In Part 1 of this series (https://quantumleaders.com/is-amazon-a-livi…anization-part-1/), we looked at how Amazon achieves their phenomenal success by relentlessly staying focused and living their Soulful Purpose™, which Is to make life easier for people to get what they want.
This is one of the core principles for how a living organization creates the outcomes they want, to relentlessly focus on and live their Soulful Purpose. Another principle we shared was the importance of knowing how to apply your unique abilities to the environment you operate in, in ways no one else can.
In this article, I want to take up another core principle. There is no one size fits all, there is not just one way to operate and organize for success, especially when it comes to the needs of people.
In the New York Times article on Amazon “Prime Mover: How Amazon Wove Itself into the Life of an American City” (https://tinyurl.com/uc5s73y), they describe many of Amazon’s employee practices. In the section of the article titled “A New Kind of Assembly Line,” they describe how Amazon is utilizing technology alongside people to make the warehouse one of the most productive and efficient in the world.
The article describes an environment where people are timed by machine for how long each task takes (Fredrick Taylor would be in awe of what they can do to measure worker productivity). It describes how if you don’t make your numbers, the computer will automatically issue written warnings and on the third one, you will be terminated. One employee was quoted as saying, “The machines determine so much. You’re clocked from beginning to end. They grind through people.”
In the last article we shared how a living organization, like a person, can have unhealthy patterns of behavior. Is Amazon a healthy living organization? Should other companies emulate Amazon’s practices to achieve the success they want?
The simple answer is no! But not for the reason you might think.
I have always said that there is not one right way to accomplish something. Your company is not Amazon, you do not have the same Soulful Purpose™ and you don’t operate in the same environment. You must find the right organization structure and operation that allows you to maximize your contribution within the environment you operate.
There is also no one right organization for everyone. Some people need and thrive in highly structured environments: other need and thrive in highly creative, open environments.
In my first management position, I had to terminate a very technically competent technician. He was so technically competent that in his new position, he rose from technician to regional service manager in less than three years. Why would I terminate such a competent person?
At HP, our Customer Engineers were out in the field with the responsibility to ensure they not only knew how to fix the computer system, they also had to fix the customer. This required them to deal with the relationship issues as well as the failing computer. It required skills beyond just the technical skills. It required interpersonal skills and a level of maturity to deal with the complexities of relationships.
While this individual had the appropriate technical skills, he could not handle the dynamics of the relationship challenges. He became anxious and frustrated. One day he blacked out driving back to the office because of a particularly difficult customer situation.
At his new position, he did not have to go onsite. The customers brought their equipment to his offices. The complex relationship dynamics were significantly less, and his technical skills allowed him to shine. In one environment, the individual was not only failing, he almost killed himself. In a different environment, he flourished.
Amazon needs high levels of efficiency to do what it does, so it relies heavily on technology and very structured environments. There are many people for whom this is an ideal place to work. “When I first came here, I thought, ‘I’m not good enough for Amazon,’” said one employee. But after a year, she was asked to become an “ambassador,” helping out newer colleagues.
Some workers thrive despite the pace. “The day goes by quick. All these other people go to the gym. Amazon pays me to stay in shape.”
Some see a path to advancement. Samaira is already a leader among the employees trained to work with the warehouse robots. Asked where she saw herself in 10 years, she replied, “Running an Amazon building like this one.”
It is often said, there is someone that is just right for you. The same is true of a living organization. There are people who will flourish in one environment while others will feel stressed or constrained and bored in the same environment.
I have often used the metaphors – you do not teach calculus to someone who hasn’t learned algebra; you do not give the keys to the car to a 5-year-old. The same holds true for configuring your operating environment. You do not put someone in a self-managing environment or an open creative environment who does not have the level of development and maturity to handle it. Nor do you put people with well developed creative skills in a mechanically intense environment.
That is why we created The Living Organization® Maturity Matrix™ and Execution Performance Assessment™. It is important to know what the right structure is, the right balance of decentralization and autonomy versus centralization of control for your environment and purpose. The right mix that allows you to successfully execute the vision you have and make the impact your organization is here to make.
Is Amazon an awful employer ? For some yes, for others they are great. It’s all about the context and the fit.
I loved this article and how it demonstrates that it is not the strong or swift or more intelligent who survive, but those who can adapt. On the other hand, a company that can identify the areas where employees are not just competent but excellent and then adapts to those employees and finds a place where they can manifest that excellence is also a living organization.
When I have advised companies on talent development I have suggested a mantra of: we identify, help develop and find a place in our company for excellence. Some companies have added a formalized process of managers periodically evaluating their subordinates for areas of excellence or areas in them that could be developed into excellence.
A company that is dedicated to excellence inside and outside their company will not only get raving fan customers, but raving fan employees.
And it doesn’t get me much better than that.
