O slideshow foi denunciado.
Utilizamos seu perfil e dados de atividades no LinkedIn para personalizar e exibir anúncios mais relevantes. Altere suas preferências de anúncios quando desejar.
ORGAHEAD - Modeling Network Adaptation as Simulated Annealing Process 2002
Organizational Adaptation <ul><li>This study only concerned with formal structure </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Change precipitate...
Organizational  Adaptation <ul><li>Organizational change </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Hiring, Firing, Restructuring, Training </l...
Adaptation and Environment <ul><li>If environment remains static, eventually a suitable (or optimal) profile will be found...
Optimization <ul><li>Problem space: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Organizational structure (network) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sk...
Orgahead Structure ORGAHEAD Knowledge Agent/Knowledge 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 ...
ORGAHEAD Simulated annealer (expectation learning) + adaptive agents (experiential learning) STRATEGIC 1  0  1  1  0  0  1...
Radar Task Decision:  Friendly or Hostile? Speed > Mach 1? Transponder Code Correct? NATO? Weapons Armed? Heading into our...
Agent Decisions
Tasks
Adaptive Agents <ul><li>Each agent sees a portion of information </li></ul><ul><li>Classify pattern of incoming informatio...
Internal Representations/ Operations Analysts Managers CEOs Inputs “ 1 ” 1  0  1  1  0  1  1  1  0 1 0 0 = 0 1 0 1 = 0 1 1...
Orgahead Strategic Level <ul><li>Organization is trying to optimize performance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Performance=Percenta...
Strategic:  Simulated Annealing metropolis criterion: p j  ( k,   ,  Temp 0 ) =  e  -cost*k/Temp Temp i  =    ·  Temp i-...
Methods of change <ul><li>Add Personnel </li></ul><ul><li>Fire/eliminte personnel </li></ul><ul><li>Change organizational ...
Model Algorithm <ul><ul><li>Get initial organization </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Train agents in initial organization </li>...
Performance over Time
Sequence Analysis adaptive organizations : HHH T F TT FFFFF HHH T H FF H F T F H FFF H F H T H F H F HH F H H T HH T HHHH ...
Correlating Performance and Activity
Firing can Hinder Perfromance
… But Not Always
Maladaptive Hiring and Adaptive Firing
Dynamic Adaptation
Adaptive Organizational Structures April 2002 Ju-Sung Lee  -  CMU – CASOS – SDS - ICES
Adaptive Structures with Tasks April 2002 Ju-Sung Lee  -  CMU – CASOS – SDS - ICES
Maladaptive Structures April 2002 Ju-Sung Lee  -  CMU – CASOS – SDS - ICES
Maladaptive Structures with Tasks April 2002 Ju-Sung Lee  -  CMU – CASOS – SDS - ICES
Scaling Up ORGAHEAD <ul><li>Currently 2 to 45 DMU's  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Could be individuals or groups or divisions </l...
levels of analysis <ul><li>Multiple levels of analysis possible </li></ul><ul><ul><li>JTF (joint task force) </li></ul></u...
Illustrative high level indicators or data that can be used <ul><li>Number of groups </li></ul><ul><li>Size of groups </li...
Applications Hypothetical 3-45 Adaptive Organizations Questionnaire Schwab Questionnaire 683, 9 divisions SGI Questionnair...
Próximos SlideShares
Carregando em…5
×

