Autonomous Decentralisation: The effects of #sociomateriality in organizational design

What causes flight delays, when its very purpose is speed? I guess one can easily draw reference to its size, and large structural volume, which always require higher cubic inches of validated alignment to be efficient, compared to say a Cessna or a helicopter!

As organizations face higher demand for growth and efficiency (read profits), the need to be agile floats as the first and foremost thought. Indeed, this essay seeks to deepen the understanding and application of agility from the lens of structural and sociomateriality-based org design. To discuss this, we need to discuss structures a bit ahead first.

The concept of structures is pretty dated. However, for a reminder, all structures which can be perceived using human sense consists of 3 important limitations;

No structure is immortal; thus there is decay right from the point of origination. Certain structures begin the process of decaying even before, and that can be observed in material sciences or in fruits, for an immediate reference, which actually tastes sweeter or better as it further decays. Every birth is the first milestone of its decay.

All structures are inherently fatal from within; this simply means that structures or their basic elements dysfunction or lose control happens within the structural edifice and often do not need an external agent; consider aging for this instance or electrons on a flow of electric current.

Finally, no two structures are equal; this highlights the structural tendency towards hierarchy, creating a reason to distinctly identify the individuality beyond their sociality. Every tree is dissimilar, and one may confirm this from biologists. The reason for the same, is highly unknown.

Now, if we look at the organization, we will find that social (people) interactions with materials lead to organizational performance. The term #sociomateriality emerged from this interfacing interactivity among people and materials. Add to this the element of technology, which is a smarter form of materiality, and it distinctly leads to better and faster delivery of productivity. Hence we must consider the effectiveness of organization design to lead this structural mass of the structure called an ORGANIZATION to lead the markets, based on its strategic wheels.

Now if we could redesign the same aeroplane into smaller cubes carrying much lesser headcount, it’s ability to refuel, maintain, realign and take off would be much faster. Similar with organizations. If we can allow decentralised automation of operations, the speed in which a local branch would operate could be faster, steeper and smarter. This furtive OD model is acronymically known as DAO or Decentralised Autonomous Organization.

How can organizations achieve this? A better redesign of the organization to begin with.

Three of the core challenges to achieve a state of DAO comes from the acronym; decentralisation or distribution challenges; automation or technology requirements and finally the social or organizing wants of the human spirit. While it sounds simple and truly is highly rewarding in terms of performance and growth, the design matters. Just like bad designs in nature cannot evolve further and leads to extinction, it is key to set the design for effecting growth rather than simple decentralisation. It would be like handing over a territory to a bunch of kids to play without supervision, leading to fights and whimperings towards lost causes. The design principles thus need to adhere to the following aspects of DePARture as a further acronym to resolve the process successfully;

Design principles: Org design principles must focus not on simple decentralisation, but on controlled autonomous rights. This means that self-correcting rights shall put wrong decisions into correct slots in case of a mistake as a design principle. It is like lane assist functions in cars nowadays, keeping the structure aligned to the objective.

People principles: The role of managing people here demands the first rule of maturity. Mature crowds, mature thought processes and mature behavior are often pillars of long-lasting success, if one has to allow independence and autonomy. Allow autonomy to a bunch of ruffians and they shall ensure that the last standing man bleeds to death.

Autonomy: Autonomy should get represented through decentralisation while being controlled by the design principle of collaborative dependency. This means that autonomy only exists for collaborative sociomateriality, as the core basis of operations.

Readiness: Self organising, maturity and technology-driven readiness principles will allow for self-correction and alignment to the core goals and objectives at all times. This will further ensure that radical and eccentric applications are limited to innovative extrapolations at the testing and prototyping levels. Functional interdependence today should be controlled using technology for alignment, and not necessarily aim at centralisation, as is often the misplaced outcome. In simpler terms, autonomous operations may begin at different points, all facing the same direction of growth path as a coordinated principle of achievement.

Culture: For DAO, ethics and relationships will play a key role to ensure there is a healthy competition among the DAO, and yet, there is bonhomie and focus on achieving together or playing on the same side in a race. Consider Formula One races or mixed and doubles' games, where the individual autonomy to excel is limited by the design principle and objective of collaborative dependency and only one playing a good hand doesn’t help in winning the match.

There are lots of models being tested today for efficiency in delivering higher org success, and the idea of DAO is only a structured approach towards developing efficient design principles for attaining such objectives. While we agree that such principles are not only successful for organizations but even complex design principles like AGI (Artificial General Intelligence), enabling such frameworks should be based on the organization’s structural strengths and properties first, to begin with. I personally am interested in research and developmental activities within organizations willing to explore OD and build future-proof organizations keeping the ‘idiot-index’ principles that Elon Musk mentions as a core manufacturing principle and can also be utilized as a meaningful index of measure. Interested further? Let's talk then!