Have you ever thought about the position-contribution paradox in organisations? I doubt it. Many of us seldom do. We only see the formal organisation chart to understand who is occupying what role, and what his title is. But we seldom recognise the informal organisation chart that describes the real scene, in terms of the flow of actions, decisions and relationships.
It is critical to understand and examine the disparity between an individual’s actual contribution and their position in the organisation. Sometimes, a person’s contribution can extend far beyond his/her formal position and at other times, the opposite is true.
Four axioms
This leads us to recognise the four axioms that clarify the organisational position and contribution paradox.
~ Formal and informal organisations are never the same.
~ Organisations are effective when each individual’s contribution exceeds or is at least equivalent to, their position in the organisation.
~ Organisations suffer when an individual’s contribution falls short of what is expected of someone occupying that position.
~ An individual’s contribution is not limited by the position that he/she occupies.
The other perspective
One can also examine this paradox from two different perspectives.
~ From the organisation’s perspective :
How leaders perform or do not perform determines an organisation’s success. This usually happens when an individual spends a long time in the same job, due to which his performance tapers off or slows down.
This can also happen when people are moved into higher roles, but they don’t scale up their performances, continuing instead to merely replicate what they were doing earlier.
~ From a personal perspective :
Some people may simply seek to grow up without contributing. During a series of leadership programmes I delivered to a large MNC that was expanding its operations in India, I noticed that the promotion policy did not emphasise on continued good performance. Instead, they only took into account the employee’s performance the year before they were due for a level-up.
The time to go from one management level to the next was roughly three years, and so, it had become a common practice to do all the “heavy-lifting” in the third year and qualify for the next promotion. The first two years saw employees do the minimum they were expected to scrape through. While some did behave responsibly, most delivered below par performance than the position they occupied for the first two years.
Career stages
Research by Dalton and Thompson concluded that careers evolved and progressed through four clear stages:
~ Learner: One who is busy learning the fundamentals. This includes a rookie, an apprentice or a new hire.
~ Expert: One who applies the expertise he learnt as a learner.
~ Guide: One who is happy to mentor, coach, lead or become an internal consultant.
~ Shaper: One who shapes the future as a visionary, pathfinder and a strategist.
These stages are recognised relatively easily and knowing where one belongs is helpful both for the individual and the organisation.
What is more important, however, is understanding that formal positions and career stages are very different. Understanding this will facilitate maximum productivity and contribution.
As for individual managers, knowing where one belongs in a career stage will help manage their aspirations as well as the type of roles one should move into, so that maximum value can be delivered.