15 Orgahead

883 visualizações

Publicada em

Publicada em: Negócios, Educação
  • Seja o primeiro a comentar

  • Seja a primeira pessoa a gostar disto

15 Orgahead

  1. 1. ORGAHEAD - Modeling Network Adaptation as Simulated Annealing Process 2002
  2. 2. Organizational Adaptation <ul><li>This study only concerned with formal structure </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Change precipitated by executive decisions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Limited number of change strategies </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Not all strategies can be considered at a time </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Greedy” selection criteria, with some probability of risky personnel changes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Thus - locally satisficing process </li></ul></ul>
  3. 3. Organizational Adaptation <ul><li>Organizational change </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Hiring, Firing, Restructuring, Training </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Employees learn through experience with task </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Adaptation performance measured against real-world results </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Stock market performance, profits </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Minimizing costs, maximizing production </li></ul></ul>
  4. 4. Adaptation and Environment <ul><li>If environment remains static, eventually a suitable (or optimal) profile will be found </li></ul><ul><li>As time goes on, organization less likely to make risky moves </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Institutionalization </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Competency traps </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Unwillingness to accept new technologies </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. Optimization <ul><li>Problem space: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Organizational structure (network) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Skill set of personnel </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Task assignment </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Step function: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Organizational change </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Fitness function: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Performance, profit, cost </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Goal: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Optimize fitness function </li></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Orgahead Structure ORGAHEAD Knowledge Agent/Knowledge 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 Other performance and vulnerability measures Task Assignment TASK Communication team1 team2 accuracy team1 team2 workload
  7. 7. ORGAHEAD Simulated annealer (expectation learning) + adaptive agents (experiential learning) STRATEGIC 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 OPERATIONAL time task organizational decision Forecasting: Current performance Possible change Expected performance Who knows who Who knows what actual design change actual performance experience information from others information from task feedback Feedback Recommendations
  8. 8. Radar Task Decision: Friendly or Hostile? Speed > Mach 1? Transponder Code Correct? NATO? Weapons Armed? Heading into our airspace? ...
  9. 9. Agent Decisions
  10. 10. Tasks
  11. 11. Adaptive Agents <ul><li>Each agent sees a portion of information </li></ul><ul><li>Classify pattern of incoming information </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Raw SIGINT or </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Processed information from below </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Classify as “Friendly of Hostile” </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Make decisions based on past experience </li></ul><ul><li>Receive feedback on accuracy of their predictions </li></ul><ul><li>Adjust internal knowledge (experience) </li></ul>
  12. 12. Internal Representations/ Operations Analysts Managers CEOs Inputs “ 1 ” 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 = 0 1 0 1 = 0 1 1 0 = 0 1 1 1 = 0 0 0 = 0 0 1 = 1 1 0 = 1 1 1 = 0 0 0 = 0 0 1 = 1 1 0 = 0 1 1 = 1 0 0 = 0 0 1 = 1 1 0 = 1 1 1 = 0 0 0 0= 0 0 1 0= 1 1 0 0= 1 1 1 0= 0 0 0 1= 1 0 1 1= 1 1 0 1= 1 1 1 1= 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 • Agent constraints: 1. Limited memory 2. Maximum of seven resources/inputs Decision Rule: If # of 1 ’s > # of 0 ’s, then “ 1 ” Else “ 0 ” • Organizational activities: 1. After every n tasks, propose a change: hire, fire, or change ties. 2. Test change. 3. Accept all good changes and some bad changes. • Agent activities: 1. Update memory table based on correctness of final decision. 2. Report truthfully. April 2002 Ju-Sung Lee - CMU – CASOS – SDS - ICES
  13. 13. Orgahead Strategic Level <ul><li>Organization is trying to optimize performance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Performance=Percentage of correct tasks </li></ul></ul><ul><li>CEO alters structure to optimize structure in response to performance </li></ul>
  14. 14. Strategic: Simulated Annealing metropolis criterion: p j ( k,  , Temp 0 ) = e -cost*k/Temp Temp i =  · Temp i-1 where 0.0 <  < 1.0 cost j = current perf j - lookahead perf j 1-dimensional solution landscape heuristic April 2002 Ju-Sung Lee - CMU – CASOS – SDS - ICES
