Dragos Iliescu
PhD in I/O Psychology
Lecturer SNSPA and partner in D&D Research
Daniela Stoian
MSc in “Managerial Communication and Human Resources”
Communication and Public Relation Faculty
National School of Political Sciences and Public Administration (SNSPA), Bucharest, Romania
Maglina Filimon
MSc in “Managerial Communication and Human Resources”
Communication and Public Relation Faculty
National School of Political Sciences and Public Administration (SNSPA), Bucharest, Romania
Mihaela Păunescu
MSc in “Managerial Communication and Human Resources”
Communication and Public Relation Faculty
National School of Political Sciences and Public Administration (SNSPA), Bucharest, Romania
Vasilica Trandafir
MSc in “Managerial Communication and Human Resources”
Communication and Public Relation Faculty
National School of Political Sciences and Public Administration (SNSPA), Bucharest, Romania
Alexandra Haralambie
MSc in “Managerial Communication and Human Resources”
Communication and Public Relation Faculty
National School of Political Sciences and Public Administration (SNSPA), Bucharest, Romania
Chapter 3: Metaphorical representations about consultant and consultancy in Romania
(For the Introduction, Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 of this article, please consult the column Research report in EJOP, issue No 4/2005).
1. The vision about his/her own organization
Generally, I see my organization as …?
Graphic 1a. Generally, I see my organization as …? (Compared presentation acceptance vs. rejection)
* Calculated based on 188 questionnaires, with the measures of expressed options
A first glance over the data encrypted in this chapter reveals an interesting conclusion about the way in which the respondents’ vision about the organization is structured: although, on principle, it is relatively balanced, the respondents’ perception also has “extreme” components, meaning that the approach is completely authoritarian, “military”. The perception of the “commander” who controls and harshly commands the system is completely rejected, while the engineer approach, which sees the organization as a mechanism that needs to be adjusted in order to function perfectly, is totally accepted.
Graphic 1b. Generally, I see my organization as…? (Composite index of preference)
* Calculated based on 188 questionnaires, with the measures of expressed options
Basically, the most accepted perception (the graphic tends to +50.0 ) regarding the vision about his/her own organization is a complex perception with two components:
A. A structural „engineered” component, which focuses on the fact that the organization is a complex system made of several sub- interdependent systems; in this context any force vector applied in any point of the system induces modifications in all its sub-assemblies; therefor all the “wheels” must function exactly in order for the whole machinery to work properly;
B. A “metaphysical” component which underlines the fact that the mechanism mentioned above functions into an environment which is by definition chaotic, subtle, undetermined, difficult to understand and impossible to control without the existence of some one “initiated” already and who knows the “signs”.
Although the two components are apparently not compatible, in fact they are the facets of the same perception that unifies the respondents’ experience with the organizations under two undeniable realities: the need to control and understand the way in which the organizations function and the inevitable, symbolized by the impossibility to control and understand all the mechanisms and the sub-systems of an organization or their way of functioning.
In the same time almost all of the respondents seem to reject (the graphic tends to – 50.0) the “military” perception regarding the way in which the organizations function. This phenomenon is happening because this metaphor is composed by many aspects which are one by one rejected by the respondents:
- First of all from the authoritarian perspective, the organization is an exact system which functions based entirely on some laws, on one set of clear and indisputable rules – aspect which is in contradiction with the metaphysical component we talked above
- Second, from the same perspective the organization is a system that has to be permanently commanded and controlled and it does not function otherwise – a probably rejected aspect first, because of its dictatorial form and, second, for its incompatibility (easy to notice) with the reality, the way it reflects in the respondents’ personal experiences.
Between the other rejected perceptions of the respondents we notice furthermore:
- The „didactically” perception – „A system which continuously learns, accumulates ant perfects itself”
- The „medical” perception – „An alive organism, in which each part grows, develops and has a function in adapting to the environment ”
The option to reject the two metaphors is amazing and we can only speculate about the motivations that represent the base for it. This are probably related to the fact that both require a minimum external intervention in the system and this fact is related more to a challenge, an ideal model of organization and, in fact, it’s not a reality. In other words, although the organizations “learn” and “grow” they are not self-centered systems and do not need external correcting interventions.
