Most of you did the exercise on command and control strategies very well! In the video bellow, Professor Hans de Bruijn tells more on his impression.

The one-pager below gives an overview of the strategies that the leaders in the exercise used to reach their goal. It is not an exclusive list, more combinations of process management and command and control are possible. More about the strategies can also be found in chapter 6 of the book Management in Networks (see the Further Reading list).

Strategy 1: Command and control as part of a ‘throffer’, first a threat, then an offer

On the one hand, the CEO is using command and control – he has made a unilateral decision to merge. On the other hand, he is offering space –the staff can decide for themselves about the strategy, working plan and structure.

Why can this strategy be effective? it most cases it is much more attractive to use the space offered, instead of trying to block the decision. Also, once four or five people have decided not to resist the decision, it is almost impossible for the others to continue their resistance.

Strategy 2: Command and control when there is a critical mass of winners

The owner uses the language of command and control. Why is that effective? Because 7/10 stakeholders stand to gain something. They can now cash in on their gains. For the three stakeholders who do not yet agree to the plan, this means that they will probably be put under pressure by the owner and the seven stakeholders – who risk being left empty-handed if the three block the deal. This makes it particularly difficult for those three parties – if they block the deal, they risk significantly worsening their relationships with eight parties that are important to them. This is a case of interdependencies, so the parties will compromise again. One party that blocks the deal will be depriving eight other parties of the prospect of profit or gain – in other words eight potential future conflicts – which may be too high a price to pay. It may therefore be more attractive simply to consent to the deal.

Strategy 3: Command and control by  imposing smart procedures 

John uses command and control for the decision-making procedure, but not for the content of the decision. He provides a unilateral explanation of the procedure. However, because he has designed the procedure smartly, he can probably also use it to determine the content of the decision. For example, if he knows that Catherine needs him – perhaps for another issue – it is highly likely that he can impose his preference on Catherine. According to the procedure, the whole group must agree to what he arranges with Catherine.

Strategy 4: Command and control after the cooperation has failed.

The HR director has given all staff an opportunity to select a model in a process. During the process, the staff has learned that they are not capable of reaching a decision together. The process has failed. This failed process provides the HR director with an opportunity to make a unilateral decision on the matter. The fact that the process failed can make this decision seem more legitimate.

Strategy 5: Threatening to influence the perception of gain among other actors.

By means of this threat and the use of command and control, the management is attempting to influence the perception of winning and losing. If they succeed in negotiating a wage increase of 2.0%, the trade unions could see that as quite an achievement, even though there is actually scope for a 3% increase.