  15. 15. Methods of change <ul><li>Add Personnel </li></ul><ul><li>Fire/eliminte personnel </li></ul><ul><li>Change organizational network </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Redesign reporting structure </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Enable interaction (I.e. create edge) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Change knowledge network </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Retask personnel </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Training </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Change in workload (stress) </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Model Algorithm <ul><ul><li>Get initial organization </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Train agents in initial organization </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Generate org. performance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Choose a way to alter structure </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Forecast expected change in performance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Decide whether to accept proposed change </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Drop temperature </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Repeat </li></ul></ul>
  17. 17. Performance over Time
  18. 18. Sequence Analysis adaptive organizations : HHH T F TT FFFFF HHH T H FF H F T F H FFF H F H T H F H F HH F H H T HH T HHHH TT F T H T H T H TTTTT H T F T F TTTTTT F H T F TT HH F HH F H FF H T H TTT F HH T HH F T F T F H FFF T H F HH T F HH T T H TTTTTTTT H TTTTTT H F T H T H TTTTTT F TT HHHHH TT TTTTTTTTT H TTTTTTTT H TT H F TTTTTTT F T H TTTT H T T H T H F T H TTT H TT H TTTTTTTTTT H TTT H T F TTTTTTT F T T H T H TTT H TTTT H TTT HH F T FFF TTTT FF T FF TTTTTT F T TT F HH T H TT F TTTT F T F TT F H T FF TTT HH TTTTT H T H TT T H TT H TTTTTT H TT HH TTTTTTT H TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT H F T FF TTT H TTTT HH T H F T H T F H TT H TT FF TT FF TTTT F maladaptive organizations : TTTTTTT H TT F TTTTT H FFF H F T F TT F T H T FF TT H T H F TT TTTTT H F T F TTTT H TT F T FF T FFFFFF T F H T F TT FF TT F HHHHHH F HHHH F H F H F HH F H TT H F H FFFFF T HH F HH F T F T F TTT F T FF H F HHHHH T H T H F TT H FF T FF H FF H F H F H T F TTT H T FF HH F HH TT FF H TT H F TT F H T F H T H FF H T F HH TT T F TT F TT F T H TT F T F TT FF H T F H F T F H T FF H F T H F H F H F F T FF TTTT FF H FF T FFFF H FFFFFFF H F HH F H F H F HH FF H F TT F H F H T HH T HHH T H T F H TT H FF T H F H T H T FFFFFF H T H T H TTTTTTTTT FF TTTTT F TT F HHH T HH TT F H FF H FFF H F HHH T FF H TT HH FFFFFFF HH F H FFF T F HH FF HHH F H F H F too many firings more structural changes than turnover T = Tie Change H = Hire F = Fire
  19. 19. Correlating Performance and Activity
  20. 20. Firing can Hinder Perfromance
  21. 21. … But Not Always
  22. 22. Maladaptive Hiring and Adaptive Firing
  23. 23. Dynamic Adaptation
  24. 24. Adaptive Organizational Structures April 2002 Ju-Sung Lee - CMU – CASOS – SDS - ICES
  25. 25. Adaptive Structures with Tasks April 2002 Ju-Sung Lee - CMU – CASOS – SDS - ICES
  26. 26. Maladaptive Structures April 2002 Ju-Sung Lee - CMU – CASOS – SDS - ICES
  27. 27. Maladaptive Structures with Tasks April 2002 Ju-Sung Lee - CMU – CASOS – SDS - ICES
  28. 28. Scaling Up ORGAHEAD <ul><li>Currently 2 to 45 DMU's </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Could be individuals or groups or divisions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Model is extensible to several hundred – but needs programming </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Currently 1-3 levels </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Can be at any meaningful division </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Need not be formal authority </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Model is extensible to several hundred – but needs programming </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Currently one task at a time </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Needs to be converted to multiple co-temporal tasks </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Currently max task complexity is 18 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>If need more complexity need a different architecture </li></ul></ul><ul><li>To build a larger, more complex organizations </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Model at the cell or division level </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Build multiple orgahead models – one for each group, cell or division and combine results </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Transactive memory </li></ul></ul>
  29. 29. levels of analysis <ul><li>Multiple levels of analysis possible </li></ul><ul><ul><li>JTF (joint task force) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Top management </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Group/team </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Overall organization </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Multiple levels of input data possible </li></ul><ul><ul><li>None </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Solely group/cultural parameters </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>High level indicators/strategies for change </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Detailed knowledge networks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Or combination of any of the above </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Level of data influences specificity of predictions generated in analysis </li></ul>Nodes in ORGAHEAD or Construct are DMU’s people agents groups organizations or some combination
  30. 30. Illustrative high level indicators or data that can be used <ul><li>Number of groups </li></ul><ul><li>Size of groups </li></ul><ul><li>Information on task assignment or job labels </li></ul><ul><li>Key resources used or services provided </li></ul><ul><li>Number or types of divisions </li></ul><ul><li>Average level of education, tenure, gender, age, race, religion, language </li></ul><ul><li>Information on locations </li></ul><ul><li>Cohesion within and among groups </li></ul><ul><li>Educational areas </li></ul>
  31. 31. Applications Hypothetical 3-45 Adaptive Organizations Questionnaire Schwab Questionnaire 683, 9 divisions SGI Questionnaire 17-150, 35 units Nursing Study Archival Data 9-12 Crisis Response Units Questionnaire and Experiment 4-6 NPS teams Field Observations 5 cells Comcargru Data Number of Agents/divisions Study

×