🎭 Live Mentor Debate

My department's been dysfunctional for years, and I've just been promoted to lead it. The previous manager blamed the problems on the team. The team blames the previous manager. HR blames both. Everyone has a different story, and I don't know who to believe (or trust). I've been told to "fix the culture," but I'm not sure culture is the problem. It could be the systems are broken—unclear processes, contradictory incentives, no accountability mechanisms. When I suggested structural changes, people say I'm "not addressing the real issue" which is "trust". Do I focus on fixing the people and relationships, or do I redesign the systems and processes? Can you even have good culture without good systems? Or good systems without good culture? — Engineer Trying to Fix Humans in Hartford

Leadership & Management Debate: Systems versus culture. James Watt's engineering mind meets Madison's institutional wisdom.

Debaters:James WattJames MadisonModerated by Stella Sharpe

penn7

"My department's been dysfunctional for years, and I've just been promoted to lead it. The previous manager blamed the problems on the team. The team blames the previous manager. HR blames both. Everyone has a different story, and I don't know who to believe (or trust). I've been told to "fix the culture," but I'm not sure culture is the problem. It could be the systems are broken—unclear processes, contradictory incentives, no accountability mechanisms. When I suggested structural changes, people say I'm "not addressing the real issue" which is "trust". Do I focus on fixing the people and relationships, or do I redesign the systems and processes? Can you even have good culture without good systems? Or good systems without good culture? — Engineer Trying to Fix Humans in Hartford" James Watt, you've said "Improvement comes from careful refinement of what exists—study the problem before solving it" — but I want specifics. Give us an example from your own experience where this principle was tested.

James Madison

This "Engineer Trying to Fix Humans" faces a predicament akin to designing a government: one must balance the interests of the parts to achieve the good of the whole. To focus solely on individuals without attending to the structure is to invite the very factions we sought to avoid in forming our republic. A reliance on "trust" alone is as precarious as a government without checks and balances. Therefore, I would suggest examining the processes and incentives within the department before attempting to alter its culture. For, as we argued in *Federalist No. 51*, "ambition must be made to counteract ambition." Could clear processes and accountability foster a more cooperative spirit?

James Watt

That's a fair question. I must concur with Mr. Madison. When tasked with improving Newcomen's engine, I began by meticulously studying its flaws. It was not enough to simply wish for a better machine; I had to understand precisely why it was inefficient. Only then could I devise targeted improvements, like the separate condenser, which addressed the root of the problem rather than merely masking its symptoms.

Want to join the conversation?