Implementing DNA

The findings revealed the following three main ingredients, important to this phenomenon, to successfully implement the DNA elements, namely: top–down approach, role model function, and resources.

Table 9

Founder with Leader and Manager Function and its Fundamental Possibilities Ingredient and Tool Remark

Top–Down-Approach Important to successfully establish strategies, thoughts, ideas, and values with passion important to the founder Role model function

Tool: extended storytelling (content and time), positive elements and values

Influence on behaviour through socialising and communication, trust on the employee and trust in the company enhanced through positive values (safety, equality, modesty)

Resources

(Requisite: power)

Allows for allocating resources based on what is important to the founder

Admittedly, the three displayed ingredients have been often used in history. Negative examples like Hitler and other dictators show that such kind of power has been used many times, though negatively. This is not a concern of this research, but the findings illuminate

109

how important these ingredients are to form an organisational society appropriate for knowledge creation with NDKM, when positively used.

8.2.1.3.1 Top-down approach.

In the first possibility, a founder automatically has the total and unavoidable top–

down ‘effect’. As already explained, it is the ‘founder’s world’ where their values and philosophy of how to run the business rules the whole organisation or in simple words ‘what the boss says counts’. This is understandable, but it is not as easy as it sounds. This

essentially means that habits and routines (i.e. objectified elements) of the founder are

assimilated by the actors of a society (i.e. employees) (Berger & Luckmann, 1966). Although Berger and Luckmann (1966) indicated that an emotional part is necessary to learn and to assimilate objective realities, their insight failed to explain that because of a given horizon that each adult (employee) has, which is filled with a certain ideology, education, and experience, the objective elements must have an (positive) origin or core in line with the horizon of the actor, so that the objectives become assimilated. For instance, with the

negative use of the top–down approach, a person is able to force, in this case, an employee to share knowledge or information, which will end in an unsuccessful story. Some might argue that the revolutionary torture methods allowed for the gleaning of issues and information, but in fact, the required resources would be immense and the reproducibility of the information as well as the recreation of new knowledge would be near to zero and therefore, not

economical and useful. Such a method will result in losing the most valuable thing in an organisation, which is the employee with their thoughts and ideas.

The use of a positive path which stimulates employees by the dint of different human and positive elements will result in the sharing of explicit knowledge or information on one’s own volition, which will in turn lead to a better transfer of inner thoughts, ideas, pros, and cons regarding different topics. Although the organisation under scrutiny uses an interesting

110

‘bottom-up management approach’ (explained in section 8.2.3.1, ‘Structure’), it was the founder’s ‘top–down approach’ that finally gave the essential fingerprint to establish the still existent NDKM roots. Additionally, this research shows that the term ‘top–down approach’ is mostly used in a negative management context; however, it cannot be skipped just because of that, as it is vital for establishing NDKM. Strategies and concepts, which should be ‘lived’

and executed from the whole organisation, must be a part of the core strategy of an

organisation. In this regard, the phrase ‘founder’s world’ will gain value because everything a founder with leadership and management functions establishes is automatically a part of the core strategy and will be executed with the passion, motivation, and love as strongly as the founder considers it.

However, an analysis of the findings revealed that in almost every quote relating to the founder, ‘top–down-approach’ was found. Interviewee 16 perfectly explained in this regard that the founder seeded his philosophy and spirit by the dint of different activities or elements that have been valuable to him and that he took great care of (Original quote, ‘er hat unsere Kultur gesät, gepflegt, herausgebracht […] Es ist von ihm herausgekommen. Er war der Erfinder unserer Kultur’) (I16/ Q18.45).

In other words, he lived his philosophy or way of thinking (i.e. founder’s reality) and took great care in what he showed and taught the world. This finding reflects the essence of the aforementioned statement by Berger and Luckmann (1966) that ‘The children must be

“taught to behave” and, once taught, must be “kept in line”. So of course, must the adults’ (p.

62).

It is automatically a top–down approach because it emanates from the founder and leader. Therefore, the founder’s code of behaviour unwittingly becomes a key-part of the organisational strategy. The term ‘unwittingly’ is used because in the organisation under scrutiny, this kind of strategy is not written down; rather it takes place through teaching and

111

showing employees the elements of the founder’s philosophy. The answer of the interviewees on the question about how the organisation affects their personality was interesting. Many of them answered that they became more ‘mature’. The founder’s unwritten but lived code of behaviour opened not only new ways to approach different situations, colleagues, and problems, but also new perspectives on what might be important in life.

