Understanding the “shadow side” of the organisation What do we mean by the “shadow side”? A couple of definitions of the “shadow side”: “…all those things that substantially and consistently affect the productivity and quality of the working life of a business, for better or worse, but which are not found on organisation charts, in company manuals or in the discussions that take place in formal meetings”. (Gerry Egan) “…the set of interactions among members of a legitimate system that fall outside that legitimate system. It comprises all social and political interactions that are outside the rules strictly prescribed by the legitimate system. It is the arena in which members pursue their own gain”. (Ralph Stacey) The “shadow system” describes the set of interactions among members of an organisation that are outside of the rules prescribed by the legitimate organisational system. It is the informal network of relations within the organisation which are evident in casual hallway conversations, on the grapevine, through the rumour mill and the informal procedures for ‘getting things done’ around here. Burke (2004) further describes the “shadow themes” as being the “unofficial ideologies” which are not publicly expressed but which may subvert and undermine the official ideology in an organisation. The boundaries of the “shadow system” are not be clear and it is through these informal networks and ‘procedures’ that people can learn and self-organise among themselves (Stacey, 1996). By “legitimate system” Stacey (1996) would describe the formal hierarchy, bureaucracy, rules, controls and communication patterns in an organisation. In contrast to the “shadow system”, the boundaries of the “legitimate system” are usually very clear and its purpose is to carry out the primary task of the organisation. Discussion points: To what extent do you recognise the “legitimate” vs the “shadow” system in your own organisation? How would you describe the “shadow side”? Which features characterise the “formal” / “legitimate” system and which characterise the “shadow” side? Egan and Stacey would put organisation culture on the “shadow side”. Or, perhaps some aspects of “culture” are influenced or expressed by the formal system; while other aspects are on the “shadow” side / informal. What do you think?
“self-sealing processes”, i.e., vicious circle, reinforcing assumptions about each other. Whereas Model II enables free choice informed by evidence. Model I: AIMS (Governing Values) BEHAVIOUR (Action Strategies) IMPACT (Consequences) Control the purpose of the meeting or encounter Maximise winning and minimise losing for yourself Minimise upsetting yourself and others Maximise rationality Asserting your own position in order to be in control and win Promoting face-saving - your own and others Taking your own reasoning for granted Asking leading questions Avoiding enquiry into others’ views Miscommunication Mistrust Protectiveness Self-fulfilling prophecies Self-sealing processes Escalating error Model II: AIMS (Governing Values) BEHAVIOUR (Action Strategies) IMPACT (Consequences) Valid (confirmable) information Free and informed choice Internal commitment to the choice Advocating your position and subjecting it to inquiry and public testing Minimising unilateral face-saving Enquiring into others’ views You could also add: dialogue, advocacy and inquiry and bringing the left-hand into the column (ref: Argyris) Reduction of self-fulfilling, self-sealing, processes Effective problem solving Social Virtues The following “social virtues” are needed to help us manage effectively – but they show up differently under Model I and Model II. Model I Model II Help and Support Give approval and praise to others. Tell others what you Increase the other's capacity to confront their own ideas, to