Neill M. Carson, PhD, MBA

NMCAS is a specialized, consulting firm focused on tying organizational structure to strategy through accountability.

How you are structured matters. A lot.

Creating the correct organizational structure is a key element in not only success, but in reducing the effort required to achieve strategic goals.

 In corporate organizations (accountability hierarchies), there are two dimensions to consider: the vertical (how many layers or levels of management authority) and the horizontal (the functional or business groupings). In non-corporate organizations (professional partnerships, medical practices, membership organizations and others) there is most likely a hybrid of membership and accountability structures, and understanding the differences and relationships is often key to building a strong organization.

The most effective structure is based on tying the structural decisions directly to your overall strategy and vision.

The key to productivity: Optimal (Requisite) structure vs bureaucracy

Too many levels slow things down and produce bureaucratic, stifling processes, while too few create communication gaps, frustrating managerial relationships, and cripple shared understanding of business goals.  The answer is getting the correct number.

This is a relatively straightforward process that does not require extensive time or process measurements, but must involve top management and leadership.  We assist senior managers in meeting their accountability to create and manage the organizational structure.

In short, you need the correct number of levels and the correct breakpoints that determine a level of management.

Business functional groupings (the horizontal elements) are much more complex, and flow from the chosen strategy.  For example, strategies that are geographically centered, product centered, or market centered will require different groupings to be effective. 

The resulting structure will, of course, reflect both dimensions: the horizontal, business related functions stratified into the appropriate number of levels s to insure communication and accountability.

Accountable management systems:

Once structure is determined (the ROLES have been defined) the next step is to create accountable management systems.  Accountability is crucial to driving effective systems in which managers and employees are challenged and intrinsically motivated by their work.  Accountability for key outcomes and processes is always paired with appropriate authority, resources, and time frames for completion.

Most organizations value accountability, but make critical mistakes in its implementation, resulting in paradoxical outcomes-- no real accountability, lack of engagement, and demoralized managers and employees at all levels. I'm willing to bet that if you value accountability, you're probably making these mistakes, as 99.99% of most organizations do. There is a simple method for "doing it right" which we will be happy to share with you.

Filling organizational roles with well-matched people. 

Once the roles (and accountabilities) are defined, they must be staffed with people who can achieve the desired results. 

Roles represent the basic strategy of the organization. People provide the energy, intelligence, creativity, and engagement to drive those results. Precisely articulated accountabilities paired with requisite authority leads to natural engagement and harnesses intrinsic motivation. A well designed organization is in fact, a fun place to work, honoring people's commitment to their jobs and careers.  If you are contemplating spending money for engagement programs, you are about to waste your resources. Engagement follows naturally (and is FREE) from a well designed organization and management system.  

Contrary to popular belief, culture change need NOT take a long time nor follow an arduous pathway.

Moving to an accountability culture (once the changes and necessary education is completed) takes a matter of weeks, not months or years.

Managers or leaders?

We do not make a distinction between managers and leaders. All managers are held accountable for leadership, eloquently defined by G. Kraines's (of Levinson & Co) acronym LEAD: Leveraging the team's assets, Engaging their commitments, Aligning judgments, and Developing each individual in a unique manner.

Succession planning:

Having a well designed organization facilitates not only talent management, but succession planning.  The management of talent is an outgrowth of proper organizational structure and functioning, not a separate "program" or function.

Software and technology support:

We can introduce you to software systems that can manage the critical information about your employee's potential, skills-competencies, growth patterns, and current effectiveness.  Talent management requires a great deal of information, and without effective software this information is lost and not used in development and management. Our favorite is Sonario, from Levinson & Co, hands down the most comprehensive and advanced talent management, succession planning, and strategic HR management software available.

Co-consulting 

Because of the specialized work in designing organizations and accountability systems, I am available to work with both internal and external firms on larger projects, advising and maintaining the emphasis on structural integrity, accountability, and fostering common goals.

