, Ivo

English

AIS Electronic Library (AISeL)

Association for Information SystemsAIS Electronic Library (AISeL)AMCIS 1998 Proceedings Americas Conference on Information Systems(AMCIS)December 1998A Participative Approach to Organizational Design:The Case of the Royal Netherlands Air ForceMarcel QuanjelUniversity of NijmegenIvo WenzlerAndersen ConsultingFollow this and additional works at: http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis1998This material is brought to you by the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS) at AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). It has been acceptedfor inclusion in AMCIS 1998 Proceedings by an authorized administrator of AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). For more information, please contactelibrary@aisnet.org.Recommended CitationQuanjel, Marcel and Wenzler, Ivo, "A Participative Approach to Organizational Design: The Case of the Royal Netherlands Air Force"(1998). AMCIS 1998 Proceedings. 271.http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis1998/271-807-A Participative Approach to Organizational Design:The Case of the Royal Netherlands Air ForceMarcel Quanjel Institute for Applied Social Sciences (ITS)University of NijmegenIvo WenzlerAndersen ConsultingAbstractParticipative approaches to organizational design are believed to create a situation that has the potential foraligning diverging perspectives, interests, needs and objectives that exist in the group of people taking partin the effort. We strongly support this notion. What we believe is needed is a set of tools that support theprocess of building shared mental models between stakeholders of a complex problem, and that enhancecommunication among them. This is especially the case within the complex processes of organizationalchange, which many private and public companies are currently undergoing. One such set of tools wasdeveloped and implemented through a participative and interactive "organizational prototyping" process weundertook in the case of the reorganization process within the Royal Netherlands Air Force. In this paper wereport about this case.Organization in ChangeDue to the political and military changes in Eastern Europe, the NATO believed that there was no longer a military needto maintain a permanent defense line along the old Iron Curtain. For Dutch Government this meant that the necessary budgetcuts could be made by withdrawing their two Guided Missile Bases and joining them into a new base in the Netherlands (in theremainder of this article referred to as "the base").Besides this, there were a number of other changes influencing the process of developing the new organization. Not onlythat the military strategy has changed, but also the base was supposed to be operated by a system of Integral Management. Thenumber of hierarchical layers was to be reduced and squadrons were supposed to function as product responsible units. For thoseinvolved in developing the new base the accumulation of these changes caused several problems. The primary ones were:• a loss of oversight into the process of change;• a lack of understanding and knowledge of how to proceed;• a feeling of insecurity;• uncertainty regarding the outcomes of change, and• lack of a structured organizational change process.Organizational Prototyping: The Process and its ObjectivesAs of July 1st 1995 the base had to be fully operational. In July 1993 it became clear to the Air Force Staff that this changeprocess was much more complex then just another reorganization and the decision was made to approach it differently. Prioritywas given to clarifying discussion amongst stakeholders and creating a shared vision. We focused on the development of a sharedvision about the new organization among various stakeholders. Based on this we designed an organizational prototype whosestructure was tested by top management through a gaming/simulation exercise. In a more elaborate and detailed version of thisexercise the organizational prototype was transferred to the level of middle management.Creating a Shared VisionThe objective of this phase within the overall organizational prototyping process was to create clarity  in the ongoingdiscussions on the organizational change. To achieve this it was necessary to develop a shared vision on both communicationand management structure of the base. Those involved were the key actors within the base and several stakeholders from the AirForce staff. In a two day workshop 20 people discussed and described the central tasks and responsibilities for each of the mainactors in the base and a number of different types of relationships between them. They identified and described in detail thecommunication flows (order, advice, request, information, consultation and monitoring) as well as the flows of people, moneyand products. By doing this they started to establish a shared vision of their new base and they were able to recognize potentialproblems and develop initial scenarios to deal with them.-808-The output of this phase was a conceptual model (a schematic) of the new organization and its communication structure thatwas understood and supported by the key stakeholders within and outside the base. The model was accompanied by a detaileddescription (handbook) of the organizational units within the base (28 bureaus and squadrons) and of the more then 350relationships. Based on this we started to develop an organizational prototype of the base.Organizational Prototype of the BaseThe objective of this phase was to test the organizational and communication structure which was developed during thephase 1 of the process. We did this by developing an organizational prototype of the base and using it to test the future byexperimenting with scenarios of potential problems and solutions. Beside this it was used by key actors within the base andseveral stakeholders from the Air Force staff to facilitate agreement on how to act in reality. In developing this organizationalprototype we followed the design steps originally described by Duke and his disciples (Duke, 1980; Wenzler, 1993, 1995). Ofcourse we involved our client as much as possible in our design process in order to ensure the