Formalisation

<< previous page

Formalisation is the practice of planning and controlling activities through explicit policies and procedures.  All formal management systems share a common method: an activity or process is first reduced to its separate parts; each part is then articulated - preferably in measurable terms; finally, the separate parts are rationalised and re-assembled into an integrated whole. [10] The key assumption of formalisation is that complex situations can be managed more effectively if they are first simplified by breaking them down into separate parts by a process of analysis, progressing from one logical stage to the next: ‘What makes formal methods attractive is their simplistic nature: they are conceptually easy to grasp; they simplify, they structure information needs; they outline a series of next steps. In short the belief system of goal based planning provides a vehicle for ordering (and sometimes ignoring) complexities that would otherwise paralyse action.’ [10]

Clear, written procedures can provide a cohesive structure and create order in imprecise circumstances; they offer certainty in unpredictable situations; they may provide a more rigorous way forward for managers than simply following their instincts.  However, despite the benefits of formal methods applied to routine activities within organisations, there is no clear evidence that shows how the same methods can be completely transferred without change to an activity which is as elusive as good management.  There is a risk that prescriptive management systems, however well-intentioned, can simply drive managers towards a rote compliance with the documented clauses of a formal specification, rather than using the system as a model for instilling good practice and driving improved performance.

According to Mintzberg, a key limitation of formal methods in business management is that strategy formulation, which relies upon managers’ knowledge, intuition and creativity, is ultimately inaccessible to formal planning procedures and analytical methods - see inset.  He claims that: ‘Because analysis is not synthesis, strategic planning is not strategy formation.  Analysis may precede and support synthesis, by defining the parts that can be combined into wholes.  Analysis may follow and elaborate synthesis, by decomposing and formalising its consequences.  But analysis cannot substitute for synthesis … Formal management systems are only useful after the most important decisions have already been made … Ultimately, the term “strategic planning” has proved to be an oxymoron’. [10]

Nevertheless, some aspects of formal methods can usefully contribute to strategic planning.  Formalisation can provide support by focusing attention and ensuring clear objectives, keeping track of issues, disseminating information, generating commitment and promoting interaction, building consensus, collating data and providing useful checklists, scheduling activities and setting deadlines.  Beyond this point, the risk is that formalisation becomes a tool for imposing control or even substituting the manager’s role itself, rather than facilitating a process already in place and responding to it in its own terms [10] - see diagram on the opposite page.

next page >>