Organizing Function of Management: The Role and Impact of Organizing Function on HR, Knowledge and Technology - Term Paper Example

Running Head Organizing Function of Management Organizing Function of Management Organizational success and effective performance depend upon management functions and use of resources. Organizing is one of the main functions which help to manage and plan available resources in organizations. The Department of Veterans Affairs relies on information technology and HR which help the organization to deliver quality services to its members and general public. The purpose of the paper is to describe and analyze the role and impact of organizing function on HR, knowledge and technology. According to the definition organizing function of management means: "the activities to collect and configure resources in order to implement plans in a highly effective and efficient fashion. Organizing is a broad set of activities, and often considered one of the major functions of management" (McNamara 2007). In the Department of Veterans Affairs, organizing function has a great impact on HR and staff relations. In this organization, HR is concerned with a long-term and a short-term perspective; the psychological contract based on commitment and compliance; self-control and external controls. The Department of Veterans Affairs pays a special attention to selection process and development of employees who work with veterans and their families. Organizing function involves training programs for service workers and career development, promotion and personal development of employees. The core of organizing function of HR includes communication, motivation and leadership (Horts, 2002). Within the Department of Veterans Affairs, attention is also drawn to the key role of organizational culture. For example, an "organization" means the philosophy, attitudes and actions of top managers and service workers, or possibly an individual manager. The rationale for organizing function is built on the idea that employees and clients engage in basically consistent, value-maximizing calculations or adaptations within certain constraints. The peculiarity of this organization is that it deals with diverse customer groups and services. In many cases, the Department of Veterans Affairs has to choose the alternative approach and consequences that rank highest in terms of the payoff functions; that is, that contribute most to the ultimate goal (Horts, 2002). The organization introduced additional training focusing on employee's motivation and work design programs to help worker identify their goal and professional development strategies. Organizing function helps to determine and manage goals or objectives and has a payoff, utility, or preference function that permits that person to rank all possible alternative actions by the action's contribution to the desired goals. For instance, "HSR&D provides core funding to fifteen Centers of Excellence (COEs). The research at each COE serves to energize the facility and network with which they are affiliated, and provides a constant source of innovation, creativity and support" (the Department of Veterans Affairs 2007). The organization is presented with and understands alternative courses of action. Each alternative has a set of consequences. Successful organization performance depends upon and is determined by technology. For instance, "technology as it is used in health care is defined as applied knowledge, in other words: any intervention used in health promotion, prevention and rehabilitation" (the Department of Veterans Affairs 2007). Technology helps to connect people in organization who operate in a distance, and has no opportunity to use printed matters or other sources. Organizing function plays a crucial role in technology management determining the main areas of improvement and resources available and needed for this process. The key benefit is the fast interactions between employees and between employees and clients. This constitutes the capital of an organization, i.e. the network of relationships constitutes a valuable resource for the conduct of organizational affairs. For the Department of Veterans Affairs, these networks are particularly important in ensuring that knowledge is shared. "Technology assessment in health care (HTA) is a multidisciplinary field of policy analysis that uses the best available scientific evidence on the medical, social, ethical, and economic implications of interventions used in health care" (The Department of Veterans Affairs 2007). Organizing function helps the Department to use resources effectively and efficiently. The Department of Veterans Affairs relies to a considerable extent on achieving success through the development of new services and techniques, and organizing function helps to ensure that the technology generated by such developments is spread around the business as widely as possible to those who might put it to good use. "Each of the three organizations within VA develops and manages its own IT functions, with much of the development and maintenance occurring at the local or regional levels" (The Department of Veterans Affairs 2007). Organizing function ensures that information is recorded and made acceptable to employees and customers. For instance, software experts collaborate by providing means for tacit knowledge