In conclusion, the perspective over the organization in its normal state is an integrating one. This means that, from the perceptual point of view, there are combined two models which requires the functional blend of an exact science with an art – in a way similar to that described in the anticipating works where, for example, there are “psychologists-priests” or “engineers” (specialists in technology who, through the high level of knowledge, have reached the border of “mystical”, of the esoteric). This is probably the best way, through which it’s described the recipe of managing the organizational phenomenon, composed both of science and knowledge of the paradigms which can adjust the “ organizational wheels” and the intuition that can only be based on the experience of reading organizational signs.
2. The vision about his/her own organization, when it’s in difficulty
The most correct analogy presenting a comparison for my organization, when it needs consultancy .
Graphic 2a. The vision about his/her own organization, when it’s in difficulty (compared presentation acceptance vs. rejection)
*Calculated based on 188 questionnaires, with the measures of expressed options
The most important aspect arising from this chapter – related to his/her perception about the organization when it’s in difficulty – is connected to the fact that, as a concept, the respondents tend to use different constructions describing the organization in its various stages – this is an observation which still remains to be validated by the rest of the data.
Even in this situation of the organization there are models taken to extreme, which are completely accepted or completely rejected by the consultants.
And even more, the image of the organization in trouble seems to generate more “extreme” negative reactions than the one of the organization in a “normal” state.
For example:
- The „esoteric-religious” model, which requires the assimilation of the organization for some “godless” being who, after confessing to the priest needs his whole understanding, his advice and support. This model is totally rejected by the respondents
- The „metaphysical-astrological” model, which presents the organization like the solar system that allowed reading the signs and the intuition of problems from its configurations, it is also rejected
- The „interventionist-simple” model, which sees the organization like a building that has a fire which needs to be located and needs extinction, is also rejected
In order to describe the situation of the organization in a crisis, the most suitable model to describe it seems to be the “educational-didactic” model, which sees the organization as a big cognitive (intellective) device (system) that permanently needs new information and ideas and this one is the most accepted model by the consultants.
Graphic 2b. The vision about his/her own organization, when it’s in difficulty (Composite index of preference)
* Calculated based on 188 questionnaires, with the measures of expressed options
Regarding the perception about the organization in its moments of trouble, it has two major components – which can be extremely assimilated into a “psychological” paradigm:
A. First, the organization is seen as a cognitive mechanism which, in order to function correctly, needs up-to-date information; when the information input is not the best one, then there will be unbalances that need to be rectified through the same means
B. Second, the organization is like the human psychic, it needs therapy in order to function normally, so it constantly needs an adjusting process which will attenuate the unbalances and frustrations
Generally, the organization is like a human system that can experience crisis because of some unbalances in the reasoning state (the received information are not adequate) or in the emotional state (the therapy process, which ensures the balance, does not take place).
The way in which are structured the other metaphorical models designed to describe the organization in a crisis, allow us to draw another important idea related to the way in which the consultants reflect in the organization: the state of the organization is the result of a continuous process and a result of decisions and exact interventions (please note the extreme rejection of the simple interventionist model described by the metaphor “fireman” and the acceptance of the models that require process). In addition, the organization experiencing a crisis needs more knowledge (science) – in order to find out how to manage the reasoning and emotional aspects. The organization does not need the shamanism and the esoteric visions, which, in fact, does not offer fundamental solutions. This is the reason why the most accepted model is a psychological one, which accepts the insights determined by the experience, but it rejects the components that are really non-scientific.
3. The vision about the difficulties experienced by the organization
The situations that make me ask for consultancy, I see them like…
Graphic 3a. The vision about the difficulties experienced by the organization (Compared presentation acceptance vs. rejection)
* Calculated based on 188 questionnaires, with the measures of expressed options
As it was expected, the perception of the organizational symptoms during the difficult times is similar to the perception of the organization having the same difficulties. But, it is possible to notice the fact that, although in this situation there are extreme rejection or acceptance reactions, the number of negative reactions is smaller.
Graphic 3b. The vision about the difficulties experienced by the organization (Composite index of preference)
* Calculated based on 188 questionnaires, with the measures of expressed options
As an extreme reaction, the only metaphor exclusively rejected is the one about the fireman, while the exclusively accepted metaphor is about the teacher.
