Unique Features: The collateral organization is unique in that it usually is not populated just with experts who purportedly are best able to address a specific problem; rather, the collateral organization typically involves a whole host of people (often the entire organization). It seems that the intractable problem often is intractable precisely because it is not clear who the experts really are with regard to this specific problem.
To make sense of this rather bold statement regarding expertise, it is important at this point to distinguish between problems and puzzles that are to be found in all systems (Bergquist and Mura, 2011). Unlike organizational puzzles that have clearly defined parameters and solutions that are readily accessible to the “right” people with expertise in a specific area, organizational problems (and even more challenging organizational dilemmas and polarities) are multi-tiered and often operate in what Miller and Page (2007) call a rugged and dancing landscape. All hands must be on deck when an organization or community faces such a challenge. Who knows where the answer can be found. What we do know is that an adequate answer is more likely to be found when the breeze of freedom is swirling around those participating in a collateral organization.
Establishing: The following steps are typically taken in forming a collateral organization. Leaders of an organization or community must first acknowledge that the usual way of doing things is not necessarily of greatest value when applied to certain types of institutional challenges. It is important to emphasize that this doesn’t mean that the organization or community will abandon its regular way of operating (to be replaced by the new collateral organization): “we will still hold on to our tried-and-true, proven way of being as an organization. But we will be adding something.” We can hold on to the old while embracing the new. This is the magic of collateral designs.
Second, a set of values and a compelling vision must be articulated concerning what the collateral organization must do if it is to be successful. As I have already mentioned, a collateral organization should not be focused on a specific problem. Rather it should provide a new approach to the identification and management or resolution of a cluster of interrelated problems that have eluded successful management or resolution via the standard mode of operation in this organization. Collateral organizations are intended to address what Miller and Page (xxxx) call complex issues. While complicated issues involved many parts, complex issues involve many parts that are intricately interwoven. Intractability usually concerns complexity rather than complication and is often best addressed through the use of a collateral system that operates in a new way that introduces unique perspectives and practices.
The third and fourth steps will vary quite a bit depending on the nature and purpose of the collateral organization. The third step concerns specification of measurable objectives, along with specification of assigned tasks. This step might be inappropriate if the collateral organization is intended as an “open space” for consideration of multiple problems as they emerge. An open space is particularly appropriate if this collateral organization is to be a safe place where a whole host of lingering problems can be identified and discussed. The fourth step concerns the people who will be invited to participate in this collateral organization. At one extreme we find the collateral organization that is set up specifically for members of the C-Suite or perhaps from those from the C-Suite together with members of the governing board. At the other end is the collateral organization that is open to all members of the organization or community (and perhaps even stakeholders both inside and outside the organization or community).
