Polymathica

Refined.. Erudite.. Visionary

© 2010 The Institute for Advanced Social and Technological Analysis, LLC

 

 

 

Articles

The Enterprise Polymath

 

The Industrial Age saw the rise of large publicly traded manufacturing enterprises. Because efficient structures of command and control were central to the success of the organization, they were organized hierarchically. They were very good at passing information up to decision makers and passing instructions down to implementers. They were relatively poor at lateral communication and coordination. As the global Information Age civilization continues to emerge, traditional hierarchical organizations are having progressively more difficulty contending with the new forces that the new age brings.  New structures and new professions will be needed to deal with them.  The Enterprise Polymath will be critical to the Information Age enterprise’s success.

Beginning in the 1980’s, the types of problems that occur at the lower levels of the organization became more complex and not easily summarized. Consequently, when the problems were passed up the organizational hierarchy many of the essential nuances were stripped out for the sake of clarity and brevity. Many people complained that they passed up complex problems and received back simplistic solutions. Corporate leadership was aware of the problem and began speaking in terms of pushing decision making responsibilities down to the lowest prudent level.

This, however, created a new set of problems. For example, the organization began to evolve organically and top management frequently didn’t understand why the enterprise was behaving as it did. Their response often was to create a department of Strategic Planning to coordinate the more distributed decision making. This may have worked if there had been Enterprise Polymaths to execute the function. However, there were not and it quickly devolved into a struggle between Finance and Marketing as to who should control the new activity.

With regard to decision making authority, in the traditional Industrial Age organization, a problem was passed up the hierarchy until it reached the individual who had authority over the complete decision. When decision making authority was pushed down to lower levels, it necessitated interdepartmental meetings, committees and task forces to coordinate laterally. They grew out of control until they came to dominate the managerial experience. The job of the departmental manager became, ‘go to meetings and defend the department’s interests against interlopers.’ The term, ‘turf battle’ entered the lexicon as departmental fealty was often placed above quality decision making.

Compounding the problem was the difficulty that individuals from different professions had communicating with each other. It is not an exaggeration to say that the various professions live in different epistemological realities. To the marketing professional, perception is reality. To the finance professional, reality is explored through quantitative analysis. To the operations professional, everything is about process efficiency. Each epistemology is correct for the profession, but incorrect for the enterprise. Interdepartmental meetings frequently seemed like the
Tower of Babel revisited.

Essentially, hierarchical organizations were attempting to behave like networked organizations and the result was, to put it deleicately, less than satisfactory. No matter how many ‘fixes’ were put into place, they just ended up creating a new set of problems. The obvious solution was to switch the organization to a network structure that could more naturally accommodate distributed decision making authority. Naturally, the terminal decision makers, sitting at the top of the corporate pyramid, were less than enthusiastic about the idea of eliminating the hierarchical structure itself. Consequently, over the past decade, the large, Industrial Age corporations have become sclerotic and are slowly being replaced by more flexible, entrepreneurial enterprises. It is these organizations that should and will be led, organized and coordinated by Enterprise Polymaths.

As to training, an Enterprise Polymath should have a year of Accounting, a year of Marketing and a year of Operations/HR. They will need to be, as all Information Age knowledge workers will, proficient in IT. However, they will need to be something more than a resultant business version of a ‘jack of all trades, master of none.’ Their important areas of expertise will lie in the epistemologies of the various business professions, group dynamics and future studies, modified to the needs of their specific organization and industry.

The Enterprise Polymath will have several duties. First, they will serve as interpreter and traffic cop as the organization struggles to make optimal decisions.

It is well established that when representatives of different professions interact in a committee environment, the result is determined more by the relative numbers and strength of personality of its members than by what constitutes a good decision. One of the primary responsibilities of an Enterprise Polymath is to orchestrate the dialogue and assure that the correct decision takes precedence over group dynamics. This will be done by assisting in overcoming the confusion caused by differing epistemological structures, interrupting the process when a strong personality begins to dominate the conversation and by translating points from one profession into terms the other professions can understand.

The Enterprise Polymath will, to a degree, become a new form of leader in the network enterprise structures of the Information Age. While Industrial Age hierarchies made decisions by fiat, the leaders of the Information Age enterprises will exercise their authority through persuasion and consensus building. In other words, the Enterprise Polymath will force an organization to move in concert toward the best solution for the enterprise, even when, as will often be the case, it is not its natural inclination.

At present, most Information Age enterprises are still young and, for them, the founding entrepreneurs will most likely be the primary Enterprise Polymaths. Consequently, today the process of mentoring and developing an Enterprise Polymath is not easily distinguished from mentoring an Information Age entrepreneur. As the Information Age matures and many of its first enterprises find their founder entering retirement, a professional class of Enterprise Polymaths will emerge. This will necessitate a more formalized educational process and more clearly defined career paths within organizations.

In conclusion, as the Information Age emerges, the dominant enterprise structure will transform from a hierarchical structure to a more networked structure. As this happens, the need for Enterprise Polymaths capable of organizing and facilitating enterprise network operations and decision making will emerge. Their development is not so much a matter of mastering the skills of the various business processes as it will be gaining command of the philosophy of business, organizational development, group dynamics and future studies.  From a practical standpoint, most Fellows of Polymathica will need to be Enterprise Polymaths in training.

 

 

 

Fall Savings at Sandals Resorts