The perceptual model, considered to be the most appropriate to describe the symptoms of the organization in crisis, is the „sportsman’s” – „the organization needs higher performances in the game it plays together with the others on the market”. The “educational-didactic” model is integrated in this sport model, the first focusing on the need of the organization to be up-to-date regarding the received information. The appearance of the sport metaphor in the consultants’ perceptual preferences is not a surprise, due to the fact that the most important measure for a good functioning of the organization is represented by its results on the market on which it acts. In fact, the bad results are the most frequent symptom, which is an incontestable clue of some possible organizational problems.
It is worthy of note that while the organization in the normal state is not at all possible to be assimilated into the “captain” model, when this problems appear this model quickly becomes a component of the metaphor system, considered to be acceptable by the consultants. Of course, this can only be explained by the fact that the respondents see the tough intervention, the control and the redirection as a must in order to overcome some difficult organizational situations.
As a conclusion, it’s possible to say that the metaphoric model, considered to be the most suitable for describing the symptoms of the organization in a crisis, is best associated with the “competitive – sport” image. The organization is a professional athlete who does not pay the expected results compared with the other athletes and this fact shows the existence of some personal problems. But these problems can be adjusted through more training, teached in accordance with the new methodologies and the access to better equipment.
4. The vision about the consultant’s activity
What does the consultant…
Graphic 4a. The vision about the consultant’s activity (Compared presentation acceptance vs. rejection)
* Calculated based on 188 questionnaires, with the measures of expressed options
Regarding the metaphors used to describe the consultant’s role in the organization, these have a characterization that is a more restrictive one than a prescriptive one. While there is no metaphoric model which can be definitely accepted from this point of view, we notice that there are two models which are exclusively rejected:
A. The „Priest / Ordinee” model – „The consultant knows what is good (“virtuous”) or bad (“sinful”) and gives advices for this”; „The consultant actually represents a superior court (from the moral, systemic or legal point of view)”
B. The „Fireman” model – „The consultant extinguishes the flames that have overcome the organization”; „The system applied by the consultant is not always a gentle one, his interest is to save what can be saved.”
Graphic 4b. The vision about the consultant’s activity (Composite index of preference)
* Calculated based on 188 questionnaires, with the measures of expressed options
Regarding the perception about the consultant’s role in the organization and the way in which his activity can be best described, we notice a structure, centered mostly on the following primer directions:
- The necessity of a correct diagnosis for the problems of the organization; from this point of view, the consultant is a “doctor” who has the necessary knowledge to exactly identify the week points and the causes of the organizational crisis
- The necessity of prescribing exact treatments for the problems of the organization. The consultant is a “doctor” who, after identifying the problems, is able to exactly prescribe the solving recipe, he is able to exactly say what are the needed actions for eliminating the “sickness”
- The necessity for a strict intervention in the organization and for watching the evolutions; the consultant is a psychologist who helps the organization to identify the problems, while this action initiates a healing “per se” process; once the problems are interiorized, some internal auto-adjusting mechanisms are started and they “heal the organization, while the consultant monitors the process
From the way in which the respondents’ options are structured for the above directions, we may conclude that this ones see the consultant’s role in the organization as one essentially psychological. This have to know how to identify the unbalances, the their cause and knows to prescribe the measures that will activate the “healing” abilities of the organization. This is a scientific process which eliminates the “esoteric”, but, in the same time, it eliminates the authority ant the excessive control – the organizational psychologist just identifies and daglocks the self-adjusting mechanisms of the organization, whose blocking has determined the appearance of the problems.
5. The vision about the consultant’s role
I expect from the ideal consultant to come with the following things in the project …
Graphic 5a. The vision about the consultant’s role (Compared presentation acceptance vs. rejection)
* Calculated based on 188 questionnaires, with the measures of expressed options
The metaphors used to describe the ideal consultant’s role in the organization are characterized in a restrictive but also prescriptive way. It’s obvious that the respondents’ perception is better described regarding the image, of the ideal consultant the expectations they have from him. As it follows, we notice that there are definitely accepted metaphors but also clearly rejected ones from this point of view.
The clearly rejected are :
A. The „Astrologer” model – „The consultant has abstruse, hard to understand knowledge about the methods of “conjuration”, statistics etc.”