8.2.1.3.2 Role model function.

The founder’s role model function has a vital impact on social interaction, attentive listening, anxiety, communication, the intensity of trust, and so forth of the employees. The position of a leader or manager also contains the function of a ‘role model’ because they (should) represent the ‘values and wished behaviour’ of the organisation. As an organisation represents the founder’s ‘world’, their values and wished behaviour are automatically present by the dint of his presence (i.e. objectified reality). Additionally, employees recognise the values and wishes presented by the founder himself to be more important than if they were presented by a sole leader or manager. This phenomenon is easily explained and

demonstrated through a short poll among the employees of the organisation under scrutiny.

The poll enquired the effect of someone saying ‘this has to be done’ versus ‘the founder said this has to be done’. The employees found the latter to be more important, which highlights that a founder, through his role within an organisation, has more ‘power’ to steer the

organisation in a certain direction.

In such a case, the content of the message as well as the founder’s reaction, action, or behaviour to different situations are important. This is in line with the thinking of Paul

Watzlawick (2016), a late Austrian philosopher, psychotherapist, sociologist, and author, who stated that ‘One cannot not communicate’ (Original quote, ‘Man kann nicht kommunizieren’) (p. 15). This sentence simply explains that it is impossible not to communicate for humans.

This is essential to this research because it explains that there is something different about

112

communication, and it is also important for a role-model function. However, even when we do not speak we communicate through our reactions, actions, or body language. In this regard, the founder is often noted not only for what he says, but also for how he acts and behaves in different situations. For instance, when the founder takes the time to listen to the employees’ problems or concerns, this act sends the message that ‘you are important to us’

(i.e. appreciation), as taking time also sends a message (communication) to others. Another example, as will be seen later in this discussion, is social interaction. Social interaction is essential to the founder. A person can tell or order others to interact socially or the person can just show and teach or inspire them to socially interact (i.e. objectified reality). The later form does not need any explanation (message) regarding social interaction; rather it is a

demonstration (teaching) from which the participant can observe, learn, and assimilate.

The later form is also introduced in Berger and Luckmann’s (1966) work. Although the founder’s behavioural code, or more precisely, the founder’s philosophy and spirit have not been written down, employees of the organisation under scrutiny assimilated the

founder’s philosophy by the dint of observation (reactions, habits, actions, and behaviour regarding different situations). Wittingly or unwittingly, men carefully observe the world with all their senses and follows what is important to them every day, which also takes place within an organisation. The different observed actions and decisions, especially of the founder, have a massive effect on the receiver (employees) every day at work. It teaches employees, both the negative and positive aspects, because they assimilate action and reaction. To gain valuable insights about the impact of the founder’s behaviour or actions in the organisation, extended narratives were used, not only extended in telling and content, but also extended over time; thus, ‘language is the house of being’ (Heidegger, 1976/1999, p.

239).

113

A good example to explain the founder’s role model function and its impact on the employees is that of a mistaken investment. After a malinvestment happened, many

employees approached the founder and complained about the incident and wanted the person at fault to be cautioned or reprimanded. Interestingly in response, the founder stated (the quote is analogously reproduced and translated from German to English) as follows:

Yes, I will do something. I will use this incident as an example and tell everyone what happened and that this is ok. In this organisation, no one must be afraid to make a decision when someone has to take one, if the person did not deliberately harm this organisation. Given that this is not the case I believe he tried to do the best. It would be worse if he would not have made a decision. (Observation 40/23)

Through the above-mentioned quote, the founder showed (role-model function) that no employee must be afraid to make decisions and fail (i.e. vital lived experience). It is a statement made not only to the top management, but also to all employees. It accords a

feeling of safety and reveals an uncommon and a very human way to deal with such problems (role model function). The incident happened many years ago, but still is preserved and shared and has a vast impact on employee behaviour.

In this regard, it is important to introduce the term ‘infected’, which was used, may be even wrongly, by an interviewee during the discussion of positive values. The interviewee explained that the employees became infected by the founder’s trust and values because he lived and showed his understanding to everyone (role-model function) (I27 /Q33.3). It seemed that the term ‘infected’ was used to denote a ‘viral assimilation’ because employees assimilated or adopted behaviour and elements important to the founder. The combination of positive values like trust in the founder as well as his role model function could be a reason why every new employee became ‘infected’ with the founder’s philosophy, which again reveals the importance of the ‘role model function’.

114 8.2.1.3.3 Resource.

