The Path of Least Resistance for Managers

Citation

Bellizzi, J.A. (2000), "The Path of Least Resistance for Managers", European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 232-233. https://doi.org/10.1108/ejim.2000.3.4.232.1

Why do firms have periods of success but encounter difficulty in sustaining that success? Why do some firms take one step forward but before taking another step forward, take one backwards? According to Robert Fritz, organizations are just doing what comes naturally. They are taking the path of least resistance and oscillate back and forth like a rocking chair. Fritz reminds readers that the rocking chair was designed for such back and forth motion. As energy is expended to move the rocking chair in one direction, it eventually loses momentum which then moves the chair back in the other direction.

Too many organizations operate with a structure more like a rocking chair. They apply energy which moves them forward but something in the organization pulls them back in the other direction. The net effect is wasted energy, wasted time, periods of advancement, followed by periods of retrenchment, and the constant frustration of organizational oscillation. Fritz recommends a structure more like a car or an ocean liner and less like the rocking chair because the car and the ocean liner are designed to move in one sustained direction.

Fritz uses some wonderful analogy to help readers see this organizational malady that results in oscillation. To demonstrate that advancing organizations can still succeed, even with a few pockets of oscillation, he describes an ocean liner moving in a sustained direction, even though there are rocking chairs on her deck. Fritz claims that such an organization advances because its dominant organizational structure is that of the ocean liner and its rocking chair structure is subordinate. However, the opposite is possible and could be problematic. Just imagine an ocean liner mounted on a large rocking chair!

The title’s theme, path of least resistance, describes how people and organizations make decisions regarding their actions. However, it only describes movement that is influenced by minimizing energy expended. As a mountain stream flows down hill, it takes the path of least resistance. This will be the path that takes the water to the base of the mountain with the least amount of effort, given the obstacles naturally encountered along the way. Often organizations find it in their best interest to expend more energy to reroute the mountain stream. Instead of flowing straight or nearly straight down hill, there may be some perceived value in rerouting the stream so that it moves around the mountain in circles, while slowly progressing down hill. Water from the stream could then be enjoyed by more of the communities and people residing on the mountain.

Expanding water usage represents what Fritz calls “where a firm wants to be”. From this goal, Fritz tells readers that organizations must answer with “where are we now?” The ensuing analysis results in actions designed to reach the goal which in this case may be rerouting the stream from essentially a straight, quick down hill direction to one that moves around the mountain several times, and slowly down hill. The path of least resistance, therefore, needs to be understood in the context of organizational goals. If the goal is to get the water to the bottom of the mountain, minimal effort is necessary. However, if the goal is to bring the water into closer proximity to more communities and residents on the mountain, considerably more effort is needed. I believe the latter is what Fritz has in mind. In both cases, the water will flow according to the path of least resistance, but the organizational goals will affect the obstacles faced by the water as it flows down hill. Fritz does not want to suggest that the easy way out is always the direction taken.

Much of this goal setting and examination of current situation in order to dream up an action plan is not really new. Neither are many of the other management concepts advanced in the book like: goals must be clear to everyone; multiple goals must be consistent; if senior management does not identify a clear sense of direction, each side of a conflict will think its approach is the best one; if goals and action plans leave room for interpretation, each group in the company may put its own spin on things leading to oscillation.

Nevertheless, the message of the book is a good one and there are enough unique contributions that make the book well worth reading. The concept of tension that forces people and organizations in a given direction that results in success that surprisingly pulls us back in the other direction is a notion I have not seen in other works. Fritz explains that the initial success reduces the level of tension initially perceived which gave rise to a particular action plan. The reduced tension, leads to a reduction in effort and as tension is perceived elsewhere, organizations constantly find themselves moving back and forth, as if they were in a rocking chair.

The author has included many actual organizational experiences which help readers see real applications. Fritz’s writing style moves the reader along smoothly from chapter to chapter. Each chapter concludes with a “Quick Review” which I did not find particularly useful but other readers may enjoy. The only problem I have with the work is the claim made early in the book (p. 44) that an organization’s business strategy becomes the platform for goal setting. My thinking moves in the opposite direction. However, I was pleased to read, a few pages later, that desired outcomes (goals) are advanced by Fritz as the first thing organizations must think about in guiding the development of business strategy. I certainly agree and I would certainly recommend this book to others, especially to those trying to run organizations without any formal education in business strategy or organizational behavior.