Additional information

Our consulting work is through unique engagement via personal contact only. I rely on the work done by my teacher, mentor, and colleague Elliot Jaques as my basic approach, but integrate concepts from modern systems theory, group, and individual dynamics. The aim is to produce a common sense, understandable, fair, powerful, and sustainable organization. I work in the nexus of individual and organizational behavior, with an organization or individual members of an organization in a unique coaching-consulting arrangement.

If you are interested in the International Assignment Profile (IAP), please visit us at www.iapsystems.com . The IAP is the leading (and really, only) artificial intelligence based system that identifies the issues facing an international family (expat) before departure, and creates a prioritized planning report that allows the family and a counselor to plan for the issues that are most likely to impact or compromise the assignment. The IAP is a tool but we've also developed a service based around that tool called ExpatGPS (for Expat Global Preparation and Support).

Coaching

I am pleased to work with individuals sponsored by their organizations to understand the personal and organizational dilemmas posed by work roles. All coaching is conducted as consultation, on site, and involves a comprehensive discussion of work, roles, and personal issues.

While I am a licensed psychologist, I do not provide psychotherapeutic services for individuals, and refer individuals in need of treatment to appropriate professionals.

Small, startup, entrepreneurial and medium size organizations are preferred clients!

Small businesses (including family run businesses) have special needs and considerations that warrant a specialized approach. Likewise medical and professional groups have both structural and accountability needs that differ from large corporate organizations. Understanding the differences and similarities can often be the deciding factor in designing effective solutions.

A new specialty: Accountable information technology (IT) security

While there are numerous software, hardware and other technological innovations designed to protect your organization from malicious hackers and crooks, all of these are dependent on managers and employees implementing them correctly and adhering to the required protocols. Research confirms that the greatest security threats to the organization is the organization itself!

• inadvertent "slips" by well meaning employees
• holding people "accountable" using accountability systems that are ill-designed (the same ones that fail to deliver on your strategy) resulting in "fake" accountability rather than real managerial accountability for security
• not understanding the appropriate roles of managers in achieving and maintaining information security

We surveyed the current security landscape, and while there is abundant technology, the advice on organizational implementation is wrong, ineffective, or self defeating.

If you are a middle or senior level manager and want to learn how to implement security effectively, read the following parable and give me a call. I'd love to help.

An informational security parable:

The parable of the two kingdoms.

There were once two prosperous kingdoms by the sea, the Kingdom of the Green, and the Kingdom of the Blue, each ruled by an intelligent and thoughtful ruler.  Each also had a large treasury, accessed by all the citizens who worked for the various guilds, clans, teams, and work-groups, headed by clan leaders, guild heads, and noble people.  To ensure prosperity and easy working conditions, the citizens all had various keys to the treasury, where they could deposit the results of their work and withdraw the necessary resources to continue, all under the watchful eye of royal auditors.  But each kingdom's prosperity was increasingly plagued by losses from citizens misusing their keys, some committing outright theft, but many tricked by shysters, con artists, and shamans.

At their yearly "king's conference" the kings decided definitive action must be taken, so they announced that any citizen misusing his or her key or participating in thievery would be summarily beheaded.  Understanding this was harsh, they also would hire wizards, spell-casters, and gurus, and offer various seminars and training aids to the workers to help them better understand the threats as well as the consequences. After all, the security of the treasury is everyone's shared responsibility!

Each king returned home and announced the policy.

At the next yearly king's conference, the ruler of the Green Kingdom announced that the program had some initial impact, but the violations continued, and mounting losses coupled with the dreadful impact on productivity and moral threatened to spoil the kingdom.  The ruler from the Blue kingdom, however, reported that initially decapitations were about the same as in the Green Kingdom, but soon dropped to only a few, and prosperity and moral were high and executions were rare.  The Green King puzzled, "Didn't we both institute the same policy that we discussed last year?"  The Blue ruler replied, "Well, yes, but on the way home I decided to add one small element to the policy".

What was the added caveat that made the difference?