Organisational Analysis According to Argyris and Schon - Research Paper Example

Organisational Analysis Organisational analysis involves organisational learning. Argyris and Schon's ladder aggregation is taken into consideration and the organisational activities are analysed. As the organisation is a collective entity, the analysis of the organisational activities involve the analysis of deeds and actions of individuals, groups, departments, divisions and the organisation as a whole. The results of the deeds and actions of the individuals decide the future course. The way the consequences affect the thought, strategy and execution will be included in the organisational analysis. It is clear that the actions of an individual change according to the circumstances. This is due to the change in thoughts and way of thinking of the persons. The consequences they face bring changes in thinking of the individuals resulting in the changes in strategies of the group or department. This in turn affects the way of working of the organisation. The way the changes occur and the reasons for the changes are interlinked. When a reason causes a consequence, and if that is unwanted or not anticipated, should result in the change of the reason. The changes in planning, strategies, environment, nature of working depends upon the extent the individuals in the company maintain congruence between the theory they have to follow and the theory they trust. When the difference is large the unwanted consequences were capable of narrowing the difference in the course of time. The way of correcting the problem to avoid unwanted and negative consequences is termed as I order change and II order change or single loop and double loop by different authors. The loop terminology is of Argyris and Schon's. In this paper the double loop learning is stressed and all the case studies and analyses were done on that basis. Organisational Analysis Introduction: According to Argyris and Schon there are two types of ways in which the individuals in the organisation react. The leader after experiencing the consequences which are opposite to productivity will take a decision to reform the process. This can be done in two ways. Those two ways are termed as single loop and double loop or model I and model II. In this paper let us call them standard I and standard II. All the theories which analyse the organisational behaviour will be according to these above two ways of reacting and analysing the differences between them. Structural organisational leadership: The leadership qualities in the structure of an organisational can be considered as complex. They range from time tested methods to technology involving strategies to the way of changing the thoughts and strategies according to the need and the time. So the stability cannot be taken as granted as the change is inevitable in the processes which should maintain sustainability of the organisation. Structure can be considered for the organisation as what is skeleton for any human body. The structure supports the organisation as the skeleton supports the body. As the skeleton develops in the course of the growth of the body, the development in the organisation demands the change in its structure. This can be termed as flexibility in organisational language. That is the structure of an organisation must change according to the growing and changing needs of the organisation. The leadership must be ready to adopt change. If the leader ship is adopting the standard I changes, then they bring change only in processes but not in the cause which make the processes to be carried on. Here the leaders by observing the consequences try to bring a change in processes and try to conserve the values or theories they believe. This makes the individuals involved in the processes to be defensive and these delay the inevitable change which is a prerequisite for the flexibility in the structure. So it can be termed that the leadership following the standard I learning is not flexible enough to bring the changes in the structure demanded by growth of the organisation. The reason is any single structure is capable enough bringing about the changes and development at the pace the organisation require. Structural congruency is required to meet the changing needs. Congruency relating structure is adopting the qualities of other structures and applying them to change our organisation's structure according to the changing needs like uncertainty, technology, the way of thinking of the management and the individuals working under it. If we consider the leadership who follow the standard II type of learning from the consequences they try to change the theories and values which are the cause for the processes. But first they try to bring about changes in the actions or processes and then slowly they prepare the individuals who are involved in the processes to change their attitude by educating them. This needs knowledge base. This is the reason, why the MNC s in Europe are wying for Information and Knowledge base. This utilisation of the knowledge brings about change in the thoughts and theories which need to be changed according to the need of the organisation. Figure 1. Model explaining the process of developing theories-in use. Reference: http://www.theexecutiveprogram.com/papers/ISIS/loops.htm Let us consider a case study in which the outcome of the product is delayed than the time planned and the management wants to bring the changes in the actions involved in order to avoid the same circumstances in the future. Here by mooting the changes in processes or strategies the leadership is forgetting the theories (governing variables) which are causes for the actions done. This makes the lower layers in the structure work with the same beliefs but with different process. That is the leader ship is not analyzing the processes which caused the actual delay. It may be in manufacturing, designing, planning and transporting sections. Instead of analyzing the actions in the above four sections or divisions the management is trying to change the processes or actions in all the divisions. This brings about the change in the way of working but not in the way of thinking and results in slow pace of change than needed actually. The leadership has to think about the theories and values which are driving force of the actions. In the manufacturing if there is a need of new technology then just bringing the change in process will not make much difference. If this is the case, the structure of the organisation had a weak link in the form of need for technology. Without addressing to it there is no use of changing the actions and processes involved in the manufacturing of the product. Political: The political circumstances which demand a change in the thought of the Organisation depends on the social background also. As the politics act according to the social circumstances the social changes that effect the political actions should be considered. The political and social environment that effects the organisation depends on the type of the organisation. In the same environment there is a record that the public sector companies incurred losses while the private sector companies thrived with profits. This can be observed in 70's in both developed and developing countries. This means that the leadership in the public sector companies act reluctantly for the need of change in both processes and thoughts while private sector is accepting the changes that are inevitable. So as long as this difference existed there existed the difference between the behaviour of public and private sector companies. This tells us that the political situation in the country provided competence and competition for the private companies and incompetence and nil competition for the public sector organisations. So the