The ingredient ‘resource’ is important because it boosts the role model effect of the founder. Additionally, it allows establishing programs, structures, and events to replace the founder’s direct presence, which is very important as an organisation gets bigger.

At the very beginning, the founder of the organisation under scrutiny seeded the DNA elements, like socialising and communication, trust or other positive values, though not only his behaviour and personality, but also his direct presence (role model function). This was achieved through instances such as gathering his staff outside to enjoy the sun, discuss, build and strengthen relationships. At this time, the company was a small start-up and few financial resources were available, but they had enough resources in the form of time, which was allocated and provided by the founder. In fact, at this point of time, the financial resources were not so essential to establish and present (teach) a philosophy and to find the time to share and live this philosophy through the role model function.

Certainly, the growth of the company into an international company made it impossible for the founder to spend the same amount of time with all the employees like before. Now the allocation of time as well as financial resources became essential to keep the founder’s philosophy and values like socialising and communication alive in the organisation.

In this regard, the organisation invests a lot of time and money to enhance

communication and teamwork. For instance, kick-off meetings are organised in nice cabins (environment) for some days just to establish good relationships among all employees and to define or mention some rules about communication and preparation, so they can work

together more efficiently. Money is not a consideration when it comes to these investments in comparison to other multinationals where this is not often supported or considered as

important, or as interviewee 16 stated ‘there are not many organisations, which would do the same; and here in this organisation this is self-evident!’ (I16/Q18.45).

115

The same interviewee highlighted and compared this with his working experience in other multinational companies and explained that especially because of such events or investments, the cooperation and interlinking among the participants, not only within groups, but also because of doing it for more than two decades, in the whole organisation is much higher (I16/Q18.45).

In this regard, the high occurrence of interpersonal problems in an organisation is one of the most dangerous barriers for the transfer and creation of knowledge. Practices

(allocating resources for kick-off meetings in nice cabins to provide a positive environment) that make the employees feel well, respected, and professional are vital for the phenomenon of this research. Such professional gatherings support relationship building, finally leading to reduced barriers; it serves as a place to enable socialising and establish relationships among those who have to solve problems (i.e. creating knowledge). Instead of the founder’s role-model function, the professional organising and environment carries the message of how important socialising and communication is for the founder and the organisation. It is an investment on the employee, which shows that socialising and communication is not only a slogan, but rather a truly lived philosophy. Additionally, it strengthens the employees’ trust in the organisation.

The discourse about the three ingredients, namely ‘top–down approach’, ‘role model function’ and ‘resources’ (see Table 9), with its tools, such as storytelling or positive values, is essential for establishing the founder’s DNA (socialising, communication, safety, quality modesty, no anxiety, etc.). Some would claim that not every employee is ready, willing, or open to spend time for socialising and communication or to build relationships, and this is definitely true. We see later in this research that having such a DNA in the organisation leads to a setting, which automatically singles out those who are not in line with the open and familiar philosophy of the founder.

116 8.2.1.4 Socialising and communication.

Socialising and communication go hand in hand because the term ‘socialise’ is also linked to communicating with others (Collins, 2009). The two terms are not pooled because for socialising and communication, different elements are needed and used for improvement.

The company under scrutiny, like many others, is not a testing ground for fancy, cost-intensive experiences and mistakes, and it never will be. The findings revealed many elements that prevent situations such as feedback culture, consulting, and so forth. The very origin of these elements is found in the founder’s philosophy, but take place by way of socialising and communication; all the other elements are subordinate, interwoven, and supports socialising and communication. In this regard, socialising was highlighted and highly supported by the founder through different activities from the first. For instance, and as indicated in the last section, the founder of the organisation under scrutiny invited his employees very often to sit outside, take a break, enjoy the sun, discuss different private and job-related issues, and eat ice cream (I6/Q7.8). This example perfectly shows not only the top–down approach and the founder’s role-model function, but also the beginning of an objectified reality.

Another employee, who is one of the first in this organisation, explained that the organisation always has been very informal and communicative. Because communication is so important to the founder, the company name was put between two inverted commas (Original quote, ‘Er wollte, dass man sich austauscht. Es ist ja … unser Logo sind ja zwei Gänsefüße, die stehen für offene Kommunikation. Es ist von ihm herausgekommen. Er war der Erfinder unserer Kultur’) (I16/Q18.45).

The inverted commas are a metaphor, which show the whole company how important

‘communication’ is for the founder. This metaphor transports the founder’s message through

117

time and space and beyond the internal network; hence, it was mentioned by almost all interviewees.