Many years ago, I came across the notion of the "Activity Trap", a phrase coined by George Odiorne in his book Management and the Activity Trap.
This is one of the dynamics of organization that I have recognized time and time again, both during my time as an in-house manager and latterly as a consultant. I’ve referred to it in passing in a number of posts but, prompted by a recent consulting assignment, I felt it was worthy of specific mention.
The nature of the Trap
Odiorne maintains that problems can reach a point at which they become ‘prized possessions’, about which we boast because of their magnitude, difficulty and perceived insolubility. At that point we can fall into the "activity trap" and become complacent about them – having lost the edge that might previously have driven us to find a solution.
The usual sequence is that a particular problem starts off as an irritant, for which a partial solution is found (like a work-around of some kind). This allows us to develop toleration for this and related problems (a "narcotic effect", as Odiorne calls it), until we reach the point at which we romanticize about them and complain about how others’ actions are stopping us from doing anything about them.
Escaping the Trap
To counter the Activity Trap, Odiorne identifies what he describes, somewhat quaintly, as "the six most efficacious factors in overcoming the activity trap, thereby revitalizing organizations". These are:
- Setting worthy goals at all levels.
- Getting commitment from people.
- Accepting responsibility for the results of one’s own (and, as leaders, others’) behaviours.
- Supporting and assisting one’s subordinates.
- Imparting a sense of mastery and satisfactory self-image to those who have acted responsibly and met their commitments.
- Relieving employees from goal pressures, by making provision for what, in today’s management lexicon, would be referred to as "employee wellbeing" and "work-life balance".
As regular readers of Informal Coalitions will be aware, I’m not a particular fan of universal prescriptions. But I can’t take exception to any of the above as guidelines of leadership practice. How these are made sense of and acted upon in the day-to-day life of the organization is, of course, critical to their ultimate effectiveness. And I guess that those caught up in their own form of the Activity Trap might immediately want to turn Odiorne’s list into a formal checklist, set of competencies, or assessment procedure!
In an earlier post - Who needs job descriptions? - I referred specifically to what I call "Contribution Statements" as one practical tool for helping individuals and organizational units "… escape from the activity trap of rigid job descriptions and procedural straight-jackets that too often limit performance – and ambition."
You and the Trap
To what extent might you and others in your organization be caught in the activity trap? And, if so, what actions are you prepared to take to get out of it?
Comments