worker class friendly polices which are stringent to the capitalist class resulted in losses to the organisations and brought the recession to the economy. After the recession the changes brought by the political leadership in administration resolved the disputes between management and workers. This made the environment liberal for both the sides and resulted in liberalisation of the organisational policies bringing the good HR practices to the fore. Political leadership is capable of bringing required changes in the organisational environment by making the necessary changes in policy making. In some cases the social changes force political leadership to force some unforeseen circumstances on the organisational environment. In the case of feminist movement demanding equal rights with men political leadership is compelled to make laws that treat women at par with men. This made the entry of women employees in all areas of organisations, which at first not liked by the organisations but in the aftermath adjusted and even benefiting from employing women employees. In an area involving mental work the women employees are preferred by the organisation's leadership as they work more committed and demand less. When allied forces under leadership of US invaded Iraq, the oil companies used this scenario to increase Oil prices and military equipment companies both in US and UK were benefited from the action. In this manner the decisions based on political reasons will bring about the unexpected changes in the structure and nature of the organisation. In the era of globalisation, most of the political parties almost in all the countries are supporting the liberal economic policies which enhance the trade relations internationally. This is helping the organisations to grow internationally and expand their scope beyond the nation as they existed in the past. This type of environment was not present two decades ago. This atmosphere of international trade was making the companies to grow and expand both vertically and horizontally. At the same time the competitive atmosphere made the companies to follow the good HR practices to reduce the role of Unions. The political atmosphere, which once gave importance to the unionised politics, was showing bias towards more liberal attitude and that is bringing changes in the organisational structure paving way for more and more employee involvement and thus making standard II learning more possible in the organisational structure. Organisational cultural analysis: The nature of work depends on the culture. The reason for the western countries to develop industrially is due to the nature of the people in those countries treating machines as close associates to them. When a westerner works on a machine he treats it as his associate and addresses it as 'her'. But in the case of developing countries the machine is just an instrument and sometimes a symbolic god, which involves only sentiment but not commitment. This difference in the culture of the people showed the difference in the industrial development and it was evident to every body who know about the industrial development in western and developing countries. It is clear that the culture of the people will reflect in their work and thus on the organisation. Now let us examine the internal culture of the organisation which guides the development of an organisation in competence with the other organisations in the same environment. This is the culture the organisation imparts on the individuals working in it by demand or by pursuation. Figure 1. The onion model of organizational culture Ref: http://www.implementer.com/implementer/newtools/cultural.htm The way the people behave, the reacting of them to the decisions taken in the meetings, their way of approaching the customers, the technology used in the company etc will talk about the culture of the company. The behavioural regularities and irregularities reflect the culture of an individual or an organisation. The culture of an organisation can be known by interaction with the individuals working inside. The values they follow, the theories they espouse will tell about the culture of the people as a whole in that area and organisation. The philosophy that leads the organisation will also give meaning to the culture of the organisation. The above things will reflect culture, but they cannot be termed as culture. The culture is that which is operated unconsciously by the people in an organisation. This is possible by the fact that what the people in organisation take for granted from the organisation. These beliefs and assumptions are reactions of the people who learn from their experience in the organisation. The collective efforts of the organisation's divisions and departments bring about the above mentioned responses of the individuals. The learning of the individuals by the experiences from the incidents happened in the organisation lead their behaviour in the critical conditions and helps to solve the problems and find solutions to the problematic conditions. Thinking in this manner the organisational culture can be defined as function which drives the thinking and working of the employees. References: The references are given in the following order Name of the author, date or the year, title, publisher, edition if available, nature of the media, date retrieved, and website name. 1. Excerpts from Chris Argyris & Donald Schon, 1996, Organizational learning, Coaching edge, electronic, http://www.theexecutiveprogram.com/papers/ISIS/loops.htm 2. Philip M. Uys and Matthew Campbell, 2005, Structure and sustainability: An analysis of the organization of educational technology leadership and support at Australian universities, Centre for Enhancing Learning and Teaching (CELT) Charles Sturt University, Australia , 13-08-06, electronic, http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane05/blogs/proceedings/80_Uys.pdf 3. Patti Anklam, 2006, KM and the Social Network, Pearce Web services, electronic, 13-08-06, http://www.leader-values.com/content/detail.aspContentDetailID=960 4.Jonathan Hopkin, 2003, political decentralization, electoral change, and party organizational adaptation, LSE research online, electronic, 13-08-06, http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/archive/00000644/01/eurs.pdf 5. Onar Usar, 2006, The Challenge of Feminist Theory in Organisational Analysis, tripod, , electronic, 13-08-06, http://members.tripod.com/warlight/ONAR.html#top 6. News, Nov4, 2003, The SALTSA Project on Work Organisation and School Work-life: how do schools as organisations facilitate professional development and well-being, Salsta, ,electronic, 13-08-06, http://www.wwwords.co.uk/pdf/viewpdf.aspj=eerj&vol=2&issue=4&year=2003&article=7_News_Saltsa_EERJ_2_4_web&id=59.162.215.32 7. B. T. Rubin, 2006, Analysis of City Challenge Business Management Game, City Challenge, ,electronic, 13-08-06, http://www.citychallengeuk.com/businessmanagementgameanalysis.html 8. Denison & Mishra, 2006, the importance of organisational culture, Holistic Management Pty. Ltd., electronic, 13-08-06, http://www.implementer.com/implementer/newtools/cultural.htm 9. Jossey-Bass, 1992, Organizational Culture and Leadership, NCSL, 2nd edition, electronic, 13-08-06, http://www.ncsl.org.uk/media/F7B/97/randd-leaders-education-schein.pdf. 10. Coates, G. (1997) 'Organisation Man - Women and Organisational Culture' Sociological Research Online, vol. 2, no. 3, http://www.socresonline.org.uk/socresonline/2/3/7.html> 11.Richard, 2005, Organisational culture, new-paradigm.co.uk, ,electronic, 13-08-06, http://www.new-paradigm.co.uk/Culture.htm 12. Carl Rhodes, 1996, Researching organizational change and learning: A narrative approach, Carl Rhodes, , electronic, 13-08-06, http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR2-4/rhodes.html Read More