How good a person is, if he has failed to create a redundancy for himself?

How does ‘making oneself redundant’ sound? It is not a new concept or thought, in fact, it had been prevailing for ages. I was first introduced to this about a decade and a half back, by my then manager. He told me that ‘You have to make yourself redundant, and that is the key to success’.

For me it was a profound statement, and I followed his advice; however, did I get the desired success? Well, it all depends on, how one defines the ‘Success’. Though, personally, I still believe in it, and abide by it.

The reason for my belief is that it is the only way to develop oneself, and others, such that it results in a maturing and possibly growing organization. To me, it is a reflection of,

• one’s self confidence, and his / her level in Meslow’s hierarchy of needs,
• degree of political environment in an organization,
• fairness in their appraisal criteria, and other HR practices,
• evaluation and the value of their award and recognition practices,
• the maturity of people that you hire and work with,
• the practices of employee engagement (local vs global), and
• the general health of working environment, over a period of time.

It might have not been the exhaustive list; however, it does provide sufficient information on the importance of it.
It is obvious that if people are struggling for their existence in company, the people in organization are stuck at first level of hierarchy of needs. Under such circumstances, where is the time to innovate, learn and think of broaden the foot print of the organization? The reason being, most of the time goes in maintaining the status quo, and refraining from trying out anything new, because of fear of failure and associated repercussions.

It stagnates everyone, the people at all levels, and resultantly the ‘Organization’. No one wants to innovate, everyone goes for incremental wins, which are safe to bet on, everyone gets in their shell for self-defense and being risk averse, learning takes back seat…Interestingly, even people being at the same level for years together, do not result in any efficiencies or organizational maturity. As the entire energy was getting consumed in maintaining the status quo, and fighting the battle of day to day survival. There is absolutely no time for self-reflection, learning, innovation, trying out new methods, tools, techniques or markets, making others learn from their own mistakes…all of this, just do not exist.

Who to blame for this fiasco? Why does this situation arise at the first place? What can be done to change?

Personally, I believe this situation arises, because a person might have either become so attached to the position, which he did not dare to relinquish. This does not mean a person is not capable, rather a person might have had some personal likings and inclinations, skewing the decision making, or it could also be true that a person is capable for the current role; however, does not have the capabilities to progress beyond. Either way, it would lead to above mentioned situation, sooner or later.

The degree of spread will depend on the position of the person, and the thinking of people hired, and people already in the system. It also depends upon the HR policies and organization culture and tolerance; however, those realizations either come in late, or are not effective. Once this gets established, it becomes the de-facto culture of the organization.

Even after all of this, it does not mean the organization gets rendered dysfunctional at once. No, as there will always be people in the system, who work and develop themselves. Though their tenure in organization will be short, and resultantly the state of being dysfunctional happens over a prolonged period. Once this is reached, bringing it back to nimble, agile, and learning organization will require some earth shattering changes, which can give the required thrust to come out of the state of suspended inertia.

So, what is the solution? It is very simple, keep watching the learning, maturity, agility, nimbleness, and more importantly the progression in organization. Do not ignore the feedback or ‘cooler talks’ from grass roots; invariably those would lead you to the actual problem source. Promote a culture of being redundant in current role, and learn and grow horizontally or vertically. This will weed out the people who want to remain in suspended inertia, and will encourage people to hire resources, who also believe in this thinking of ‘learning’.

The stated problem of stagnancy, and suspended inertia are the results of convoluted internal policies, politics, and strongly barricaded organization, which, though may want to grow, but cannot grow; unless, acted upon externally, or it creates some artificial measures to grow.