Systems Thinking – The Purpose of the Work
- December 2nd, 2009
- Posted in Systems Thinking Concepts
- Write comment
If someone asked you to clean the table, what would be your response? This simple question is at the heart of understanding the design and management of the work. Let me explain.
When asked to clean a table a natural response might be “what am I cleaning it for?” (unless of course you are my teenage son who would respond “why”). This seems to be an appropriate question am I cleaning the table to:
- Do work or homework

- To eat on the table, or
- To perform surgery
For each of the above I would require different types of cleaning. With knowledge of purpose I can set about performing my job in appropriate manner. I can pull what I need to perform the job as needed (cleaning equipment, cleaning liquid, clothes, etc.). Understanding purpose gives me context to the job to do.
A command and control (or traditional) manager doesn’t think this way. There are a variety of reasons. Some disrespect the ability of the worker to think, but most want control over the work to make sure the work is done right. So what do they do?
- Set Targets. Things like I want you to spend 45 – 60 minutes cleaning the operating table.
- Standardize the Work. A step-by-step process of what to do and how to do it.
- Inspection. This to make sure targets are met and the performance is “up to standards.”
All these things add to costs. Targets don’t guarantee that the right things will be done. Standardized steps with no deviation from method through inspection does not allow for better methods to be learned or even guarantee the purpose is understood by the worker. Further, the work is really quite boring when I don’t understand purpose, can’t work with method and am dictated to by managers and inspectors.
For most service organizations and government management this (targets, procedures, and inspection) is the design and management of work that is followed. As Frederick Herzberg said, “If you want people to do a good job, give them a good job to do.”
These aren’t the only barriers as we have scientific management theory (functional separation of work into specialties), incentives, front/back office design, top-down management, decisions separated from the work, cost focus and many others to overcome. But the purpose of work and how we play it out should give one pause. We can do better, there is a better way.
Leave me a comment. . . share your opinion! Click on comments below.
Tripp Babbitt is a speaker, blogger and consultant to service industry (private and public). His organization helps executives find a better way to make the work work. Download free from www.newsystemsthinking.com “Understanding Your Organization as a System” and gain knowledge of systems thinking or contact us about our intervention services at info@newsystemsthinking.com. Reach him on Twitter at www.twitter.com/TriBabbitt or LinkedIn at www.linkedin.com/in/trippbabbitt.


Tripp Great insight! You have pointed out the key to job satisfaction. Of course you are right, knowing the purpose of a task intimately makes the doing of it more fulfilling. Even more so if there is complete alignment with a clear and present vision of the ultimate goal of one’s efforts.
The important question here is – who is the one-who-knows? A command-and-control manager thinks he knows the best way to do the job, the best choice of cleaning materials, and so on, and the worker merely does what he’s told. This is what we call an r-type service. If the worker (service provider) delivers outcomes, this is a c-type service. If the worker (service provider) supplies the knowledge and know-how as well as the labour, then this is what we call a K-type service. And if the worker (service provider) solves the problem (for example provides a brand new throw-away table for each operation), this is what we call a P-type service. http://www.asymmetricdesign.com/archives/67