Organizational Analysis of Organisms - Coursework Example

Introduction Biology and management are different fields altogether, but they have many similarities as well. Biology is mainly concerned with dealing with organisms; on the other hand, management is about dealing with the running of organizations. In essence, an organization is an organism going by the features that define the two. Learning Morgan’s (2006) multiple perspective framework has enabled me to understand the fine details of organizations, particularly with regard to their development. Cases in point are the features of organizations, which can be likened to those of organisms in biology. In this paper, I will address this issue and also discuss how what I have learnt has the changed the way I might perceive organizations in future. I begin by addressing the similarities between organisms and organizations. One fundamental similarity is that both are founded on the simplest structures. While organizations begin as associations of people, organisms are founded as associations of molecules (Morgan 2006). In biology, conglomerations of molecules form cells, which are the basic structures of the complex living organisms. Similar is the case among organizations: individuals form groups and the groups eventually form various types of organizations. In biology, we talk of species of organisms. These are groups of organisms that have similar features but are isolated from others due to these distinct features that make them recognizable as “species.” In a similar perspective, there are different types of organizations specializing in different activities. Based on the different levels of specialization, we can have different “populations” of organizations as we have different “populations” of species. Lastly, the different populations of species in biology are vital for the ecology of the regions in which they are found, as are the different types of organizations in different parts of the world. Gallos and Schein (2006) define organization development as an effort that is planned organization-wide and managed from the top with a view to increasing the organization’s effectiveness and health though planned interventions in the organization’s activities by applying behavioural science knowledge. This in-depth definition of organization gives me an overview of an organization’s development as a process that requires concerted effort to improve its effectiveness as well as wellbeing. The definition shows that the effort has to be well planned and must also involve a lot of research input. The development of organizations dates back to historical times. Mayo and Maslow’s work on motivation are good exemplars of this and the work stressed the importance of needs being satisfied as well as how the need to satisfy the desires changes across individuals (Hatch 2006). In order for organizations to be effective, there is need to strengthen the role of human resource management within them. This entails aspects such as addressing turnover issues to ensure a low turnover, addressing absenteeism and increasing productivity. Organization development though needs to be addressed cautiously since a change in one attribute of the organization affects the other attributes. Based on the above information, I have learnt a number of points about organizations. Going back to the definition of organizational development, I highlighted that it is a planned change effort. This means that the organizational development programme encompasses a systematic diagnosis of the organization as well as the development of a strategic plan for improvement and the utilization of resources to implement the effort. I can relate this to Ludwig von Bertalanffy and the General Systems Theory. According to the theory, the key point about organizations is the operating environment in which they are situated. This determines how they mobilize their resources for different purposes (Hatch 2006). Along this line, as earlier mentioned, an organization is made up of several small units, or subsystems; and each of the systems can be considered as a system on its own. Therefore, in an attempt to evaluate the alignment between different systems, there is need to identify and eliminate the possible dysfunctions in order to guarantee effectiveness. This means that organizations have to focus on their strong points and focus on meeting their objectives along these lines while rectifying their weak areas. In my working experienced, I have always focused on utilizing the strong points within the organization to counter the weak points Another point that I have learnt about organizations stems from the contingency theory. This is the assertion that the most appropriate way of designing and managing an organization involves analysis as well as understanding of the features of the situations that an organization is in. Even among organisms, there are various forms of adaptation to enable the organisms to suit to the conditions of the habitats in which they are found. I therefore realize that the only way for an organization to be successful and effective is to adapt to the environment in which it operates rather than striving to adjust the environment to suit it. The most successful organisms are those that have highly adapted to their environments, and this is also true of organizations. In future, I would like to see organizations working in the harshest of environments but eventually succeeding because of their resilience. The contingency theory is traditionally related to organizational performance and in this bread sense it is consistent with economics. Nevertheless, the theory has mostly not derived much from economics and tends to remain isolated from it (Donaldson 2001, p.245). In real sense, the contingency theory as pertains to organizations is related to the various dimensions of organizational development such as technology, the social system, formal organizational structure as well as the environment in which the organization operates (Donaldson 2001, p.245). I have also learnt that although organizational development involves management from the top, it must encompass all stakeholders of the organization. Case in point is the fact that organizational development should be about emphasis on team work as a site for learning more effective ways of working together. Going back to the fundamentals of an organism, it is a known fact that cells are specialised in their functions. This notwithstanding, the functions of the cells have to be well coordinated to ensure that all the physiological processes of the organism are carried out as required. For instance, the process of digestion involves different organs that produce different chemicals. However, eventually each organ has to play its role to ensure that the food is completely broken down. The same apples to managing an organization through teamwork. In doing so, emphasis should be placed on the processes carried out by the various groups rather than on content. In addition, collaborative management is required in order to inculcate team culture and create good relations within the inter-team levels. Effective organization management should also involve thorough consultation, and as mentioned earlier, this should be organization-wide. I therefore believe that the metaphor that organizations are organisms is true because among organisms, any failure to coordinate the various functions of cells or organs may result in a serious malfunction in various processes. The same applies to organizations: failure to coordinate roles from the subordinates to the senior management of the organization may result in serious failure by the organization to attain its objectives. From the course work, I have learnt that effective organization management should avoid a lot of hierarchical bureaucracies. The matrix structure (figure 1) is one of the ways to facilitate this. With the matrix structure, there is a focus on team-based management with emphasis on increased adaptability to various environments and improved coordination between the functional departments of the organization as well as better utilization of human resources. Figure 1: the Matrix structure Source: Course work The matrix structure entails an organization being multifocused such that both product or service and function are geographically emphasized simultaneously. The matrix is applicable when both expertise and product innovation change are fundamental in meeting the organizational goals (Daft 2009, p.110). In many situations, the matrix becomes a perfect answer when the organization realizes that the divisional, functional, and geographic structures combined with the available horizontal linkage mechanisms may not work. The matrix thus acts strong form of horizontal linkage. The distinct characteristic of this kind of organization is that both functional structures (vertical and horizontal) and product divisions are implemented contemporaneously (Daft 2009, p.110). In the matrix structure, both product managers and functional managers have equal authority with the organization, and the subordinates report to both (Daft 2009, p.110). The matrix structure can thus be said to be a forms of organization with a flatter management structure as opposed to the tall structure that entail a lot of bureaucracy. In conclusion, organizations’ performance can be closely related to the functioning of organisms. Organisms need functional molecules that form cells. The cells group themselves to form tissues and organs that eventually form the living organisms. In the same perspective, organizations are formed by groups of people. In order to be effective, these groups have to be efficient in attaining their set objectives. It all begins by dealing with individuals since they are the basic units of organizations. From what I have learnt, managing these individuals effectively is the best way to ensure the success of organizations. References Daft, R L 2009, Organization Theory and Design, Cengage Learning, New York. Debrah, Y A & Smith, I G 2002, Globalization, Employment and the Workplace: Diverse Impacts Routledge, New York. Donaldson, L 2001, The Contingency Theory of Organizations, SAGE, London. Gallos, J V & Schein, E H 2006, Organization Development: a Jossey-Bass Reader, John Wiley and Sons, New York. Hatch, M 2006, Organisation Theory, Oxford University Press, Oxford Morgan, G 2006, Images of Organisations, SAGE, London. Read More