In a conference that took me (virtually at least) to South Africa, I shared the story that led to the perception of organizations as living organisms. Then I had the privilege to get feedback from systems thinking practitioners involved in the story from its beginning. Let me share both with you and see how this can inform your leadership and collective dynamics.
In this post we will see together:
1 Why the notion of a living organization is more powerful than it may sound?
2 Where do living organizations and learning organizations come from?
3 Three takeaways from system thinkers
I sometimes craft collaborative workshops for executives or teams with the following proposition: represent your organization or entity as if it was a living organism (real or imaginary).
Why is the Notion of a Living Organization more Powerful than it may Sound?
Why do leaders of complex organizations find it instrumental to draw their organization as a living organism when shaping their strategy? I see two main reasons.
First, representation is one way of playing, and playing is key in rationalizing. You read this right: through play, the members of an organization will think better. Experts in neuroscience, psychiatry, history, culture, corporate governance, and primatology1 show the main benefits of playing for humans:
- Empathy and “emotional contagion”: playing helps us realize the impact of our actions and the feelings of others, it activates a wide range of emotions including trust and confidence
- Creativity: playing allows exploration, testing, and mistakes, which are prerequisites for learning. It helps grasp uncertain situations and makes taking risks more acceptable.
- Health: humans are made to play throughout their life and the opposite of playing is not work, it’s depression. Playing is also a powerful protection against anxiety.
- Relationships: playing is a way to connect and relate, as well as to learn social norms and rules
With a drawing, executives have not only reached deeper questions and analysis than if I had only asked to describe the situation with words. They have also (re-)discovered the power of a metaphor. Don’t tell me that you’ve never referred to a sports team or a high peek to tell the story of your cooperation or strategy?
Second, considering an organization as a living organism is a shift from more traditional views that often refer to machines and mechanics. The Industrial Revolution certainly has a lot to do with our inclination to see companies through the organizational chart and Excel sheets angle!
How can the notion of living organization support your business and leadership?
Where do Living Organizations and Learning Organizations Come From?
In the 1980s, the person in charge of strategic planning for Shell, Arie de Geus, wondered why a handful of companies were much older than the expected corporate life span of that era (hint: it has shrunk again since then.) He and his team identified 27 companies with a history spanning 75 years in the US, Japan, and Europe and compared their behaviors. Here is what they found, which de Geus shared in the book “The Living Company”. Companies that live a long life are:
- “Sensitive to their environment”
- “Cohesive, with a strong sense of identity”
- “Tolerant”of activities on the margin, or decentralized, ready to diversify
- “Conservative in financing”.
The key here is that these organizations are connected to their business environment, and thus adjust their behavior to the reality of their surroundings. They favor self-preservation in turbulent times, and self-development in times of slower change. (I’ve been wondering what slower change could mean in 2024 compared to the 1970s).
The connection between business and life is: Survival and improvement in the long run. And we know now that Darwin’s thought has been oversimplified over the years, and that cooperation, rather than domination, is the reason why life exists and develops –biologist Lynn Margulis has shown it throughout her career and concluded: “Life did not take over the world by combat, but by networking.”
It will not be a surprise to observe how longevity depends on learning: adjusting between survival and growth is a learning process for the entire organization. That’s where another steppingstone was crafted by a large organization: Visa was created by Dee Hock in 1970 with the intention to acknowledge that organizations face and create both chaos and order. He coined the concept of “chaordism” and went on to influence the creation of what is still known to this day as the Society for Organizational Learning (SOL), where corporations and academia combine research (theory) and experience (practice) to develop individuals, teams, and organizations.
SOL’s founder, Peter Senge, shared what makes a learning organization in his pioneering book The Fifth Discipline. You’ll recognize the role of collective dynamics and empowerment in his description. Learning organizations are “places where:
- “People continually expand their capacity to create the results they truly desire,
- “New and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured,
- “Collective aspiration is set free,
- “People are continually learning how to learn together.”
If it needs repeating: Organizational learning is about improving performance, as shown by the focus on “results”. I believe that truly desirable results refer to what is now often called purpose or reason for being: that something that is bigger than each of us and makes us accomplish great things together. And a free collective aspiration is an invitation to empowerment.
Three Takeaways From System Thinkers
At the end of my conference for my colleagues at SOL, 3 topics emerged as key in the 50-year-old story of living and learning companies.
First, “the roles and the importance of communication”: a learning organization gathers doers, thinkers, and helpers. It is the combination of their profile and skills that makes the organization thrive. Each member of the organization is “like a cell” in a living organism: they are sensitive to the environment at their level. And communication, especially in multicultural contexts, is key. “Curiosity is key in working together and making decisions”. Organizational living and learning are all about “finding solutions together”.
Second, the choice of a CEO has the potential to drive or hinder the learning capabilities of an entire organization. It’s all about “deciding to change the way to decide” –which happens to be the title of a foundational book about circle-based organizations.2 The CEO can also be the person who stops any movement toward more empowerment and reverts to more traditional ways of making decisions: it happened to Visa after its IPO –which didn’t stop Dee Hock from helping organizations use the governance that made Visa’s success against all odds.
Third, we covered the notion of “unlearning” that derives from organizational learning. “Habits, and beliefs” are meant to be shared and questioned on a regular basis, and at every major turn in the life of an organization. It is a great moment and tool to get teams together around a common goal. It takes time and effort, however less so than the time and effort to allow teams to grow apart and misunderstandings or conflicts to arise. Worldviews and “everything that has shaped how we see the world” have an impact.
Starting with imagination and representation, we jumped into the origins and insights of living and learning organizations. With these frameworks in action, organizations and leaders can better navigate the complexities of leadership and foster more dynamic and performing teams.
Co-Dynamics is how I guide organizations toward more balanced ways to work and decide. You will find more stories in chapters 10 and 11 of my book “Shared Decision-Making in the Corporate Arena.”
- Jeff Mogil, Stuart Brown, Jane McGonigal, Isabel Behncke, Friedrich Schiller, Marc Malmdorf-Andersen, Kevin Werbach ↩︎
- Who Decides Who Decides by Ted Rau: soon available in French. ↩︎
Photo Daniel Watson