B. The „Fireman” model – „The consultant is trained and has experience in “working with the flames”; more than this, he implicates many things in the action, he takes risks”
The exclusively accepted are:
A. The „psychologist” model – „The consultant is a facilitator who has knowledge about the inside problems of the organization and who is able to make it to go, by itself, towards the change ”
B. The „Teacher” model – „The consultant has great theoretical and practice knowledge and pedagogical flair.”
C. The „captain” model – „The consultant has the experience and the knowledge from previous “wars” , battles”, has the ability to organize, plan and analyze”
Graphic 5b. The vision about the consultant’s role (Composite index of preference)
* Calculated based on 188 questionnaires, with the measures of expressed options
Regarding the expectation on the ideal consultant’s role in the organization and the way in which the expectations on his activity may be best described, we notice a b configuration centered mainly on the following directions:
- The ideal consultant must act as a “psychotherapist”, he has to be a facilitator who has the necessary knowledge in order to correctly identify the deviation from the right path of the organization and to take the deeded measures in order to putt it on the right track; he must repair the self-adjusting mechanisms and then to monitor the coming back to normal
- The ideal consultant must have the necessary background in order to understand the organizational problems and he must have the intuition to identify the adjusting measures; he is like a teacher who has both knowledge and a lot of important experience in working with his students
- The consultant must act as an accelerator for the changes in the organization, he has the role of a coach who, by leader and charismatic abilities, may change the faith of a game through the encouraging speech and the technical advice, right from the beginning of the game or at the break
From the way in which the respondents’ visions are structured in the above directions, we may conclude that they perceive the ideal consultant’s role in the organization as an enterprising role. He has to know the means to identify the unbalances, their cause and then he is able to prescribe the measures that will create the “self-healing” abilities of the organization. In the same time, he acts according to the intuition given by the personal experience. His intervention in the organization does is not limited for repairing the mechanisms self-adjusting. Through authority and charisma he is an accelerator of the change and, in the same time, he monitors and closely controls the most important process.
6. The vision about the consultant’s activity
I expect the consultant to spend time in the organization, as it follows …
Graphic 6a. The vision about the consultant’s activity (Compared presentation acceptance vs. rejection)
* Calculated based on 188 questionnaires, with the measures of expressed options
The metaphors used to describe the consultant’s behavior in the organization have a characterization that is both prescriptive and restrictive. The respondents’ perception is, also in this case, well précised.
In conclusion, we notice that there are a large number of definitely accepted metaphors, but also there are definitely rejected metaphors from this point of view.
The exclusively rejected are:
A. The „Astrologer” model – „He spends time with the customer to bone up on a subject, but he considers that the data sent by the customer are enough and not necessarily personally collected. He gives the solution after he thinks it over and he is helped by his initiation abstract methods ”
B. The „Mechanic / Engineer” – „He comes, he repairs the broken organizational mechanism and leaves without asking about something else ”
C. The „Fireman” model – „He remains in the organization as long he needs to “extinguish the fire”, in order to overcome the crisis. It’s not his job to clean after.”
D. The „Priest / Ordinee” – „He spends a lot of time in the organization but he offers advice only when he is asked for.”
The ones exclusively accepted are:
A. The „Guide” model – „He stands beside the organization during the whole project, but his role ends when he reaches the destination.”
B. The „Designer / Aesthetician” – „He has an exact interaction with the organization, limited in time and in objectives ”
C. The „Coach” model – „ He spends enough time in the organization in order to teach the individuals and the departments to interact one with another.”
D. The „Teacher” model – „ He spends enough time in the organization in order to pass over the needed knowledge and to evaluate them. When the “courses” and the “exams” end he will leave.”
Graphic 6b. The vision about the consultant’s activity (Composite index of preference)
* Calculated based on 188 questionnaires, with the measures of expressed options
The consultant’s activity is primarily defined by the characteristics of his essential non-intervening demarche. The consultant’s presence in the organization is determined by the problems it has and, therefore, his role is to solve them. His behavior is focused on monitoring the process of recovery of the organization; he shows it the way until the organization covers all the necessary steps in order to consider the problems solved. In that moment his role stops.
But until it stops, the consultant is responsible for bringing the organization into the competitive parameters. This fact does not happen directly only through his actions, but is a process determined by the consultant through the implication of the key components (departments, humans).
