Work in Organizations: QH2

Recognize the Domain

Work is psychosocial and so can looked at in two ways:

as a mental activity built most obviously around intending-RL6 and acting-RL1, but involving all the other Levels of Endeavour-RH,

&
as a social obligation to produce a real-world output of value (i.e. to change reality)

Work that involves many people requires explicit management. Frameworks focusing on management commence here with a basic need of all societies: production of concrete or tangible goods, products or services, through the use of tangible resources.

In THEE, this is the domain of formal organizations-QH2.
See the taxonomic path.

Background to the Inquiry

The levels of work scheme was first devised by Elliott Jaques in collaboration with Wilfred Brown at the Glacier Metal Company in the UK. It was subsequently developed further at Brunel University, principally by Ralph Rowbottom, Gillian Stamp, David Billis, Ian McDonald and Warren Kinston. Academic studies, popular expositions, software tools, and reports of applications have been provided by many others.
References from those times:

The theory was developed through an iterative scientific process with an emphasis on the critical scrutiny of concepts and validation through long-term testing in organizations. It has been used in consultancy projects and workshops for many thousands of managers and professionals in many countries including UK, USA, Canada, Australia, Netherlands, Singapore, South Africa.

Practising managers rapidly take to the ideas when explained in the context of problems they experience, e.g.

too much red tape, role confusion, understaffing and overwork, organisational slack, failure to implement strategies or policies, insufficient delegation, duplication of work, low morale.

By contrast, academics have felt less pressure to give the theory the attention it deserves. Their empirical studies typically consider the mess that exists and ignore fundamental principles or taxonomic issues.

More about Jaques' contribution.
More about WK's early inquiries.

Work is Hard to Describe

Work within organizations is difficult to describe. The primary problem is a preference to focus on the kind of work (e.g. marketing, auditing, training, designing) or components of work (e.g. communicating, leading, relating, reporting) rather than the complexity of work (i.e. level). Conceptually:

the kind and components of work = the content of work.
whereas management = handling the context of work.

Unless you are a systems thinker, you may not pay much attention to context. But it's intuitive—e.g. when you use a computer-mouse, that is what the right button is for.

It turns out there is a natural succession of contexts of ever greater scope in organizations: i.e. contexts become content. These are the levels of management.

Management covers a variety of contextual concerns around handling people, organisation, programs and techniques, which apply at many or all levels.
This has led to unsatisfactory, confusing or misleading names for managing.
More

Work at any particular level shows important similarities whoever does it and whatever the field. As the levels are ascended, there is a broadening and deepening in both the scale and complexity of what is to be achieved and the range of environmental circumstances to be taken into account.

Work levels can be socially defined by needs-to-be-met and responses-to-be-made. The same kinds of work and the same components of work can be performed at many levels according to these different needs-responses.

For example, the issue of who (or which role) is «responsible for equipment safety» cannot be answered because that responsibility (so stated) applies at many levels. If this is not immediately obvious to you ...
click here:

The technician-WL1 is responsible for ensuring that dirt does not get into the equipment during use.
The supervisor-WL2 is responsible for ensuring that maintenance schedules are adhered to and breakdowns are properly handled.
The departmental head-WL3 is responsible for organizing a system of maintenance, record-keeping, and annual evaluations of equipment.
The general manager-WL4 is responsible for allocating budgets and staff to ensure safety levels are maintained.
The chief executive-WL5 is responsible for giving due weight to safety in strategies for the outfit as a whole.

It is possible to create a matrix of work to show how standard components of work and management must be handled at each level. The work levels are rows and components of work are columns.

Needs to be Met	Responses to be Made	Work Level	Cost Control	Innovation	Information Handling	Quality Standards	&c
		WL7
		WL6
		WL5
		WL4
		WL3
		WL2
		WL1

Rows: A complete row defines a coherent and viable mission or role. Allowing incoherent fudges predictably leads to staff discontent, management conflict, and work disruption.

Columns: Each column defines exactly how an organizational system must be set up to ensure that this particular aspect of work is handled. Omitting the contribution of any level inevitably disrupts managers and harms performance.

Next Steps

Avoid confusion between: action & activity, outputs & outcomes, strategic objective & strategy. Clarity is essential for the analysis to follow.
See the structure of this account with guidance and links to key topics.
View the taxonomic path.

OR
Start now with methods for managing work situations.

Originally posted:5-Nov-2013