^{Background The three leverage points in any organization are purpose, relationships and structure. They are  conditioned by the three realities of social, technical and economic factors. There are 4 theories of organizational effectiveness, with all organizations falling  within these 4 theories or some matrix of them. these theories are: a) scientific management, b) organizational development, c) socio-technical, and, d) social scientific.}

^{On application, we observe no significant shift in management controls in the organization: no  performance improvement, no cost efficiencies. The enterprise continues to react to social, technical and economic factors as it has done in the past. Fortunately, its counterparts and competitors are doing the same thing, with the same results. Control of technical, economic resources and leverage points remains at the upper levels. The need for maintaining the controls and the rewards they bring are greater than the needs for organizational effectiveness (revenues, savings, profits, customers, survival).}

This cycle of need is good for the consultants and change agents, but, not for the organization.  Valuable resources in money, time and energy are expended in trying to get it right, taking away from its mandate. This condition is common in large organizations, corporations and government departments.

In a world of increased rates of change and opportunity, the ratchet response to change accelerates the rate of increase of the relevancy gap. The culture reinforces stasis, incrementalism with innovation of the adaptive, adoptive kind and newness a better internal mouse trap not a shift of relevance. This environment reduces the capacity to shift or change at the rate of the sector. This makes the organization less capable of responding to the dynamics of its sector, increasing the relevancy gap and eventually demanding critical action (eg: bankruptcy, buyout, layoffs, reduced budgets). The ratchet response must be replaced by one which builds on the dynamic variables in the organization. As such, an organization needs to exploit its internal capacity to establish a culture of relevancy.

There is a way to achieve the benefits of productive workplaces while recognizing the needs of senior management for incrementalism and control. Systemic Creativity^TM is a set of processes by which organizational relevancy is driven from within; in anticipation of and in immediate response to the dynamic pressures of social, technical and economic factors. It was developed in response to the identified failure of the empowerment, team concept and participation movements of the late 20th Century in large organizations. Systemic Creativity^TM simulates the dynamic efficiencies of the Partaking Organization in the hierarchical, bureaucratic institution.

Systemic Creativity^TM aligns a cross-section of people with the critical skills and perspectives into a steering team which decides on the purpose, relationships, structure and resource allocation of the organization. The process identifies these people, brings them together, determines the outcomes, measures the results, forecasts critical points and cycles participants through the steering team as needs are identified. As with the environment, it is a dynamic process which approximates the changes in the sector; keeping the organization current.

By implementing Systemic Creativity^TM the establishment:
• builds the capacity for change from within;
• balances change with controls;
• ensures a better set of solutions for organizational survival and growth, and;
• creates a culture of continuous improvement consistent with the dynamic pressures from the outside, ie: same rate of change.

Such an internal process creates the capacity for adjusting to external pressures as and before they occur. This ensures relevance at any point in time. It provides for the effective use of resources eliminating the ratchet effect and reliance on change agents. The Systemic Creativity^TM Steering Team will be a standing group with changing membership across time. By its existence the enterprise will be well positioned to respond to the evolution of delivering products and services on demand, freeing up managers to manage and providing an environment of receptiveness to shifting demands.

We choose service over self-interest most powerfully when we build the capacity of the next generation to govern themselves.

Ensuring service over self-interest. Systemic Creativity^TMfocuses our attention on aspects of our workplaces that have been most difficult to change, namely the distribution of power, purpose and rewards. Systemic Creativity^TMis the search for the means of experiencing partnership, empowerment and service within an organization. It focuses primarily on the policies, practices, structures and achievement measures that constitute the organization.

- A.P. Day, Systemic Creativity^TM-Balancing Greatness  and Maintenance, manuscript, 2000.

The Training and Education Division with the Management Services Division will deliver the Systemic Creativity^TM program. In consultation with the lead senior manager and designated staff, we will develop the Systemic Creativity^TM Steering Team criteria, processes and procedures. Team members will be selected by the lead senior manager and designated staff after review by a joint Client - Management Services Division Committee. Key components of the process are:
1. Designate the core competencies for the team
- technical/functional skills
- problem-solving, decision making skillls
- collaboration/influencing skills
- communication skills
- life-long learning criteria
2. identify the internal players and leaders for the team
3. A Systemic Creativity^TM Steering Team which will provide:
- customer relations identification and management system
- a process of maximizing applicability of delivery model effectiveness
i. Compatible goals between team-based systems and operations
ii. Team work is supported
iii. There are champions with vision
iv. Flexible timetables
v. Core competency training supported for all members
4. A process of department evolution to better anticipate and respond to external changes
5. Measures of success for innovation and a culture of relevance
- Clear Goals - end results not how to get there
- Clear Roles - task and process skills balanced for goals
- Clear Accountability - trust and commitment to the end results
- Practice-based performance criteria
- Management proactively anticipate and find solutions for external factors

The Training and Education Division will adapt the Systemic Creativity™ Training Program for the Client recognizing the unique needs of the Client. Our facilitators will deliver the one (1) week course. The facilitators will observe, facilitate and provide guidance on the effectiveness of five (5) meetings of the Client Systemic Creativity™ Steering Team. The Client-SCST will submit four (4) of its reports to the facilitators for critical feedback. The results and recommendations from these practical reviews will be presented to the lead senior manager for information and action, if necessary.

The tendency for an organization of innovation and relevance to devolve into complacency is the basis for more failures than any other factor. Periodic revisiting and renewal of the organization is vital to maintain a culture of relevance.

- Ian E. Bush, from Leading Edge Organizational Development, manuscript, 1998.

Bush and Associates Consulting through its Benchmarking Services Team will perform these reviews at the mid-point of the strategic plan and for designated periodic reviews. This will provide the enterprise with timely feedback on the effectiveness of its internal system to adjust its action plan to achieve the strategic objectives.