Dec. 18 Study Guide

Book: Harvey, Jerry B. The Abilene Paradox and Other Meditations on Management. 1996. 150 pages. $15.61.

This is a book of seven essays/meditations/sermons about management issues. Harvey, an emeritus management professor, is a gifted story teller who uses parables and analogies to talk about organizational behavior issues, such as managing agreement, conformity, the importance of owning mistakes and forgiving others, and cooperation. I’ve provided summary information on three of the chapters here: “The Abilene Paradox: The Management of Agreement,” “Organizations as Phrog Farms,” and “Encouraging Future Managers to Cheat.”

The Abilene paradox (see the first entry in the webography below for a PDF of an earlier version of this essay) begins with the story of a Texas family whose members agree to a long, hot trip by car to Abilene. Upon their return home, they each learn that none of them wanted to take the trip. Harvey discusses the reasons why individuals in organizations agree to decisions that they don’t think are in the best interest of the organization. “An analysis of the dynamics underlying the Abilene Paradox opens up the possibility that individuals frequently feel as if they are experiencing coercive organizational pressures to conform when they actually are responding to the dynamics of mismanaged agreement,” Harvey writes (p. 29). Harvey suggests that the responsibility for avoiding the trip to Abilene doesn’t just reside with top management. He recommends that individuals within the organization can address the group, own up to their own discomfort with the situation, and ask others for their input.

Harvey provides a lot of generalizations about phrogs in the humorous but telling essay “Organizations as Phrog Farms.” (See link below to the blog by Madhukar Shukla for a summary.) He suggests that phrogs act primarily to improve their own situation, in isolation from others, and with limited communication. They are more interested in preserving the status quo than in advancing the organization. Instead, he suggests creating work environments that reward collaborative work, and encourage both personal responsibility and trust.

In the essay, “Encouraging Future Managers to Cheat,” Harvey argues that the academic definition of cheating, -- to give or receive aid from others – is contrary to a healthy, cooperative business model. Despite the criticism he received from his academic colleagues, he told his students that it was cheating NOT to give or receive aid from others.

About the Author: Jerry B. Harvey is a professor emeritus of management science at George Washington University in Washington, DC. Harvey has consulted for business, governmental, military, religious, educational, and voluntary organizations. In addition to The Abilene Paradox, he authored How Come Every Time I Get Stabbed In The Back, My Fingerprints Are On The Knife? His current research is about ethical, moral, and spiritual issues of organizational behavior. Dr. Harvey has a BBA and a Ph.D. in Social Psychology from the University of Texas at Austin.

Questions:

1. When was the last time you took a trip to Abilene in your personal life? In your professional life?
2. Is a trip to Abilene always symptomatic of group think? What else can lead a group down the road? 

3. How can an organization create a culture that allows employees to get off the road to Abilene? 

4. Are libraries at risk for turning employees into phrogs?
5. Should there be different definitions of cheating in the academic and professional communities?

A Short Webography:

http://www.xecu.net/schaller/management/abilene.pdf
This is a PDF of a paper by Jerry B. Harvey, “The Abilene Paradox: The Management of Agreement,” which is very similar to the signature chapter in the book.

http://alternativeperspective.blogspot.com/2005/12/organisations-as-phrog-farms.html
This blog entry, by Madhukar Shukla, summarizes the chapter, “Organizations as Phrog Farms.”

http://www.arl.org/diversity/leading/issue8/abilene.html
This is an article, “Revisiting the Abilene Paradox: Is Management of Agreement Still an Issue” by Kathryn J. Deiss, Association of Research Libraries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abilene_paradox
Wikipedia entry on the Abilene paradox.

http://www.uthscsa.edu/hr/train/AbileneOnline.pdf
PowerPoint presentation by Robert J. Sarvis, PhD, UT Health Science Center at San Antonio, Office of Human Resources.

http://www.pdma.org/visions/apr06/good-questions.php
Article in Online Visions Magazine from Thought Leaders of Product Development & Management, April, 2006 by Greg Githens.

Nov. 20 Discussion

Book: Hammond, Sue Annis. The Thin Book of Appreciative Inquiry. 2005

Preliminaries: Nine very congenial people attended this initial discussion, most of which were librarians. Varying degrees of management and leadership experience, were represented, and included those who had held elected and appointed political positions. The participants had time to chat over snacks before beginning the formal discussion. The discussion began with introductions, and a brief discussion of future books. While Laura Stone led this first discussion, other members agreed to facilitate future discussions.

Book Discussion: The group members began by summarizing the book. Everyone agreed that the book focused on the positive and offered a hopeful perspective – “optimism over pessimism.” One participant said she liked the idea of carrying something forward from the past, so that a plan or eventual activity has roots. The idea of building from past successes appealed to the discussion participants. The members also agreed that this focus was helpful on an individual basis when problem solving or planning an activity, and appreciated the importance of valuing differences.

Although the group appreciated this positive approach, they weren’t as sure that it would necessarily lead to a more successful planning approach. One participant talked about a corporate situation where people had tried very hard to do the right thing, to lead in a positive way, and to be responsive to all stakeholders, but ultimately failed because of factors beyond their control. The process didn’t necessarily address situations where the group may not know what they need to know. Nor did it provide a map or process for next steps. One participant said the book provided some good ideas for strategies, even if we weren’t sure it would lead to answers.

Something to Think About: In her list of assumptions, Annis says, “If we carry parts of the past forward, they should be what is best about the past.” How do we necessarily know what is best? How do we decide what has worked? Some “bests” may have been good for one group of people (for example, walk-in patrons) but not so good for everyone else (non-library users).