Mark, it is so nice to hear from you. It has been a while.
I agree with your comments and managers who are dedicated to developing excellence is a core part of creating an excellent company. As long as by excellence we mean the whole human being not just their ability to be excellent on what the organization needs them to do. In term of THe lIving Organization(R) Model that means developing the whole human being their Context skills (self awareness) their Relationship skills (their interpersonal skills) as well as Activity Skills (their ability to do the job.
In that way we are truly creating excellence for the individual and excellence for the living organization.
I define strategy as the ability to course correct or adapt as Mark put it. I still believe in having a vision for the short, Mid, and long term. The path to achieve the vision is what changes.
Bob, it’s so nice to hear from you. I think the way you positioned what you do is in alignment with th point of the article. Having a vision of what you want to create (short, mis and long term) is what the strategic compass is all about. It is a recognition that a fixed plan, a plan once set is only to be executed, which has been the tradition of traditional strategic planning doesn’t work. Your way of putting it – the vision is set but the path to get there is fluid – is right. That is why we call it a compass – it directs us and keeps us focused on the vision, while allowing us to sense and respond to the ever changing environment.
Thanks for commenting.
A valuable follow-on. Especially resonate with the necessity of someone being mature enough for full self-organising. It’s time we compared our 3D maturity model (incorporation, role/task OD, inter- and inner-personal) with yours! (You’ll find our model in the chapters of our Picasso and Einstein: the Economy, Leadership and You book)
Graham, I agree maturity is a key developmental component for organizations overall to move to higher level of performance. I often say that an organizations capacity is equal to its capability plus its maturity. too often leaders focus primarily on capability and lose sight of the importance of maturity.
I will check out your your 3D maturity model and yes we should compare notes. I look forward to it.
Hi Norman,
interesting points you’ve made. I think though, besides Amazons Soulful Purpose as you call it, the even more important factors in its success were the tools and approach it developed in uniting its workforce behind its core principles and most importantly the rigorous infusion and execution thereof. I think the point is, for every employee to actually live and believe in the principles. It seems like B2C companies have been telling their employees for a long while to “put the customer first”, but that is not enough.
What I’ve learned from interactions with Amazon workers beyond the factory floor was consistent. Everyone has entirely internalized Amazon’s leadership/guiding principles and lives by them.
One of the principles is, that talent should always be nurtured and promoted and that system is enforced vigorously and seems like the embodiment of the once so great American dream. You work hard and well and you will rise to the top. At the same time, Amazon makes sure that innovating, motivated and hard-working employees keep moving through the ranks into key positions driving business forward.
I personally don’t agree with their MO, agenda or critical size; I am for companies owned by their employees and giving back to the communities they thrive from instead of draining and maximizing profits for detached shareholders. Bosch and Zeiss have successfully applied a shared model for example.
This is a very interesting company supporting other companies to move to alternative business ownership models: https://purpose-economy.org/en/ (I am in no way affiliated).
Keen to hear your thoughts.
Best,
David
David, thank you for the contribution and insights you bring. Yes the Soulful Purpose is but the starting point. It’s also the relatively easy step. The more difficult is living your purpose – fully. and that is what Amazon does so well.
Part of what is behind viewing an organization as a living being is that the cells of a living being are committed to the welfare of the host body, for they know that a healthy body creates healthy cells and healthy cells create healthy bodies. When, as you stated, Amazon rigorously infuses their core context and Soulful Purpose into every person (Cell) it will naturally create extraordinary outcomes.
Like you, I don’t agree with some of their MO and still, as I say in the article, I can appreciate how it might fit for their Soulful Purpose. And just like people the have a right to choose their own purpose, the way they want to live.
Also I want to thank you for the link to Steward Ownership model. I will explore it more deeply and reach out to the folks who are behind it. Part of The Living Organization paradigm is that we shift from an ownership framework to a stewardship framework, so this interests me a lot.
I do have one question for you. You mention “the tools and approach it(Amazon) developed in uniting its workforce behind its core principles and most importantly the rigorous infusion and execution thereof. Can you share what those tools and approach were/are. If you want to take this to email for easier conversation you can reach me at nwolfe@quantumleaders.com
Thank you again, for taking the time to share these insights.
Hi Norman,
thanks for your reply and happy to hear your interest and engagement in steward ownership. I dropped you an email.
What I thought would be interesting to hear would be your take on HR in a living organization, because, in my experience, HR feels often a little left out of the loop and not quite aligned with the “cells” needs. Although this might be off-topic here.
Best,
David
David,thanks for the meal and for furthering this conversation. As I mentioned in my email response to you, I don’t think it should be HR’s role to be the one to take care of the development of the “cells”. I think this falls to first the “cells” to develop themselves as they are the only ones to choose to develop (cannot be made to develop from the outside). And second their “supervisors become facilitators of this development process.