to be collected and, where feasible, codified. Knowledge is another sphere influenced by organizing. Employees are not be willing to share knowledge with those whom they do not trust, but KM software helps to reduce this risk to a minimum, and in some cases even encourage employees to be more active and participate in current affaires. Taking into account organizing function, knowledge helps in the development of performance management processes which focus and the development and sharing of knowledge of a particular type for a particular group of employees around the world "Internet technology that allows both flexibility and optimal use of their human capital" (Horts 2002, 48). It also sustains the redevelopment processes of organizational and individual learning which generates and assists in disseminating knowledge. In conjunction with IT, develop systems for capturing and, as far as possible, codifying explicit knowledge. Generally, promote the cause of knowledge management with senior managers to encourage them to exert leadership and support knowledge management initiatives (The next-generation Enterprise Portal 1999). Organizing function helps to join human resources, technology and knowledge management. In the Department of Veterans Affairs, knowledge is as much if not more concerned with staff and how they acquire, exchange and disseminate knowledge as it is about information technology. That is why it has become an important area for HR practitioners, who are in a strong position to exert influence in this aspect of people management. Software can benefited in any process or practice of creating, acquiring, capturing, sharing and using knowledge, wherever it resides, to enhance learning and performance in the organization (McNamara, 2007). In the Department of Veterans Affairs, service workers and managers need to implement a system which contains a large cache of documents and include search engines that allow people to find and use the documents they need. In the personalization model, it's more important to have a system that allows people to find other people. Technology is aimed to coordinate only a technological process in contrast to traditional management which coordinates all levels of the organizational structure including their interaction and performance. Organizing function concerns with managing those resources that are required to produce the services. The balance of power has undoubtedly shifted to organizing which now has more choice over how it conducts relationships between employees, a process of service delivery and clients. Managers pay a particular attention to services and innovations in this field. This has speeded up design processes, transformed working practices and increased the efficiency of organization. Effective organizing influences commitment of staff and human resources (Horts 2002). Effective organizing is just the first step in creating strong and viable organization resources. Organizing function of management influences the environment and perspectives of further development on the macro- and micro-level. Organizing function of management allows the department to be flexible and be ready to innovate and to adopt new technologies as they come along. The way in which the organization employs the latest technology can be an important determinant of its competitive advantage. The Department of Veterans Affairs has optimized these resources for effectiveness implementing new ways of doing business. Organizing function of management is concerned with those activities involved in recruiting of professional staff, training, and development within the organization and infrastructure, namely the systems of technology planning, finance, quality control, etc. which are crucially important to an organization's strategic capability in all primary activities. It is strongly influenced by resources outside the organization which are an integral part of the chain of activities between the product or service design, through production and marketing to the use of the product or service by consumers. References 1. The Department of Veterans Affairs (2007). Retrieved 14 May 2007, from http://www.va.gov/ 2. Horts, Ch.-H. B. (2002). Governance, Knowledge Creation, and Organizing: An Afterthought. Human Resource Planning, 25, 48-52. 3. McNamara, C. (2007). Management Function of Organizing: Overview of Methods. Retrieved 14 May 2007, from http://www.managementhelp.org/orgnzing/orgnzing.htm 4. The next-generation Enterprise Portal: Integrating the Knowledge and Processes of the Enterprise, Appsolut Software-while paper, 1999. Retrieved 14 May 2007, from http://dheise.andrews.edu/courses/MIS/KM/white_paper_enterprise_portal.pdf Article Governance, knowledge creation, and organizing: an afterthought. by Charles-Henri Besseyre des Horts Governance and knowledge are important considerations in designing the organizations of the future. Corporate governance has been associated with increasing the return on capital employed and more rigid control of management teams. The emphasis on creating shareholder value has led other stakeholders to become more vocal about their competing expectations. Concurrently, knowledge creation processes have risen in importance and caused new thinking about turnover and retention: of knowledge or of people Among the key phenomena that characterize the