validity of the prototype.The organizational prototype is based on a symbolic representation of the primary production system at the base: eachproduct responsible unit (squadron) has a limited production capacity, represented by a number of little cards, symbols for’people’ and ’things’. The players have to reach a certain production target by allocating their capacity. Each squadron commanderhas to decide where to allocate his scarce recourses. The production system was designed in such a way that it represents a systemof mutual interdependencies between squadrons. Recourses are scarce and when one squadron commander needs the ’things’ fromanother squadron for his production, the owner of these ’things’ might need them to reach his own production target. Thecommunication and organizational structure within the game is - though in an abstract form - a replica of reality: the base ismanaged by a commander and his two replacing commanders and they are being supported by several staff bureaus. The tasksand responsibilities are the same as in reality: they have to make sure that the production in the squadrons is as ordered by higherechelons and that the base is able to operate with a certain level of quality over a longer period of time. Playing the game involvesabout 40 players and takes one and a half day. During the game the players were confronted with the problems they definedduring phase 1. To deal with some of these problems they had to redefine tasks and responsibilities of some actors. During thedebriefing the new structure gained a wide support: the new base was born.This participative and interactive development of the base was evaluated by our client (Kramer, 1994). They judged thebenefits of the first two phases of our process as follows: during the workshop the participants learned a lot about the new AirForce philosophy. Especially for those not involved in developing the philosophy it resulted in closing the knowledge gap. Themost important benefit of the workshop was the creation of a shared vision of the future organization. This shared visionappeared to be very valuable in facilitating discussions during the workshop but also outside the workshop. The game was judgedas having a positive effect on the level of understanding about the not yet existing base. Playing the game was also consideredhighly valuable because of a bond it created between people who would be close coworkers in the future. Based on theexperiences within the base, the organizational prototyping tools we developed and used were recommended as standardapproach for the reorganization of all Air Force bases.ConclusionFor the success of complex reorganization processes it is of vital importance that the people involved can keep a grip on whatis happening to their environment. They need to understand what their future organization will look like and they have to besupportive of the process of change. If they do not recognize the changing organization as their own, the reorganization processwill be directly or indirectly opposed. By creating commitment to change within those involved the opposition can be mostlyavoided. In the end any implementation process of a new organizational model needs the support of the "shop floor" to besuccessful. An organizational model that might be brilliant on the drawing board can easily fail once implemented, if it lackssupport of the people that have to function "within" that model. A less perfect organizational model could be a success if all thoseinvolved support it whole hartedly.One effective approach to gaining support within a "re-evolution" of an organization is the implementation of a process ofinteractive and participative organizational prototyping, based on the gaming-simulation methodology. This is primarily sobecause of its ability to:• facilitate communication between different perspectives;• provide an environment for exploring the future in an experiential way;• enhance the awareness and understanding of a complex problem environment;• increase the motivation for the process of change; and• help create the commitment needed for implementing the change.The Royal Netherlands Air Force is convinced of the added value of our organizational prototyping approach. They nowcopy this approach in reorganizing other bases. They also use the organizational prototyping tools we developed within theirManagement Development courses. The aim of it is to explore with their trainees the future organizational structure of the AirForce.-809-ReferencesDuke, R.D. (1980). A Paradigm for Game Design. Simulation and Games, Vol.11, No. 3.Kasteren, B. van, V.A.M. Peters & M.M.H. Quanjel (1994). Organizational Development through Gaming: Developing theorganizational system of a Royal Netherlands Air Force base, Paper presented at the ISAGA Conference, Ann Arbor, MI,1994.Kramer, LtKol R.H. (1994). Letter number PGR/94/262 from the Secretary of the Task Force for Reorganizations in the AirForce to all Air Force bases.Quanjel, M.M.H., Wenzler, I., Kasteren, B.J. van en Ter Beek, W.C.M. (1994) Systeemanalyse GGW De Peel, Confidentialreport for the Royal Netherlands Air Force, Nijmegen: ITS-BAG.Quanjel, M.M.H. & Wenzler, I. (1994). Innovations in Conceptual Modeling. In: System Dynamics - Exploring the Boundaries.ISBN 92-9129-004-1.Quanjel, M.M.H. & Wenzler, I. (1996). Organizational Prototyping: the case of the Royal Netherlands Air Force. In: GarciaCarbonell & Watts: Simulation Now!, proceedings of the 1995 ISAGA Conference in Valencia, Spain.Wenzler, I. (1993). Policy Exercises: A New Approach to Policy Development. Nijmegen: ITS. ISBN 90-6370-937-4.Wenzler, I. (1995). The Why, What and How of Policy Exercises. Paper presented at the ISAGA Conference 1995. Spain:Valencia.Wenzler, I. (1997). Take five: gaming/simulation design process. Proceedings of ISAGA 1996. Riga: ISAGA.

A Participative Approach to Organizational Design: The Case of the Royal Netherlands Air Force

https://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1698&amp;context=amcis1998

A Participative Approach to Organizational Design: The Case of the Royal Netherlands Air Force

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

AIS Electronic Library (AISeL)