To produce a good and meaningful service you need knowledge. Lot’s of it. And you need the ability to integrate.
In my work I often meet people complaining they didn’t know that a certain type of information was available within the organisation, that someone was working on a project that they should have known of right from the start of their project, that they lack overview on who is working on a specific topic or field. And that all of this is poorly coordinated.
Coordination as the ultimate solution
Their lack of ability to integrate naturally is usually answered with: let’s coordinate more! And when proposed in a meeting all others participants nod in appreciation for this mind-blowing idea. Moments later the group comes with plans to create a comprehensive and dynamic list with all projects. And not one project should be missing. Even possible relevant projects outside the organisation are usually not forgotten.
Coordination is not integrating
Because it is a coordination task no elements can be excluded, more and more columns appear, more and more divisions are suggested. Some internet-based tools are also thrown in because people need to be able to retrieve the information. In the end the task of listing is given to a junior person and the IT-specialist (who needs to make it web-based). I usually see them both looking in exasperation, just wondering how to bring this daunting task to a good end. A list is never finished and IT solutions only work if people know how to use them…
Coordinate less to be able to integrate
Why is the answer never: ‘coordinate less’? Why is the natural reaction to institutionalise the lack of overview with a list? In essence the knowledge worker in you is not taking responsibility for its own services. You should not ask for coordination, but ask what information you need to improve your product and then seek that information. It should start with asking colleagues what relevant information (s)he has. The start could be that simple. You don’t need these static lists to make information flow through the organisation!
A few images come to mind after reading this post:
– water cooler
– large discussion table in an informal, open setting e.g. common pantry
– lunchtimes
To me, these are oft-overlooked but key avenues/places where personal networks and collegial ties can be formed. It’s much easier to ‘coordinate’ with another person if I have some sense of what he/she is like – as a person. E.g. “he’s not a morning person, so I can cut him some slack in the morning, or better to catch him after he’s had morning coffee”; “i rem she was saying the other day at lunch that she has a good friend who’s an expert in something I need some info urgently on…” etc
Sometimes we aren’t even conscious of our own reactions. If a colleague I knew well and trusted asked me for information, I’d be quicker to give and less questioning about it, than if someone I barely noticed/speak with asked the same. With the trusted colleague I’d prob even offer some extra info over what was requested, if I think it could be helpful too.