evolution of firms and organizations during the past decade, shareholders' power is perceived as having had an important impact upon organizational structures and processes (Brilman, 1998). This phenomenon -- namely, the development of corporate governance -- has resulted in increasing expectations of higher returns on capital employed and more rigid control of management teams. The recent financial scandals (Enron, Worldcom) have, however, put somewhat into question the traditional relationship between shareholders and management teams as postulated by agency theory (Jensen & Meckling, 1976; Melbourne & Cyr, 1997). Corporate governance gives back to the firm's owners the power to influence strategic orientations and decisions that previously were left in the hands of the management team (Charreaux, 1997). This well-entrenched trend has been followed in the majority of Western economies (with some variations, as in the case of Germany where decision-making processes are more consensual and boards are more collective (Charkham, 1995; Kay & Silberston, 1995)); but it is mostly associated with the Anglo-Saxon (American) form of capitalism. Corporate governance has thus become synonymous with the development "short-termism" through the "tyranny" of the quarterly report. This situation has laid a great deal of pressure on managers to focus on creating economic wealth, because they are mainly rewarded for this. In France, the recent dismissal of JeanMarie Messier, the head of the media giant company Vivendi Universal, has followed its dramatic turn of fortunes, yet it was also a verdict on his American style of management, whi ch created much controversy. The excessive attention given by management teams to the creation of shareholders' wealth has generated what could be described as a "group-think" phenomenon discounting any other perspective about the ultimate goal of the organization. In most recent years, particularly in Europe under the pressure of the "green" movement and other citizens' groups, other stakeholders -- customers, employees, trade unions, communities, government -- have become more and more influential in the conduct of organizations because they have other expectations beyond the profit motive (Ferone, 2001; Ramirez & Wallin, 2000; Brilman, 1998). This enlargement of the concept of value creation can be identified in the Oticon case described by Larsen (2002, in this issue) and the Leisureplanet.com case deconstructed by Verkinderen & Altman (2002, in this issue). As a positive example, what is striking in the Oticon case is the systemic change that moved the company to a "knowledge-based organization" in which the value creation not only emphasizes the financial return for shareholders, but also focuses on customer satisfaction and employee involvement. This example may be viewed as an applied case or the balanced score card approach that has been advocated by Kaplan & Norton (1996). As a negative example, the inability of Leisureplanet.com to create value for multiple stakeholders led this company to cease operations abruptly. The "unplugged" nature of Leisureplanet.com failed to bring much value to local employees, communities, and customers. Another phenomenon that has drawn much interest over the past decade -- knowledge -- has been positioned as one of the most critical assets that an organization must acquire, develop, and retain (Baumard, 1999; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). Knowledge is a prime source of competitive advantage because it may possess several key characteristics: valuable, rare, non-imitable, non-substitutable -- as the resource-based view of the firm postulates (Wernefelt, 1984; Barney, 1991, 1997). The development of project-based organizations described by DeFillippi (2002, in this issue) leads to the creation of specific knowledge through the combination of internal and external learning made possible by Internet technology. Moreover, the impact of regional collaboration (e.g., Silicon Valley or Route 128 in the USA, Sophia Antipolis in France, the M4 corridor in UK) is critical to understanding the emergence of informal communities of practice that not only disseminate knowledge of technical practices but also maintain a code o f conduct. At stake here is the capacity of organizations permanently to learn and adapt (Argyris & Schon, 1978). In this context, Arthur and Parker (2002, in this issue) convincingly argue that HRM is no longer a person-centered approach but rather a knowledge-centered approach. Traditional HRM tools and practices are put in question with the development of knowledge management. The management of careers in knowledge-based organizations is, for instance, dramatically different according to Arthur and Parker (2002, in this issue), who emphasize the importance of communities that serve as "natural arenas for knowledge sharing and new knowledge generation." As another illustration, the case of Oticon provides a textbook example of the learning organization according to Larsen (2002, in this issue), who argues that "the possibilities for professional and personal development are proclaimed to be -- and to a vast degree are indeed -- unlimited, if one knows how to exploit these opportunities." These cases illustrate the critical importance of various knowledge creation processes that relate tacit and explicit, individual