The core theory of success seems to be the often-quoted approach to theory for organisational success at Singapore Schools. What's it all about? What's its strengths and limitations and how can it be adjusted to make more sense on the ground for school key personnel?
This post tries the answer these questions and starts of with an explanation of the theory from a relatively unknown person called Dr Daniel Kim.
A) The Core Theory of Success
Every change project needs to be clear about the desired future it wants to create. The results we want are sustainable results.
Quality actions are high leverage actions that lead to sustainable quality results. However, it is not uncommon to find that the strategies of many organisations are incoherent, work against one another and may not deal with the real underlying issues.
The quality of actions is determined by the quality of collective thinking in organisations. This requires stakeholder involvement and commitment. Collective thinking means a shared understanding of where we want to go, our theory of success, where we are currently, and the systemic structures that might be holding us back. Our stakeholders must understand what is involved so that they can take quality actions that are coherent and contribute to the desired future.
The quality of relationships in the organisation determines the quality of collective thinking. The quality of relationships must be considered at various levels:
- Self: Change begins with the individual. The change leader must have personal mastery — i.e. be clear about the purpose of the change and his own commitment. He also needs to know his and his team’s strengths and limitations.
- One-to-one relationship: Trust is the underpinning attribute of effective change teams. Trust is built when team members understand what is required of everyone, see each one contributing and the fruits of their efforts.
- Team relationship: Effective teams enjoy synergy within their teams and with other teams.
- Organisational relationship: All staff understand and are committed to the desired future of the organisation and the strategies to get there.
B) Critique
1. The theory strats with quality relations and rightfully so. However, embedded in it is the most essential - quality of self. This tends to be forgetten and often people try and start of building relations with others but unless there is self-awareness and individuals practice reflection, it is unlikely that there will be quality relations because when relations hit a speed bump, people look to blame one another instead of seeking to understand the strain on the relationship from both sides and looking inward for answers and solutions. Often enough, it takes personal enlightenment for strained relations to mend. Hence, the importance of
self-awareness and self-improvement is critical.
For the other aspects of quality of relationship, I would completely agree on the importance of inter-team work and on the importance of trust. For inter-team relations to work, systems must intretwine and teams should have joint KPIs and work collectively for these outcomes in joint projects. School leaders should craft more interdepartmental projects. I would call this the
quality of alignment
In the area of trust building, it requires enlightened KPs who are prepared to let go of their own egos and sit down to chat over issues for the common good and this may include having to trust that the other party will put in the effort with you to get the job done. This may mean each side not being too calculative and being prepared to do more than the other party and yet knowing that it is important for themselves not to slack. If one side constantly does not pull his own weight, then the relationship's trust may falter, hence, wisdom is needed and all cooperating parties need to go the extra mile and acknowledge the other side if they did more. as long as neither side tries to skive and then try to gain glory in the end, trust should prevail though it is delicate. I would call this the
quality of trust.
2. The theory apparently starts out with quality results. While I understand it as goals which is probably a better and more positive term to use than results which has a positive undertone. The choice of words is important for a theory to be embraced. Barbara Cargill from Melbourne University who gave my overseas trip team a lecture on Change Leadership highlighted the importance of using positive language when describing change elements of which results/targets are one of those. Hence, we should perhaps use the words outcomes or goals which are neutral -
Quality of Goals/Outcomes
3. Again, I would rather use "processes" in place of "Action" which tends to be ambigious and it tends to suggest finality rather than continous change and improvement. Hence I would use the term "
Quality of Processes". Certainly this is critical for success since processes and structures modify and drive behaviour.
4. For the quality of collective thinking, there tends to be only mention of a common vision. While this is important, given the complexity of decision making these days, qualiyu of collective thinking should be change to just quality of thinking because collective thinking tends to also promote groupthink which is part of the dysfunctionalities of a cohesive team. Hence, the
quality of thinking should be about ideas that can stand up to scruntiny and are backed by substanial evidence and sensible explanations. Quality of thinking would also mean that individuals and the team as a whole have considered all possible scenarios and put the idea(s) through their simulated paces and have taken into consideration all possible factors so that the best possible solution is being pushed out while keeping in mind that it is not always possible to pre-determine everything and thus the door is left open to continue learning from the outcomes of applying the solution and tweaking it along the way to improve it.
5. I would also suggest another thing to be added which is the
Quality of Networking - this is critical because it will help open doors to new opportunities and it is tied to the quality of relationships yet it is a very seperate skill - the ability to make friends and allies or at least partners who are willing to work with you on win-win outcomes.
In summary, the
core theory of success refined by Daniel W S Lim is as follows:
Quality of Goals/Outcomes
Quality of Self knowledge
Quality of Reflection
Quality of Relations
Quality of Trust
Quality of Alignment
Quality of Networking
Quality of Thinking
Quality of Systems & Processes