In other words, the consultant is a coach, a teacher who knows the organizational components which need to be modified in order to overcome the problems and his influence is mainly over these ones and not over the entire organization. When he is sure that the key points of the organization have been “prepared” for repairing, his role stops.
7. The vision about consultancy, in general
For me the finality of the consultancy is …
Graphic 7a. The vision about consultancy, in general (Compared presentation acceptance vs. rejection)
* Calculated based on 188 questionnaires, with the measures of expressed options
Also, the metaphors associated with the image of the ideal consultancy and its finality are well shaped. We notice even here the existence of some models which are exclusively accepted –the „educational” one which says that the final purpose of the consultancy is getting supplementary information, useful for the organization and it’s members; the „psychological” one which says that the finality of the consultancy is to consolidate the personality and health of the organization– but also exclusively rejected models – the „police officer” a model which says that the finality of the consultancy is to identify and punish the individuals responsible for the problems of the organization; the „fireman” model which says that the finality of the consultancy is to overcome the crisis ; the „designer / aesthetician” which says that the finality of the consultancy is the amelioration of the external image of the organization.
Graphic 7b. The vision about the consultancy, in general (Composite index of preference)
* Calculated based on 188 questionnaires, with the measures of expressed options
The most accepted model used for describing the ideal finality of the consultant’s organizational demarche is based on the concept of “consolidation”, evolution, optimizing. Therefore, we consider that we might gather the common traits of this set of metaphors in two possible “extra-metaphors”:
A. The organizational construction, at the end of a consultancy process, is an improved consolidated construction with functional improvements and, also, design improvements
B. Or the organizational personality, at the end of a consultancy process, is an auto-updated one – it knows its vulnerabilities but also its potential and it has the necessary instruments (incorporated in the system) for controlling the first and fructifying the last.
In the same context, , the objective of the consultancy is, therefore, a positive optimistic one, characterized by constructive thinking – the objective to overcome the present problems, to overcome the difficulties and to improve the self-adjusting mechanisms towards a level that will no more allow the appearance of such problems. In other words, the organizational system does not need to be simply helped to overcome the moment of crisis, but it has to be endowed in order not to get to such moments.
Conclusions
In brief, what would be the most important conclusions that we can draw at the final of this study?
First, the metaphors may successfully be a common language of the HR professionals, a new “Esperanto” that can be sometimes extremely useful for other professionals but especially, for the organizational consultants. Because, at the extreme, this may be a metalanguage which is not influenced by the numerous theoretical structures and specific versions of the multi-discipline and multi-paradigm system represented by the organizational sciences. In other words, a well chosen metaphor may best describe an organizational situation and in many times has the chance to be a messaje that travels directly from the sender to the receiver, without cognitive or experimental distorsions.
Second, the understanding of the organizational metaphors may be a very useful instrument, which may help defining and profoundly interpreting the perceptions and expectations that the human relations’ specialists have.
From among all this we will only mention the most important metaphors and the ones highly general.
For starter, we may say that there is an obvious difference between the way in which the organizations in a normal state are perceived and the ones in a “crisis” are, too.
The organization in a “normal” state is dodged-up in a way which has almost the clock precision – it is a complex mechanism, a large number of pieces which are all related and depend one to another. In addition, like for the great Swiss clocks, beyond the excellent technical knowledge, the clockmaker also needs a set of abilities that overpass the raw physics. These abilities are the intuition, the experience and the knowledge of internal life of the mechanisms.
The organization in a “crisis” is profoundly humanized, psychologizated, is an alive organism which needs not only correct and up-dated information, but also a good emotional flux. The organizational being needs therapy in order to overcome the crisis. From this perspective, the HR specialist is a psychotherapist who, in order to solve the problems, utilizes a mixture mostly composed of science and he has “the personal art”, as an accelerator, a hard to define dimension which comes from empathy, experience and intuition.
Another very interesting thing is related to the HR specialists’ expectations about the organizational consultants’ role. They should be a kind of “parental figures”, they should appear when the organization is in trouble and implicate themselves in the demarches of getting back the normal state:
(1) they should provide to the organization the needed instruments in order to self-adjust;
(2) they should guide the organization and its key members towards the assimilation and application of these instruments, all through a non-dominant but harsh style;
(3) they should become a “role model” through the charisma ant competence and, at last;
(4) they should respect the sign of “no entry” on the organization chamber when it functions correctly again.