The systematic collection and dissemination of new knowledge will not help your organization at all if that information isn't used to make more fact-based decisions. Encourage your associates to apply what they have learned. Reward them when they do, and hold them accountable for making mistakes they made before when they don't demonstrate learning.

A critical part of transforming the organization's culture is to make sure there is sufficient focus on human resource development. The famous quote from Roger Milliken frames this best: "Insanity is doing things the same way and expecting different results." If you are striving for significant changes in the ways in which the organization operates, then there must be changes in the ways in which the people inside the organization operate. There are two options for how to make this happen. Either you can fire everybody and hire an entirely new set of employees (which will ensure that things will be done differently), or you can spend time, effort, and funds on developing the current employees to have the new skill sets that are required.

Simply proclaiming that from now on the organization will operate differently will not make it happen. Since you will not be firing everyone, the only viable option is to focus on development. In this regard, you should think carefully about the competencies your associates will need to demonstrate in order to succeed in the new organization. Once you are able to identify the new skills, knowledge, and abilities that will be required, you can work out ways to build these capabilities among your associates.

In essence, you will create individual development plans for each of your staff members by assessing their current capabilities in comparison with the new set of competencies. There may be some knowledge gaps that are similar among many of your associates. In those instances, a customized executive educational activity may be the best way to close the gap.

Case in point:

A utility company determined that its managers were not effective collaborators inside the organization. These were people who were trained to be competitive negotiators with customers and suppliers and who used similar approaches when working with their colleagues across business units and divisional lines. This situation was creating a lot of ill will within the organization and was manifested by internal warfare. I was involved in designing a two-day program on collaborative problem solving that focused on building the skill sets for achieving win-win results with internal conflicts. The customized program was conducted frequently in order to reach a large number of managers in a relatively short time. By addressing development in this way, the company was able to create a common foundation for midlevel managers to improve internal collaboration.

The objective was to change the culture, not to develop just a few people. For individuals who have gaps between their current set of capabilities and the identified new set of competencies, there are several alternatives for development. Certainly, some new skills can be obtained from other educational activities. However, most new competencies are best developed through on-the-job experiences. Job rotations, involvement in task forces for company wide initiatives, short-term projects, and overseas assignments are all methods for developing the new competencies required for success.

Creating a lean organization was one of the descriptors my clients identified for the ideal company. While this mostly has connotations for the organization as a whole, there are ways in which managerial leaders can make contributions to "leanness." The most obvious way is to be careful to avoid over staffing. It is not uncommon to hear associates point to inadequate staffing as the reason behind poor performance "if we only had more people, then we wouldn't have these problems." There are times when that statement is undoubtedly correct, but there are likely more times when it is inaccurate. Before you add people, make sure that it is truly an issue of insufficient staffing as opposed to process or people problems.

Another way to stay lean is the judicious use of temporary employees. In the early nineties, contract employment became a popular vehicle for avoiding paying the benefits and fringes required for permanent hires. It got to the point in many firms where the over utilization of temporary associates led to serious quality concerns. You should not expect to get the same level of commitment to quality and customer service from contract employees as you do from permanent staff members.

The less loyalty the company demonstrates to its employees, the less loyalty it will receive in return. And less loyalty was the result of the wide scale use of temporary workers where there was no real difference between the work required of them and the work required of the permanent employees. In addition, it generated a fair amount of discontent. However, the occasional use of contract employment makes sense in today's environment.

If possible, hire temporary associates to cover new staffing needs for growth spurts until you can better determine the stability of customer demand. If the growth is continuous and relatively secure, then you can change the new positions to permanent ones. If the continued growth is uncertain, you will not be saddled with excessive overhead. We employed this approach at Emory University when we were building up the executive education portfolio. We did not have sufficient staff to cover all the new programs we were planning to roll out; yet it was difficult to predict how successful we were going to be in gaining enrollments across the new portfolio, especially in the area of e-business. Therefore, we hired several contract employees to serve as program managers on a project-by-project basis. These were individuals who came through referrals, who were experienced but did not want to have full-time positions, and whom we were easily able to train to handle the responsibilities. The most important lesson I learned from this staffing option was to treat the contract employees with the same respect as the permanent staff-and to make sure everyone else acted similarly.

We made sure they were invited to staff meetings, office celebrations, and planning sessions, but no ill will was created if they chose not to participate. My final word of advice on maintaining a lean organization is to be careful with your expenditures. The relative ease of keeping close tabs on the budget is heavily dependent upon the size of your unit, the diversity of its activities, and your managerial style. If you are fortunate to be working with primarily Theory Y associates, all that you need to do is to help them understand that conservation of financial resources is good for the business. They have the capacity to react as if it is their money on the line, and so they will be careful with how they spend it. If you are not this fortunate, and have more Theory X employees, then it is best not to delegate the budget control to anyone else in your unit. You may have someone else handle the data entry and reconciliations, but you should monitor your expenditures frequently.

Even in an organization that seemingly tolerates overspending budget lines, you would be wise to end the fiscal year with some dollars left over. Demonstrating your ability to conserve resources will make you much more likely to get more when you truly need it-and this is important to the future progress of your unit.

As change is a constant in business, all organizations need effective change agents throughout the enterprise. The more you can demonstrate your openness to change and your ability to lead others through change, the more you will distinguish yourself from other managers in the company.

I am S S Senba completed my UG degree, now am working in Bangalore.