| FROM OUR EXPERIENCE |
|
| From ninja warriors to Al-Qaeda: the business model of the future is changing? |
|
 |
Who hasn't heard of ninjas? A mysterious fighter, always dressed in black, a master of disguise possessing a never ending arsenal of weapons, capable (in movies) of spectacular acrobatics. Many perhaps imagine that these fighters (similar to modern day mercenaries) worked alone, took the law into their own hands and fought only for money.
Nothing farther from the truth. Ninja warriors were part of secret organizations that sometimes executed different missions(similar to special ops), depending on the noble men that requested such missions. If we look at the way they were organized (leaving fascination aside), we can observe an extremely well structured system, with a hierarchy that allowed everybody to know what they had to do but at the same time, protected their superiors or HQ from being discovered. Basically, organizations that were operating with ninja warriors in the Middle Ages were in some ways a herald - structure wise - of what Al-Qaeda is today or what some companies will be in the future. Again we are talking about the structure of the organization, not its purpose.
Who hasn't heard of Al-Qaeda? It became known as an organization when connections were made (not proven) between the 9.11 attacks and its members. And still if someone is trying to find out more detailed information about it, you won't find a lot of sources, aside from a couple of sites in Arabic, including the "official one".
What is interesting in this type of organization is that, without having a public structure, headquarters or branches in the classic sense, without being listed on the stock market, its members are everywhere, plotting and making their presence known without being discovered.
What are the correlations between these two organizations - ninja warriors and Al Qaeda - and the current business world? If we look at the way they are built and work we can see certain common elements that seem, given the current climate, worthwhile:
- the lack of a obvious structure, in the classic sense, so that at any moment hierarchical levels can be adjusted or new structures and branches can appear, without affecting the core in any way
- the lack of a HQ although the organization is present in many areas, an element which confers mobility to the entire system
- the extraordinary mobility of its members and the capacity to rapidly adapt to changes in the environment
- fast communication within the network, even when there is no technology
- activities which are in sync with the direction or vision of the organization, even though they aren't visible or under the careful supervision of their leader
- systems/ processes/ procedures which are identical in every part of the network and a delegated decision making system at local levels
Even if these examples are extreme, from the point of view regarding the purpose of the organization, it's still worth analyzing the way in which they managed and manage to be successful (in their own terms). Even more, it's worth asking ourselves what we can learn from their success at being efficient, maybe more efficient that some corporations in reaching their goals.
In a world that is focused on fighting for peace (sic!), in a volatile economic environment that showed us in the last two years how virtual everything is, including money, it seems that it's high time for some companies to adjust their business model or at least learn how to efficiently work with less resources in a system that is far more flexible that we have ever thought.
If we look at the business environment, we can see that there are organizations that adopted this network system or even started from scratch based on it. And they are successful. Some integrated the network model in some departments, keeping the basic structure intact. Others started from scratch and decided to follow through with a model that offers the highest degree of flexibility with the minim amount of costs.
What will this effort accomplish?
Here are a couple of arguments:
- clients don't have as much money as they did, so they will want the same products/ services at smaller prices
- maintaining or increasing profit even when you are confronted with budget cuts and a drop in sales
- developing your business with very few resources but high profit margins
What are the causes behind the appearance of this type of organization?
The development of the past 20 years brought forth the network as being the most important organizational structure. The network model is considered as being an evolutionary step forward in terms of quality from the previous two we have known: market and hierarchy. Even more, post birocratic organizational models were developed based on the node, network and interconnectivity philosophy. If we look at Asian business models (keiretsu in Japan, chaebol in Korea, Indian casts and Taiwanese families) we see that they work based on networks.
It seems that one of the reasons behind this model, in American companies, is the appearance of the internet. When DARPA scientists (The Department for Advanced Research Projects Agency) came up with a solution that would prevent the destruction of the U.S. communication system by soviets this led to the creation of a system that couldn't be controlled by just one element and had thousands upon thousands of computers that were independently linked through a flexible and continuously adaptive communication system.
It's obvious that technological evolution and electronic systems (e-mail, websites, intranet, online communities) determined adjustments and even structural changes in certain organizations, so that they could keep up with the automatization process. Add to this the trend of balancing your personal and professional life (not yet that trendy in Romania) which put a lot of pressure on some companies to become more flexible and find equally productive alternatives for employees at lower costs. Thus the work at home system appeared. Certain operations were outsourced to emerging or underdeveloped economies due to lower costs and the same quality of communication with the help of IT infrastructure.
Another source of this evolution is the pressure from the Y generation. The lack of interest and even rebellious attitude towards structures and hierarchies from the younger employees, who are capable of performing in atypical environments determined organizations to reconsider their internal structures. Furthermore, based on current estimates, it seems that the generation which is developing just now (those born after the year 2000), provisionally called the Green or Z generation, will put even more pressure on organizational structures and hierarchical systems, of postwar origin.
The last element on the list of possible causes seems to be the crisis which appeared two years ago in America and is just now making its presence felt in Romania, without reaching its peak yet. The pressure of increasing the efficiency of work processes in the case of smaller amounts of products / services bought, the clients need to spend less on products and services of better quality will force companies to rethink their financial and commercial equation. What is being given up, what is being reshaped, what hasn't been done out of a feeling of comfort and is now necessary because there is nothing to lose?
In the second part of the article we will analyze the impact that this new trend has on the business environment.
Rares Manolescu
Senior Manager |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recommend this newsletter to a friend.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Human Invest is a Premier League company in the arena of training and organizational development consultancy services, present on the Romanian market since 1998.
We are recognized for conceiving and implementing programs which offer managers an authentic experience towards improving their leadership performances, and thus we support companies in becoming more and more engaged in delivering excellent services for their clients.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
