Discussion: View Thread

A new Integrating mechanism at the White House -- apologies for multiple copies

  • 1.  A new Integrating mechanism at the White House -- apologies for multiple copies

    Posted 05-18-2007 16:57

    First, let me say that I view an organizational structure as a command and control network, which filters information on the way up the structure and expands information on the way down the structure.  I like the horizontal organization structure, but realize that there are limits on the number of relationships a person can manage.  Effectively, we are pre-wired to manage approximately 150-200 relationships (span of control) (R.I.M Dunbar, "Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates," Journal of Human Evolution)(1992), vol. 20, pp. 469-493).  

     

    Now for my analysis of your question:

    From an organizational viewpoint, I see a minimum of 21 standard direct reports (information streams - the cabinet & cabinet ranking members) to the U.S. president.  This does not count the NSA, the leader of the intelligence Org, who does a daily briefing, or other special study groups.  Therefore, we can conclude that there are 21+  channels of organizational filtered information flowing to the president (the decision maker). The span of control is higher than a typical business, but should be reasonable given the number of relationships that a human can handle. Therefore, adding another direct report should NOT be an issue.

     

     This organizational structure (chain of command) establishes priorities on the information flowing through each channel.  In other words, some of the information, which may be important in understanding the overall picture, is filtered as it moves up through the organization.  To resolve the filtering issue, organizations have historically established alternative paths of communication to the key decision makers for highly important areas of concern. This is accomplished by creating task forces, special studies groups, etc.  Therefore, I conclude that if you want to limit organizational filtering of information, then an alternative channel of communication must be established, which bypasses the standard organizational structure. Therefore, if the objective is to reduce/limit the filtering of information on the war(s), then an appointment of a “War Czar” (Most likely a media label) or a Deputy National Security advisor is an appropriate action to take.

     

    Keith Morgan

    ----- Original Message -----
    Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 5:44 PM
    Subject: A new Integrating mechanism at the White House -- apologies for multiple copies

    Yesterday, the White House announced the appointment of a War Czar.
    Lt-General Lute is to serve in this important integrating role. He
    will report directly to the President, but he will be ranked as a
    Deputy National Security advisor.

    Imagine you are a member of the President's Board of Organizational
    and Leadership advisors (a body that does not yet exist, but let us
    imagine that it does). The President has belatedly (that is after
    making the decision) called on you for your advice as to whether this
    makes sense organizationally.

    Please consider the pro's and con's of the appointment and its
    position and give your advice as to whether this is sensible or
    whether alternative arrangements should have been made.

    Please reply to me on or off list and I will post the results of this
    inquiry later.

    Thank you for taking part in this exercise.


    Leader Net Moderator: Martin G. Evans martin.evans@utoronto.ca

    Change your profile or Search the Archive or leave the list here:
    http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/