The Nut Island Effect is a management dynamic first outlined by Paul Levy, former executive director of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority in a Harvard Business Review article titled, “When Good Teams Go Wrong.” In the article, Levy relates the systematic breakdown in communication within a wastewater treatment plant team—an organizational collapse that ultimately led to the pollution of Boston Harbor.
Nut Island is a small, 5-acre former island in Boston Harbor that houses a sewage treatment facility. From 1960 to 1997 a team of 80 men and women operated the treatment plant with the task of protecting Boston Harbor from pollution. However in 1982, this well-intentioned team released 3.7 billion gallons of raw sewage into the harbor and further contaminated the water with additional water treatment efforts. How could something like this have happened?
As Levy explains, the staff of the Nut Island treatment plant was highly competent and worked in relative isolation. Over the years the team became increasingly skeptical of management. Early on, staff requested funding to maintain failing equipment, but upgrading ignored. Consequentially, the staff became increasingly self-sufficient, making do with what resources it had—often making their own tools, or jerry-rigging equipment. This autonomy proved problematic in the face of disaster.
Levy points out that the organizational patterns of Nut Island are not rare. In fact, he explains that they are quite common in other types of organizations. He reduces the team’s destructive arc to five steps:
Management distraction and team autonomy – A climate exists where management is consumed by other issues and the team is a cohesive unit of highly motivated and skilled individuals who thrive on autonomy and avoid publicity.
Assumptions and resentment – Management assumes team self-sufficiency and begins to ignore requests for assistance, resulting in team resentment of management.
De facto separation – The team cohesiveness and resentment of management results in a full separation characterized by limited communication and complete refusal of outside assistance.
Self-rule – In order to satisfy external requirements the team creates self-imposed regulations, which create hidden problems.
Chronic systemic failure and collapse – Management indifference and misguided team self-regulation become systemic, resulting in repeated failure and eventual catastrophic collapse.
He also outlines three primary tactics to stop the dysfunctional dynamics: the establishment of performance measures and rewards tied to companywide goals, the hands-on presence of senior management, and the integration of team members with people in other areas of the organization to foster a big picture perspective.
To what extent have you experienced these patterns in your organization? And what strategies have you used to improve communication between operators and management?
For a deeper dive into this organizational topic, we invite you to participate in a December 20th webinar in which speaker Melanie Goetz will explore the roles of operators and managers in water organizations. She will address tools to help increase communication between operators and managers, as well as problem-solving techniques to improve operations at an organizational level.
