Note: For those not initiated in the PAEI and capi concepts, and the lifecycle theory please read: Ichak Kalderon Adizes: Managing Corporate Lifecycles (Santa Barbara, California: Adizes Institute Publications, 1999).
Now, the sequence of PAEI roles in growing should be: first (I) should grow and be large enough, sufficient enough for the (E) to emerge.
(E) consumes a lot of energy and (I) creates a fertile ground in the sense that energy is available to innovate, to create. (I) gives maximum energy. Disintegration wastes energy. It is not strange that Artists are narcissistic. They are control freaks. Why? So that all energy is focused on creation.
(E) creates the ideas which when commercialized and monetized, generate the (P) which now needs to get organized, and thus (A) will emerge.
Thus, the sequence of growing is: (I)> (E)> (P)> (A).
It is long-term efficiency, (I), followed by long-term effectiveness, (E), mirrored thereafter by short-term effectiveness, (P), and short-term efficiency, (A). (Why the mirror effect, I still do not know.)
Applications: Show me socio-political instability, low (I), and I will show you low innovation followed by low economic growth.
For instance, developing countries suffer from low economic performance. Aid, subsidized (P), is not the answer. It only masks the problem like a headache drug masks a headache disease.
What they are missing is (I). Often they have internal religious or tribal warfare. Or suffer from ubiquitous corruption, which is another cause of disintegration. Without (I), (E) will suffer. All energy is wasted. There will be no indigenous innovation and no external investments either. Necessarily that impacts their (P), their indigenous economic performance.
The sequence of aging is reverse. First sigma goes down.
Sigma is the integration of (I) of PAEI and (c) of capi. (I) is manifested in Mutual Respect. (c) is manifested in Mutual Trust. If either (I) or/and (c) decrease, MT&R suffers, energy gets wasted, and eventually (E) suffers - ultimately, it will be reflected in a declining (P).
What causes MT&R to go down?
We know what impacts Mutual Trust and Respect:
• common vision and values,
• functional PAEI diversified organizational structure,
• collaborative decision making process and
• mature, self actualizing people.
Thus, one major reason for organizational aging is that the organizational structure did not change to reflect changes in the environment it is operating in. Or it is not structured right to foster all PAEI roles to be performed.
Another reason is that new people who do not command and/or grant trust and respect join the company.
The third reason, with challenges from the environment caused by change and people changes, the corporate values vision becomes blurred.
Fourth, without a systematized and ongoing nourished process for collaborative decision-making and with pressures of time and complex problems that need to be solved, the collaborative process of decision-making will suffer.
Each of the above factors cause aging; together they accelerate the aging.
We can see the causes of organizational aging in another different way: as the organization did not change over time, although it needed to reflect new realities, A=T=R alignment gets disturbed, people's commitment decreases, it reduces the energy people contribute to the organization, and that causes aging too i.e., less energy is available for (E). Eventually (P) will go down.
If (P) is low over time, it will starve (A) from resources which will become dysfunctional anyway, because with change, (A) gets outdated, and unless there is an external source of resources, (A) will crumble. The end result is organizational death.
Interesting to analyze the behavior of capi during growing and aging.
In growing, capi is first personalized. Then, it gets institutionalized. In aging, the process is in reverse: institutionalized capi breaks down and converts itself to be personalized i.e. a dictator emerges.
Application: I suggest the USA as a system is aging.
It is not a mission and values that integrate us as much anymore. MT&R are in decline.
Obama got elected because of the mass of African Americans who voted for him regardless of his agenda. Just because of the color of his skin.
In the next election, if Hillary Clinton gets elected, it will be because of a massive vote by women who will vote for a woman president regardless of what her agenda is.
Voting by color of skin or gender and not by agenda is a sign of disintegration.
Respect is going down manifested by the increasing adversary relations between the Democratic and Republican parties.
Trust is going down manifested by the Occupy Wall Street phenomena and the declining portion of population that is voting. The trust in politicians is evaporating.
As (I) goes down (E) will eventually go down.
Because without MT&R, energy gets depleted, internal disintegration goes up, and energy left for external integration goes down. As energy goes down, (E) will decline. Another country that will be more (I)ntegrated will take over leadership of the world. That country does not exist yet but will emerge. So far, India has (I) problems. So do China, Brazil, South Africa, and Russia, the BRICS countries which many consider as the candidates.
In the USA, as (I) is going down now, (E) will go down eventually, and thereafter (P) will go down. The (A) is overwhelming the system. It is manifested by mushrooming national debt used to finance government machinery and its promises to the population.
As (P) declines, a witch hunt against whoever is the president will be the norm. I predict the next president of the USA will have lower polls than any president in the history of the USA.
The probability of democracy crumbling and a dictator by behavior being elected is high because capi from institutions gets personalized as the system ages. There are already signs of that happening. Obama is being accused of making unilateral decisions, bypassing Congress.
Ichak Kalderon Adizes
Again, for those not initiated in the PAEI and capi concepts, and the lifecycle theory please read: Ichak Kalderon Adizes: Managing Corporate Lifecycles (Santa Barbara, California: Adizes Institute Publications, 1999).