Subscribe to our blog!

Your email:

About Pegasus Communications

Pegasus Communications helps individuals, teams, and organizations thrive in an increasingly complex world. more...

Join us on Twitter @pegasustweets

Leverage Points Blog

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

"The System Made Me Do It"

 | Add to delicious delicious | Submit to StumbleUpon StumbleUpon | Share on Facebook Facebook | Share on Twitter Twitter | Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn 

By Janice Molloy

It's a core principle of systems thinking: The underlying structure greatly influences--if not determines--the behavior of anComplexityy system. In a sidebar to their article "A Culture of Candor" in the June 2009 issue of Harvard Business Review, James O'Toole and Warren Bennis talk about the power that organizational systems have to shape the behavior of their employees. To back up their claim, they refer to the classic 1971 experiment into group dynamics by social psychologist Philip Zimbardo--a study that provides cautionary lessons for leaders of any kind of organization.

In the experiment, Zimbardo divided a group of Stanford students into guards and prisoners. He and his colleagues created a mock prison in the basement of the psychology building, closely simulating the atmosphere and power dynamics in a typical penal unit. The situation quickly deteriorated, with the student "guards" psychologically and physically abusing the "inmates." The researchers cancelled the simulation after just six days. 

Concurring with Zimbardo's conclusions from the Stanford experiment and subsequent research, O'Toole and Bennis state that "human behavior is determined more by situational forces and group dynamics than by our inherent nature. . . . Ethical problems in organizations originate not with ‘a few bad apples' but with the ‘barrel makers'--the leaders who, wittingly or not, create and maintain the systems in which participants are encouraged to do wrong."

The deep-seated cultural problems with companies such as Enron have been well documented. As A. J. Schuler says in his article, "Does Corporate Culture Matter?: The Case of Enron," "Unethical or illegal individual actions are sometimes symptoms of systemic problems, and Enron's systems of accountability, oversight, ethical disclosure and corporate priorities were seriously flawed." Similar unquestioned value systems and patterns of behavior undoubtedly contributed to the global mortgage crisis.

The good news is that we can just as easily design systems that bring out the best in people. According O'Toole and Bennis, "Instead of wasting millions of dollars on ethics courses designed to exhort employees to be good, it would be far more effective to create corporate cultures in which people are rewarded for doing good things." The challenge is developing leaders who have the will, foresight, perseverance, and courage to put these kinds of structures in place.

Knowing how powerful systems can be at rejecting change, how can each of us learn to take personal responsibility for challenging unethical or dysfunctional practices? How can we buck the tide of conformity to shift business as usual? How can we avoid falling prey to the "just following orders" syndrome?
  

Janice MolloyJanice Molloy is content director of Pegasus Communications and managing editor of The Systems Thinker.

 

photo: Nancy Daugherty

Comments

This is so good. We all behave according to systemic cultures and it is fascinating to sit back and observe one's own behavior in systems that prevent people from doing their best and acting to get the best possible outcomes. Cynthia Coopers biography and analysis of the downfall of Worldcom echoes what you have written. Understanding the systemic structures that create the behaviors is what fascinates me most and at the root of my research and writing of my book, Creating a Masterpiece - What Leaders Need to Know about Implementation. Thank you - thought provoking and timely.
Posted @ Thursday, July 09, 2009 10:54 AM by Becky H. Smith Ed.D.
Thanks, Janice. Your description of the systemic strength of culture is great. I also like the simple notion that maybe the way to ethical systems is to put in place systems that reward people for doing the right thing. Could that be so hard?
Posted @ Thursday, July 09, 2009 12:35 PM by Sharon Eakes
Thanks for the comments, Becky and Sharon. I think it's always good to be reminded of the role we play in being designers of systems and not just players in them.
Posted @ Thursday, July 09, 2009 3:26 PM by Janice Molloy
This is a great article and highlights responsibilities we should all take to make the system ethical. Unfortunately, very large organizations cannot count on every person to take this responsibility. My company established a code of conduct that requires not only ethical conduct but also the responsibility to report unethical conduct. This required senior management to have the conversations that lead to establishment of the code - exactly what Janice is suggesting is the proper starting point. 
 
Jon
Posted @ Thursday, July 09, 2009 4:25 PM by Jon Bergstrom
"... it would be far more effective to create corporate cultures in which people are rewarded for doing good things." The challenge is developing leaders who have the will, foresight, perseverance, and courage to put these kinds of structures in place." 
 
So true and so seldom to be found. 
 
People -also rising leaders and existing ones- have to take choices and most organizations done offer that room to move, so you are stuck in the system. 
 
One way: take your space and act what is good for the whole (perhaps not seen from your boss' perspective - would be probably different when he opens his mental map and personal aspirations to you and others);-) 
 
Challenge the current system, dare something, gain more:-)) 
 
Cheers, 
 
Ralf
Posted @ Thursday, July 09, 2009 6:21 PM by RalfLippold
The organizational systems of corporations, nonprofits, educational organizations at all levels,religious organizations, etc. all swim in the sea of market capitalism (the dominant economic system)- The parameters and elements of that economic system are fundamentally determinate of these organizational systems. I do not despair, I am realistic - leaders who do the good things do not rise in these organizations steeped in market capitalism and our social cult of celeberity - disciplined humility has never been in vogue with the "bottom line" gang.........
Posted @ Thursday, July 09, 2009 11:11 PM by Greg Mowat
So very true. An old Italian adage claims, "Il pesce puzza dalla testa" - translated to "The fish stinks [starting] from the head". And I might add, intention and awareness are everything in leadership. Without the proper intention and the awareness of one's actions, leadership and consequently, systems led, can create disaster. Thank you for your insightful work!
Posted @ Friday, July 10, 2009 5:58 AM by jacqueline
Thanks for this Post Janice - good to see others tying in organisational culture and systems with the Zimbardo experiment. I'm also reminded of the powerful way Jane Elliott (of blue eyes / brown eyes fame) manipulates inherent racial systems and assumptions to turn on and off certain cultural schema. She shows quite graphically how a "leader" (read powerful influencer or person with positional authority) can consciously manipulate existing systems for both good and bad.  
 
