STRATEGY AND PLANNING The Need For Surface Structure Change

The window of opportunity created by the releasing of the implicate emotional energy locked in the deep structure levels of the Organization's culture is only open for a certain critical period, and how this energy is now reintegrated into the surface structure explicate levels is as important as how it is released in the first place. The third phase of the Intervention, titled Strategy and

Planning, was designed to focus the newly released implicate energy so that it would manifest on the explicate level of the Organization's culture in new systems, structures, strategies and operations, thereby embodying, or making real, the deep structure cultural transformation by integrating the changes into the system.

Organization's Culture Poised at SOC

The freeing up, or clearing, of blocked past emotional energy on the deep structure implicate level right across the Organization, that began with the Performance Partnership Workshops and culminated during the Cultural Change Workshops, released a torrent of energy and with it a sense of anticipation and enthusiasm within the staff. The integrity of a CAS, in this case human Organization, is such that change at the deep structure implicate level of human feelings / consciousness will manifest as the desire / need for change on the surface structure explicate levels of the Organization such as new structures, strategies and work processes that better reflects who they are - reintegration.

It is at this stage that interventions often falter, through a lack of planning or understanding of how the change process works, or through the change agent becoming emotionally involved / identified with the deep structure of the

Organization's culture. Regardless of the justification, the singular reason they falter is a failure to harness the energy released on the deep structure

implicate levels and focus it to bring about / embed a corresponding change on the surface structure explicate levels by transforming the structure, strategy and processes of the Organization in such a way as to be congruent with the implicate work. When this does not happen and the initial enthusiasm is not

harnessed and used to embody changes to the Organization, it often leads to people feeling deflated as all the promise comes to nothing.

Criticality

The Intervention, and the Organization's culture, were now in the most critical phase, with the implicate level of the culture freed up and the resultant release of energy and expectation for change not yet embedded in the Organization's structure and strategy. The change agent, using the Complexity Theory of Human Change, had successfully catalysed the Organization's culture, by probing around and stirring up its deep structure, until it reached the point of Self Organized Criticality (SOC). The crucial factor now is that the SOC state be maintained right at the point of criticality until the new surface structure changes manifest and the Organization settles back down into its newly adapted state thereby completing the phase transition.

The reasons that this phase of the transition, between the implicate release (Phase 2) and its explicate manifestation (completion of Phase 3), is so crucial and the integrity of this transition so important, is twofold: Firstly, at this point of the Intervention both states of the culture, the new and old, exist

simultaneously, ‘just as ice floats in water at the freezing point (Smolin, 1997:169)’; and Secondly, both individuals and the Organization as a whole are undergoing touchpoints at various levels making them especially

vulnerable and open. This has to happen or there can be no real change, where regression to the previous state of the culture is just as probable as is the flipping over into the new state. An Organization that is well poised will oscillate between the two states waiting for a sign, usually interpreted as the definitive move, that will determine which direction it reconsolidates in. By now the changes on the implicate level bought about by the work done in Phase 1 & 2 were manifesting as the need for change in structure, strategy and work processes across the whole Organization. People who six months earlier were frightened to speak out were now openly and excitedly discussing how they wanted to pull down barriers between workplaces and be able to move around the Organization to take up new roles or share roles with other

sections. To find some evidence of the type of change in the energy,

enthusiasm, excitement and increased emotional self-expression around the Organization during this period it is worthwhile revisiting the EBA process to see how it was progressing.

EBA Update

To recap, the first EBA was negotiated under conditions where ‘the atmosphere between staff and managers was tense, full of distrust, and often hostile. Both groups felt hurt and aggrieved’ (EBA Working Group Member Personal Notes 1996:1), and eventually ratified by the AIRC in September 1993. The second EBA was negotiated under conditions where ‘Again the atmosphere was tense and mistrustful’ (ibid:2) and ratified by the AIRC in April 1994, the same month the Intervention began. The second EBA included a page-long list of ‘reserved matters’ on which negotiations began in July 1994 and continued through to resolution in April 1995, which coincided with the most intensive period of the Intervention. Negotiations began just after Phase 1 (The Questions) were completed and were conducted during Phase 3 (Three Day Introductory Workshops) and Phase 4 (Strategic Planning Workshops), and finalised one month before Phase 5, (Follow-Up Workshops) were convened.

Overwhelming Response

At about this stage of the Intervention the EBA Working Group asked for help from the staff to work on the ‘reserved matters’. Twenty five staff, almost a third of the Organization's total, volunteered to help - an overwhelming

response given that it had proved difficult in the past to get people to join the Group. The new recruits were divided into eight teams, each team taking responsibility for one or more of the reserved matters and reporting back to the EBA Working Group. Many of the staff volunteered to help in areas they had a particular interest in or felt strongly about which led to better ownership of the problems and a degree of conflict as old and new tensions surfaced. However, the conflict that arose was ‘rather less fraught than previous EBA negotiations had been, [as] the staff and managers were developing their awareness and their communication skills through the CTP [Intervention] that