A familiar question
Have you ever been in a casual conversation with someone, and the inevitable question comes up:
“What do you do for a living?”
It is a question we are all too familiar with, and the usual response is to state the company we work for and our job title. But does this really tell us anything about what a person does for a living?
In reality, job titles are simply labels defined by the company or field of business we are in. If we dig deeper, however, we will find that our job has multiple facets that can be differentiated by the objectives we strive to achieve and the relationships we have within our organization.
Let us explore these facets of our jobs.
Everything is communication
“An organization is not primarily defined by its members or
by the material resources at its disposal,
but rather by its mode of operation,
which is structured by communication.”
– Niklas Luhmann
First, let’s define what I mean by an organization.
Loosely based on and greatly simplified from Niklas Luhmann’s system theory, an organization is an autopoietic social system that consists of a network of communication that is purposefully coordinated toward achieving specific goals or objectives.
This may sound straightforward, but there’s actually a lot to unpack from this definition.
The key point is that in organizations, it is not the individuals who determine the system, but the communication. Individuals certainly act within the system and drive the communication, but the communication is governed by the internal rules of the organization – its norms, culture, or identity – which are often implicit and based on shared understandings and assumptions about how things should be done.
The term “autopoietic” refers to the system’s capability to produce and maintain itself by creating its own parts. This means it is constantly reinforcing and recreating its patterns based on the rules it follows. If you’ve ever tried to change an organization, you’ve probably experienced this pattern of internal resistance to change.
The third point is the purpose or function the system is trying to achieve or fulfill. This purpose is also emergent based on the self-organization of the system through internal communication and the system’s response to the environment. Companies often use strategy processes, mission and vision statements, and other means to determine and convey what they want to achieve.
All of this is communication.
And if this were not enough by itself, it gets even messier, as communication and deriving meaning from it involve three distinct parts:
- Information refers to the content or message that is being communicated. Information is not simply an objective reality that exists independently of communication but is rather a product of the communication process itself. It is a process of selection, what is communicated and what is omitted, which already creates meaning. Think about taboos in communication, political correctness, woke & cancel culture – all of these create meaning. As Peter Drucker said, “The most important thing in communication is to hear what isn’t being said.”
- Utterance refers to the act of communication itself or the physical manifestation of the message. An utterance is not simply a neutral vehicle for transmitting information but is rather an active participant in the communication process. The choice of words, tone of voice, and other aspects have a significant impact on the meaning of the message. Think about the tone a message is conveyed in – is it appreciative, condescending, or ridiculing – this often gives more meaning than the message itself.
- Understanding refers to the recipient’s interpretation of the message. Understanding is not simply a passive process of receiving information but is an active process of constructing meaning based on the information and utterance. This means that understanding is not simply a reflection of the sender’s intended meaning but is rather a product of the recipient’s interpretation of the message. Understanding decides the transfer of the meaning in future communication by either accepting or rejecting it. Think about the reaction you show when you receive a message – it is the content and the tone and your own interpretation of these, that determine what you understood and whether and how you deal with what you received.
I hope you are still with me, as we now try to apply this to the context of a company, business, or similar entity, where people come together to create products, solutions, or provide services.
Three in one
When you examine an organization closely, you realize that there is not just one network of communication at play, but multiple ones. An organization comprises subsystems that are responsible for different tasks and functions, each following its own rules of communication. These can be broadly categorized into three groups: formal, informal, and value creation.
Formal
Position – Compliance – Hierarchy – Job Title
The most apparent structure is the Formal Structure, as it is often depicted in organizational charts. This structure is defined by the Position of the individual in the organization, and its primary purpose is to ensure Compliance with external and internal rules and regulations. Additionally, most of the administrative processes are typically executed within this structure. The power is derived from the Hierarchy, and bosses can demand and order their subordinates to follow their commands. The power is bestowed from and delegated by the owner of the organization, with a clear mandate in the interest of the company. The place of an individual in this structure is referred to by their Job Title.
It is usually easy to spot these Job Titles, as they start with “Head of”, “Director”, “Vice President”, etc., and are most likely printed on the business cards.
Informal
Social – Belonging – Influence – Personal Brand
The Informal Structure is not usually depicted but can be experienced daily when interacting with others in the organization. This structure is defined by the Social Relationships of individuals in the organization and creates a Sense of Belonging and Identity. The structure is essential to get a lot of things done in large and complex organizations when the formal mechanisms are either not working or too slow. The power is derived from the Influence an individual has on others and can neither be mandated nor forced. It can only be created by fostering mutually beneficial relationships and gaining trust and respect over time. In this structure, the individual as a Personal Brand is the decisive factor. Their character and interaction with others will determine their standing.
Value Creation
Mastery – Contribution – Reputation – Role
The Value Creation Structure is where things get done, and performance and output are created. It can take the form of a development project, a service team, or any other kind of value stream, where people from different organizational functions (formal structure) come together to solve problems and create value. This structure is defined by the Mastery or Competence of the individuals involved in the value creation process, which generates Contributions toward the goal of the organization and secures its progress and survival. The power is derived from the Reputation of the individual based on their previous work, knowledge, or capabilities. Although this can be faked to some extent, in the end, the results will determine how well-respected an individual is. The individual in this structure is referred to by the Role they play in the value creation process.
Besides the many project roles, I have held in my career, I was also referred to as “Mr. CorelDraw” during my student days because of my proficiency with the program. Which came in handy, when creating entertaining slide shows for our Christmas events.
