Why 'Systematization' Alone Isn't Enough - 100-Day Countdown to 60 (46)

It is often pointed out that the 'personalization' of tasks and activities brings negative impacts to an organization.

• Work stops when the person in charge is absent or resigns

• Methods and quality vary from person to person

• Handover and training of new staff take time

• Work and responsibility become concentrated on specific individuals

• Managers and executives cannot step away from the front lines

Therefore, efforts are made to 'standardize' and 'create manuals' to build 'systems' that ensure tasks and activities run sustainably.

Some even believe that the job of an organization's leader is to create 'systems'.

By visualizing work procedures and quality, standardizing them, and incorporating them into manuals and checklists, they can be shared among multiple people.

Such 'systems' will likely solve the problems listed above.

However, with 'systems' alone, things often stop at the point of standardization.

Even if tasks can be completed, there are times when people stop being conscious of the required results, or when growth through performing the work can no longer be expected.

This is a story from quite a while ago, but when I was a business manager at an English conversation school, I ran the four annual student recruitment drives using a 'system' that was cascaded down to each school.

Student recruitment activities proceeded according to the manual, even if I didn't go to the site or if new staff replaced the old ones.

However, when I spoke with staff at schools that weren't meeting their student acquisition targets based on daily tallies, the only response I got was that they were doing everything correctly.

Also, for schools that reached their targets, the activity would just stop there.

I realized that every time I received a report during the recruitment period, I was only mentioning the gap between the target and the current numbers.

In fact, just running a 'system' is not enough.

In addition to the 'system'—or rather, within the 'system'—it was necessary to incorporate 'Positive Reinforcement'.

'Positive Reinforcement' is different from just praising someone.

By providing a positive response to an individual immediately after a desirable behavior, you increase the likelihood that the behavior will occur again.

When we are acknowledged, we humans tend to repeat the behavior that was acknowledged.

What I should have done was not point out the gap in the numbers. I should have focused on the actions taken to innovate toward the goal, the small steps forward, and the attitude of not giving up. I needed to look at those things and provide specific acknowledgment.

A 'system' creates a framework for action.

But it is not the 'system' that keeps people moving.

Experiences where one is acknowledged, feels a sense of purpose, and realizes personal growth are what keep people moving.

That is why a leader's job does not end with creating a 'system'.

Isn't it necessary to create a culture within that 'system' where each individual can be acknowledged and grow?

Does your organization have a system for acknowledgment?