Flat orgs and LO LO5191

John O'Neill (jao@itd0.dsto.gov.au)
Mon, 29 Jan 96 15:58:13 +1100

Replying to LO5172 --

My concerns stem from work I am currently engaged in which is to develop
people strategies that provide direction toward an end- state 20 years
from now. To develop this strategy, we are defining our desired end state
which is becoming quite an eye-opener. We see people having greater
movement in and out of companies, the half-life of skills being 3 years,
and the processes of learning organizations being influenced by constant
change. Companies will become more global, employing a variety of skills,
cultures, and belief systems. We will use a 24 hour/7day clock much like
the software company that designs here in the states, sends the design to
be coded in India, and then returns the code to be tested the next day;
using the many time zones as they become globalized.

Keeping this in mind, what will make people bring their hearts and hearts
and their minds to work each day instead of just their skills? What are
the attributes desired by business? Will people (20 years from now)
continue to look toward a single corporation, a single career, a single
job, as their means for lifestyle support? Or will people be motivated to
move between businesses, careers, jobs, while continuously learning and
adapting? What becomes of the company - employee contract? Any thoughts?

___________

People moving in and out of organisations and having a half-life of skills
of 3 years _exactly_ describes the software development industry in the
state it has been in for the last 20 years.

I have a question for you: How many people do you know over 35 who still
work as programmers ? (not as technical managers, but as pure code
hackers).

In Australian industry (in my experience), there are very, very, few
people still programming after 35. Where do these people go? What are they
doing now?

I have yet to see any research on what happens to computer programmers
once they pass 35 (maybe their computer swallows them up :->). My
experience is that these people have been totally used, abused and burnt
out by the system - at the same time they have often earnt enough money to
do what they always wanted to do, whether it be run a small business, buy
a farm, travel the world ... whatever.

>From a human resources perspective I don't believe that you can set an
end-state of people moving in and out of organisations with a *very*
limited lifespan on their skill set AND expect them to bring their hearts
and minds to their work.

The coders I described above coded so that they could earn enough money to
do what they wanted to do. If you want people to be part of your learning
organisation then you must find a better paradigm than the one the
software development industry has been using. Otherwise you may find that
the lights are on, but noone's at home.

--
John O'Neill
DSTO C3 Research Centre, Australia
email: jao@itd.dsto.gov.au