and collective knowledge: awareness, assimilation, implicit learning, internalization, articulation, appropriation, and extension (Baumard, 1999). In this perspective, the community webs described by DeFillippi (2002, in this issue) may be viewed as boundaryless organizations in which knowledge is created at the collective level mainly through articulation and internalization processes. Similarly, the early success of Leisureplanet.com (Verkinderen & Altman, 2002, in this issue) illustrates other knowledge creation processes that relate individual and collective knowledge such as extension, appropriation, and implicit learning with the development of its innovative approach of travel business. In order to foster these knowledge creation processes, some specific HRM practices are likely to be implemented (Arthur & Parker, 2002, in this issue): recruitment of knowledge not people, re tention of knowledge not people, acceptance of turnover, encouragement of community links, reinforcement of industry citizenship. And the final question: Are we really witnessing the emergence of new organizations based on radically different structures and processes The answer is cautiously positive when considering the cases described in this issue, but the extent to which these new organizations are radically different from old economy companies may be subject to debate. DeFillippi (2002, in this issue) advocates for a positive answer arguing that these organizations adopt project-based organizing with the use of Internet technology that allows both flexibility and optimal use of their human capital. The major change experimented successfully by Oticon (Larsen, 2002, in this issue) is also an argument in favor of the emergence of new organizational models, though the case has its limitations (e.g., career progression opportunities). In a similar perspective, Arthur and Parker (2002, in this issue) point out the need for companies to respect employee career investments in order to reinforce their "knowing-why" motivation. These companies have to develop new ways of organizing and managing knowledge, not people. Last, but not least, the failure of Leisureplanet.com (Verkinderen & Altman, 2002, in this issue) illustrates the difficulty for new organizations to emerge and develop in an evermore demanding environment. The collapse of the first wave of dot.coms and recent accounting scandals call for a more cautious approach to new organizational (and financial) models. References Argyris, C. & Schon, D. (1978). Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Barney, J. (1991). "Firm Resources and Sustained competitive Advantage." Journal of Management, 17: 99-120. Barney, J. (1997). Gaining and Sustaining competitive Advantage. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. Baumard, R (1999). Tacit Knowledge in Organizations. London: Sage. Brilman, J. (1998). Les Meilleures Pratiques de Management, an coeur de la Performance. Paris: Editions d'Organisation. Charkham, J. (1995). Keeping Good company: A Study of corporate Governance in Five Countries. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Charreaux, G. (1997b). "Vers une Theorie du Gouvernement des Enterprises," in G. Charreaux (Ed.): Le Gouvernement des Entreprises, corporate Governance, Theorie et Faits. Paris Economica, ch. 15, 421-470. Ferone, G. (2001). "Racines et Evolutions de l'Investissement Socialement Responsable dans le Monde," in G. Ferone et Coll: Le Developpement Durable, des Enjeux Strategiques pour l'Entreprise. Paris: Editions d'Organisation. partie 1,7-81. Jensen, M.C. & Meckling. W.H. (1976). "Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior. Agency costs, and Ownership Structure." Journal of Financial Economics, 3, October. 305-360. Kaplan, R. & Norton, D. (1996). The Balanced Scorecard: Translating strategy into Action. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Melbourne, T.M. & Cyr, L.A. (1997). "Agency Theory Implications for Strategic Human Resource Management: Effects of CEO Ownership, Administrative HRM and Incentive Alignment on Firm Performance." Working paper No. 96-17, ILR cornell University. Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi. H. (1995). The Knowledge creating company New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Ramirez, R. & Wallin, J. (2000). Prime Movers. London: Wiley & Sons. Wernefelt, B. (1984). "A Resource-Based View of the Firm." Strategic Management Journal, 5: 171-180. Biographical Sketch Charles-Henri Besseyre des Horts has been an associate professor of human resources management and organizational behavior at Groupe HEC since 1990. He directs the MS in Strategic Human Resources Management. Between 1993 and 1995 he was the dean of Marseilles-Provence's Graduate School of Business. Charles-Henri earned a Doctorate in Management (Aix-Marseilles) and a Ph.D. (UCLA). He has been and is actively involved in a number of international training and consulting activities in the United States, Canada, Nigeria, Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, South Africa, Brazil, Lebanon, Rumania, Russia, Malaysia, Vietnam, China, and Australia. He has published several books, one of which (Vers une Gestion Strategique des Ressources Humaines (Towards a Strategic Human Resources Management)) received the 1988 award for the best socio-economic management book. Read More