After reading too many articles on the need to eliminate cumbersome processes in industry, I found myself thinking about the roots of bureaucracy.
The processes are performed to guide the execution of the action and invariably include approval checkpoints to ensure that those actions were executed. While processes must be simplified and eventually automated, checkpoints are the real productivity killers.
On lack of trust and inefficiencies
Some are offended by what they consider to be a lack of confidence, others are distressed by the frustrated acquisition of equipment that could make their work more efficient. I was in both camps, but I finally got over both feelings. The reason? Show me one person with common sense and I will show you four other people who cannot distinguish between what they need and what they want.
At the root of bureaucracy, the need to control the use of common resources will often be found, be it approval for the construction of a wall or the acquisition of a new network router. In an endless cycle, people in the “I need the resource to do my job” field find ways to bypass the process and the bureaucracy responds with more checkpoints. Bureaucracy thrives at the intersection of limited resources with resourceful people.
Executives and keyboard purchases
Eliminate all checkpoints and you will soon have a tragedy of the commons on your hands.
Of course, the extreme case of a top executive approving a $ 200 purchase should be avoided. On the other hand, $ 200 may be the cost of that set of keyboard, mouse, and speakers that look great with the replacement workstation you received last week.
Personal responsibility to the rescue
In the tragedy of the commons, the only known solution is to eliminate or reduce the “commons” in favor of personal property, whatever that resource may be. Karl Marx would not be proud.
Scott Adams once suggested, in the serious part of his excellent “The Dilbert Principle,” that companies actually gave employees money to purchase office supplies instead of the traditional supply containers scattered around the building. It would be up to the employees to individually buy the supplies they need or keep the money. The actual quantity is not important, grain counters have all the numbers they need to calculate that quantity, but the company would no longer need to burden administrative staff with those tasks.
The real question is, could you try to extend that approach to personal laptops or desktops? In many geographies, the cost of these machines can rival the monthly salary of their users. What happens when you hand over the money for equipment that should last 3 years and the person leaves the company before that period ends? Confiscate what they bought or demand a refund?
Solve that riddle and the end of the bureaucracy may be near.