I would also add my agreement about how deep seated (historical, traditional) structures are also part of the system and control/influence behaviours. One of my favourite experiential workshop exercises is to show pictures of trams, trains, libraries, schools, churches, lifts, traffic etc and have the participants shout out the "rules" which apply to each location / situation. It is amazing how consistent people are in what they say - showing just how enculturated (is there such a word? there is now) - we are. The church cultural schema / behaviours are almost universally: quiet, reverential, differential, respectful, peaceful... etc. (However, racial differences do show up which are always interesting).  
 
For those of you who are familiar with Ken Wilber's Integral (or AQAL) Model as applied to Systemic or Transformational Leadership, it becomes immediately clear (at the simplest level) that the 4 Quadrants - Personal (or Intentional), Behavioural, Relational (or Cultural) and Structural (or Systemic) indeed are the major (leadership) leverage points for change (changing behaviours). The Zimbardo barrel fits into the last two "external" quadrants by creating a new environment (but activating known stereotypes & cultural expectations - building a new framework of dynamic and interdependent relationships) and a new (but archetypically familiar prison) structure. Zimbardo's 16 simple prison "rules" are enough of a "prompt" to reframe (see NLP) the mental models & behaviours of the inmates & guards. However, this only works if the "subjects" are susceptible to "external locus of control (LOC)" (as we all are to a certain extent). Captured in the 1st quadrant of the AQAL Integral model are the values and ethics of those who have "internal locus of control" (Senge's Personal Mastery) and can resist the external influences (Jane Elliott actually removes these people from her exercises by physical expulsion - because they disrupt her ability to create the barrel she wants). [The Behavioural quadrant makes reference to the link between what we know, our skill base but more importantly how we think & feel; to our attitudes and thus to our observable behaviours and the results/resonance/impact they have.] 
 
"The System Made Me Do It" is paradoxically both true and a "cop out". If we are conscious - mindfully aware (cf: psychological experiments of Ellen Langer on this subject) of what system, structure and culture can do to us, we can resist behaving in ways which are immoral, unethical or against our values - and the same applies to our (would be authentic) leaders as well. Unfortunately the path of least resistance (path most travelled, least thinking and less energy expended) is to stay on autopilot and "go with the flow" (or at least with the system). [It takes energy input (best done via passion not fear or urgency or crisis) into the system to overcome the activation barrier to change.] If the culture is one of boss-focus, fear, stress and anxiety (loss of job equals inability to pay of the mortgage, feed the family or our flight-fight limbic system takes over … etc) then it can be easily shown that employees tend towards external LOC (cf: David McClelland - he estimated in the 1980's that the boss “owned” at least 80% of the workplace culture – tradition & ritual owned the rest depending on the age (concretization) of the organisation). Learnt Helplessness in these situations is also real as Martin Seligman and Donald Hiroto showed in the 1970's. 
 
I think that you have "the solution" - for those people who are subject to external LOC, influenced by the system, involved in business as usual and just following orders - we need ethical, authentic, from-the-heart & soul leaders who understand their power (and associated responsibility) and are willing to build systems, structures, cultures and environments (barrels) which reward the right behaviours and are empowering, engaging and enabling - ones which focus on personal development (personal mastery - ILOC), build capability, self-confidence, courage (fearlessness) and commitment. What is very clear is our current economic system (and sub-systems such as the advertising and entertainment industries) does none of these things. To the contrary our (Western) economy is systemically raping our environment and degrading our civilisation and society – to pay for growth-at-all-cost and unsustainable wealth creation. 
 
For those organisations (and communities) which are fortunate to have independent people with internal locus of control, we need a different leadership style - more like that suggested by Meg Wheatley (or akin to Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela's autopoiesis) - we need leaders who are connectors and gardeners, such that the individuals are free to build networks of positive generative relationships and communities of practice and purpose. [Having significance and meaning, and having the opportunity to make-a-difference (in the work we do and the lives we lead) are vital to the new organisation and central to the psyche of the “new individual”.] 
 
That we need to change our (mc market capitalism & cult of celebrity – thanks Greg -) systems is in no doubt. That we need Great Personal Leadership is also in no doubt. The trick now is to think more about the systems and leadership we DO WANT and not accept that which we have now when it fails to meet these standards (mediocrity is not acceptable). This starts with both a top-down and bottom-up EXPECTATION & BELIEF (not just an aspiration) that change is not only possible but WILL HAPPEN. Accept nothing less as a leader or an employee - in the end WE ARE THE SYSTEM and WE have the power to change us & it. Regards, Ian 
 
Posted @ Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:26 AM by Dr. Ian Metcalfe
I agree with the premise entirely and am terrified of the senior management who are not systems thinkers and do not recognize this potential.
Posted @ Wednesday, July 15, 2009 3:59 PM by Ron Sposato
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics

Receive email when someone replies.