Bottom-up Approach

Description of Bottom-up Approach. Explanation.

Definition Bottom-up Approach. Description.

Bottom-up Approach is a democratic and consultative style of Decision-Making, Organizational Change and Leadership, in which employee participation is promoted at all levels the organization. This approach to leadership is associated with Flat Organization Structures.

Advantages of the bottom-up approach include:

Participation of employees (this is likely to influence the implementation of the plans in a positive way).
Motivation of employees.
Empowerment of Employees - Encourages creativity at lower levels
Ownership of employees (even if things initially don't work as expected, there is no blaming or pointing of fingers, but instead there is a willingness to be creative and get it right this time).
Does not require a lot of knowledge at the top level.
Leverages specialized knowledge which is present in the lower echelons of the organization.

Disadvantages of the bottom-up approach include:

Complexity (making a decision with just a few people is more simple).
Time-consuming (making a decision with just a few people will typically be faster).

Bottom-up Approach Forum (13)

Why are we not Stimulating Employee Creativity and Innovation?
"We seem to agree more or less what what needs doing to stimulating employee creativity and innovation...
So then, why aren't companies doing these things? Is it such hard work to listen to the employees?"

Ways to Stimulate Employee Creativity and Innovativeness
"Apart from a bottom-up approach,
1. In what ways can an organization stimulate creativity and innovation in its employees?
2. What conditions and strategies are needed to support these approaches?
Thanks for your ideas...

Editor: we'll add numbers to all ideas to make them easier referenceable and remove double ones to avoid this page becomes too cluttered and complex."

Is a Bottom-up Approach a Theory Y Approach?
"Theory X and Theory Y are 1960's theories of human motivation created and developed by Douglas McGregor at the MIT Sloan School of Management. They describe two very different attitudes toward workforce motivation. McGregor felt companies followed either one or the other approach.
- In Theory X, which has been proven counter-effective in most modern practice, management assumes employees are inherently lazy and will avoid work if they can and that they inherently dislike work.
- In Theory Y, management assumes employees may be ambitious and self-motivated and exercise self-control.
It is believed the talents of employees are under utilized in most organizations. Is Theory Y comparable to a bottom-up approach?"

Bottom Up Approach is a Product of the Holistic Concept of Management
"A holistic approach to management would of necessity incorporate the lowest rungs of the workforce in the management process. This would be because effective management denotes unity, i.e. shared values and shared responsibilities. That being so, the bottom up approach is a strategic move perceived by top management as absolutely required for management excellence. It is however, not necessarily a self-serving approach, but more of a cultural and transformational imperative. This general understanding was given effect to in the investment bank I worked for up to 2005, by grouping or organising the entire workforce into three cultural/excellence teams/committees - the Transformational Team; the Quantum Leap Team and the Executive Committee (ExCo)."

We should not AIways Involve Everybody
"I have experienced bottom-up approach in numerous cases and with good results in most cases. It is clear that this approach is not advised for all decisions. It is very important to distinguish the appropriate cases. For example it can not be done for cases in which the bottom levels have no information about the issue at hand.
And also it does not mean that all employee have to be participated in all decisions. In some cases only the employee of relevant departments should be engaged."

Suggest it to the President Forum
"Japanese company Mazda had what they called the "Suggest it to the presidents forum" where employees, especially on the bottom level, are encouraged to suggest new working methods to their president. This allowed them to quietly undertake a lot of corrective measures to sustain the company."

How the Bottom-up Approach Can Be Abused
"No illusion may be given to employees as a strategy to hide what is in reality autocratic management."

Bottom Up Approach is Time Consuming
"Time consuming? Yes, probably. So what. We should invest far more time in talking for a more human society. Not just talking as such but listening to each others arguments, not in order to convince, but to finally agree and decide which next steps should be taken."

Determine Organizational Structure First
"The bottom-up approach in my view, should be considered only after determining whether the structure within which it must be implemented, into a classification called "stars". The company is in a start-up phase, sustainability, revitalization, turnaround, closure / withdrawal.. These different situations determine the level of responsiveness and contribution of employees. Clearly, consult and decide is a viable solution to the extent that employees adhere sufficiently to the culture and the trajectory of the company (the living environment, compensation system, motivation and reward, career prospects, and especially recognition as a creator of value). See The First 90 Days: Critical Success Strategies for New Leaders at All Levels by Michael Watkins among other work."

Change Driven by Personal Agendas
"Organizational / cultural change is often driven by personal agendas - but these can be hampered by wily (Ed: ~shrewd, sneaky) others' personal agendas. Both of these personal agendas are invisible to the process. One could argue it can turn into a game of chicken?"

Quinn and Bottom-up Change
"Quinn in his 1996 book "Deep Change: Discovering the Leader Within" identifies that change occurs when you find the source of trouble. He also suggests that cultural change needs to start with personal change, even for the CEO. Quinn suggests organizations need to undo forces that want to preserve the status quo, especially if they involve the maintenance of hierarchies. He also suggests promoting technically competent and innovative people may not help change, if they do not understand the culture or politics of the organization.
Is it possible for the power of the leader to poison the workplace environment? I think it may. Sometimes resistance or barriers are created by a leader, who is not trusted or respected. Quinn appears to support bottom up change, as well as the need for transformational leaders. Pressure by leaders to conform, will result in resistance and often leads to failure of any change initiatives."

My Bottom Up Approach Definition
"My definition of the bottom up approach may not be a standard one - but it is how I use it...
The issue in initiating a new program or implementation of a new change is to get it accepted.
Instead of going top down starting a dialogue at lower levels of an organization and if the initiative is seen as important the lower level will introduce the initiative upward. Part of the approach is to get a core group invested in an initiative-- then it can go bottom up.
In addition in management auditing -- those who know most often are the lower level front line workers-- the information they give is very valuable.
Bottom up is reference to entry point -- such points can also be top down or middle up."

Bottom-up Approach in Projects
"How do you apply the bottom-up approach in any project? Thanks..."

New topic | Join our management network