Compliance vs Commitment LO8797

Nickols@aol.com
Thu, 1 Aug 1996 06:24:18 -0400

Replying to LO8771 -

Bill Hobler writes, in part,

> GREGG OKUNAMI asked about how to gain commitment to a project.

>> I started to think about the need for a driver, which resulted in
>> thinking about Senges ideas about compliance vs commitment.
>> Utilizing
>> a driver or someone to be accountable is an example of an
>> organziational model based on compliance.

>The compliance based model is that of a hierarchial organization.
>Commitment is most easily gained in a model in which the committed have
>control rather than their 'superiors' having control.

The concern with compliance versus commitment goes back well beyond
Senge's ideas. It traces to the shift to knowledge work, which represents
a shift from prefigured to configured work routines. Peter Drucker
flagged this shift for us beginning in the 1960s and has tracked it ever
since. In any case, for prefigured work routines, the aim of management
is to ensure compliance. For configured work routines, the aim is to
elicit contribution. Both can occur in a hierarchical system and often do
when the work of the organization includes low-skilled repetitive routines
as well as highly-skilled, problem identification and resolution work. It
is the nature of the work that drives a concern with commitment or
compliance, not the authority structure of the organization. Moreover,
the control of configured work routines is, by definition, vested in the
worker. As Peter Drucker wrote of the knowledge worker: "No one can
supervise him."

Regards,

Fred Nickols
nickols@aol.com

-- 

Nickols@aol.com

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>