Checks & Balances
These structures are not independent of each other and sometimes overlap, particularly when organizations try to mimic value-creation structures in their formal structure. This is not necessarily a bad design but has some pitfalls (more on this later). In a well-balanced organization, these structures can support each other. They ensure that none of them becomes over-dominant and impacts the overarching performance of the organization.
It is easy to imagine that too much compliance slows down value creation. On the other hand, with too little compliance, an organization can easily fall prey to violating laws and suffering significant legal consequences. The same can be true in the case of an over-dominance of the informal structure when the company is driven by a popularity contest instead of rational business decisions.
As with everything else in life, nothing is stable, and organizational progress requires a continuous adaptation of the power relationship of these structures to fit the external context and market demands.
Four steps to apply
At this point, you may be wondering what all of this has to do with your job. That’s a good question, and I’m glad you asked!
First and foremost, if you work in any organization, you are part of the structures defined by communication, whether you like it or not. You cannot avoid it.
Secondly, being aware of these concepts can provide valuable insights and enable you to manage and purposefully utilize the described mechanisms. Now, let’s see how you can apply them step by step.
1. Clarify Your Goal
If you want to achieve something, be clear about your goal. This will guide you in how to approach it. Is it enforcement and compliance, relationship and belonging, or value creation and contribution? Once you’ve determined your goal, identify the relevant context.
2. Know Your Context
Your context is the organizational structure you are working with to achieve your goal – formal, informal, or value creation. Mixing up your context can make it much harder to achieve your goal or even harm your endeavor. For instance, bosses who rely on their formal power instead of showing themselves as a person are likely to fail in building meaningful relationships.
3. Utilize Your Power
Depending on your chosen context, you can now utilize the related social dynamics to drive your goal forward, and people will follow your lead for different reasons:
- You are powerful (formal, hierarchy)
and they anticipate consequences. - You are trustworthy (informal, influence)
and they respect you and want to be respected by you. - You are skilled (value creation, reputation)
and they appreciate your contribution and mastery.
4. Build Your Identity
By doing so, you execute and build the respective facet of your identity in the related context – your title & position, your personal brand & influence, your role & reputation. If you do it well, it will positively affect your standing. If you do it poorly, it can harm and weaken your position in the organizational structure.
Adapt Your Communication
These steps deal with the interaction between humans, and they all tie back to communication, whether verbal or nonverbal. What you communicate (or not), how you communicate, and what is received and understood (make sure to inquire, listen actively, and paraphrase) will greatly determine whether you will achieve your goals. Be intentional about it and adapt it in content and style according to the context. In a formal structure, communication may be more direct, in an informal structure, it may be more inviting, and in a value-creating structure, it may be more guiding.
A couple of pitfalls to avoid
As with any concept or model, it is a simplified abstraction of reality, and hence it has its limitations and pitfalls. Below are a couple of the most prominent ones that I have encountered myself or frequently discuss in my mentoring sessions.
Mixing up Context
None of these structures or your part in them is more important or better than the other in general. It all depends on the current moment and situation and what is more appropriate and helpful. On the other hand, we all have our preferences in how we like to act and may have a bias toward one or the other structure.
Being the boss sometimes demands that one makes a call and takes a decision. It does not help to play this via the informal network in a group to get everybody on board. This may take too long and may not yield the best solution, which typically requires trade-offs and creates winners and losers. On the other hand, demanding to be liked and respected will not work either.
In addition, organizational setups sometimes mix up these structures and try to mimic value creation (aka project organization) with the formal (aka line organization). This makes the context determination even harder, as roles in a value stream become formal job titles, deluding the separation between value creation and compliance.
Be aware of which path you choose and avoid mixing up the context with the way you interact.
What helps me is to explicitly communicate which structure and role I am currently playing. More often than not, I was surprised that it may have been clear in my head, but my counterparts had a completely different interpretation. As we all have relations with the same individuals in multiple of these structures – you can be a boss, an expert, and a trustworthy person all at once for one other person – it is helpful to be clear on the context of the moment.
The Halo Effect
As humans, we have a cognitive bias (The Halo Effect) that an overall positive impression of a person leads to positive evaluations of specific traits, abilities, or qualities associated with it. In other words, if we like someone or something, we are more likely to attribute positive qualities to them and overlook or downplay their flaws.
This effect may also influence how we perceive one’s standing in one of the organizational structures and derive from that a judgment on their standing in another structure.
A good example may be that a very well-liked and respected person in the informal structure may also be seen as a very good and competent boss in the formal structure, completely neglecting the required traits and competencies of a formal position (e.g., business understanding, decision making, …). Another classic example is a promotion path from being an expert in a field to becoming a team leader, completely neglecting the required social traits.
Being aware of and differentiating the organizational structures, mechanisms, and traits can combat the Halo Effect and avoid inaccurate judgments and decisions based on incomplete or biased information.
Identity ≠ Role ≠ Title ≠ Job
Finally, we are human beings, which are so much more than any role, title, or job. We are part of multiple social systems and organizations besides our business lives. We should not let any of them or the perceptions of others determine what we are to ourselves and to the ones we care about most. Our identity is complex, manifold, unique, and belongs to us. We should shape it in a way that serves ourselves and our life goals.
Change and adapt but stay true to yourself
As with everything in life, nothing is static. Change is the only constant, and your social networks, position, role, and reputation will always evolve. It is also likely that your job title will change as you switch jobs or go through one of these typical re-organizations in big companies.
However, with the model described above and proper communication adapted to the respective context, you need not worry too much. You will be able to reestablish yourself within any of these organizational structures.
In the end, what matters most is to focus on who you are, who you want to become, and to stay true to yourself.
