I think they map quite easily as:
Power oriented → Amber "command and control"
Rule oriented → Orange "predict-and-control" (management by objectives)
Performance oriented → Green "culture and empowerment"
 See "Exhibit 1" table: https://www.strategy-business.com/article/00344?gko=10921
Although management and leadership do play an extremely important role in shaping culture, I wonder whether the kinds of tools and technology an organisation uses can also have a significant impact.
My guess is that creating transparent data sharing capabilities within an organisation would undermine the political point scoring that some people achieve with information hording/hiding. Being able to comment on data and processes from any part of an organisation would also encourage a culture of empowerment and orient individuals and teams towards the mission of the organisation rather than each individual unit. Technology could achieve this kind of impact if it were broadly adopted across the organisation.
What role do tools like Slack, Salesforce and Airtable have in shaping the culture of an organisation?
I'd also go further and say that the way the tools and the workflows within them are designed ends up having an influence on the organizations that use them (and of course, there's a feedback loop there as the organizations request changes/features).
This means there ends up being a real culture battle for transparency and accountability at the infrastructure and tooling level. Some people participating might not even consider the implications, but there are certainly vested interests who would prefer more closed/controlled environments, and competing interests who prefer more open and transparent environments which lend themselves to the kind of local fix / global fix / inquiry end of the spectrum mentioned in the article.
It _has to_ come from the group culture, which is empowered by the good will of the power structure, that comes from the top (investors, board, executive managers).
If it's not there, it will never be, change lanes.
Edit to add:
And if it _is_ there, it might go, because it's a fragile equilibrium (any change of course in the management/board can be a red flag).
Of course, the tools must have some political support. But they do enable status-quo changes.
Tools/tech just won't fix people issue.
> The most critical issue for organisational safety is the flow of information
Puts me in mind of management cybernetics, viable system model (VSM), requisite variety, etc. Would recommend a book by a friend of mine, Patrick Hoverstadt's The Fractal Organisation. Uses VSM to identify organisational antipatterns, rather like the article but much more fully developed.
Fixing problems requires knowing what is actually wrong with the organization. If the problem is that your organization is overcome with bureaucracy, then the solution start with enabling a subdivision sufficient autonomy to pursue objectives without being disrupted by meddlers and busy-bodies.
If we hear more stories of negative changes, then maybe the negative ones are more memorable, or people are more likely to comment on them.
The broader culture change takes more time, but the ship is definitely moving.
For example, Google wanted to transforms its organisation to be more friendly to business contracts. Seems like a good idea, but said transformation is destroying the generative culture and makes it more bureaucratic like Oracle or Microsoft.
Update for Apple: https://bonkersworld.net/organizational-charts-update
It introduced me to the word 'coup proofing'.
It's not clear whether the generative culture would be optimal if a different metric, such as return on investment, had been chosen.
Bill got a sweetheart deal from IBM, partially thanks to his mother serving on the United Way board with Jon Opel, chair of IBM.
Steve Jobs was adopted by Paul Jobs, a mechanic and a carpenter, and Clara Jobs, who was a payroll clerk for Varian Associates. Neither of his adoptive parents had the chance to attend college.
Jobs sold his minivan and Wozniak sold his HP scientific calculator to initially fund development of the Apple I.
If you've got the choice of being born to oldsters with extreme wealth and connections, I highly recommend it over fundraising.
> Edmondson’s study provides a striking confirmation, in a medical context, of the value of this scheme
It never hurts to remind practitioners of these issues, especially in organisations where safety has life-or-death consequences.