Problem Solving Process in Big Organizations - Term Paper Example

Problem Solving Process Task Table of Contents Page Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………………….2 Abstract……………………………………………..…………………………………………….3 Problem Statement……………………………………..………………………………..………..4 Literature Review……………………………………….……………………………….………..6 Research Methodology………………..………………….……………………….……………..11 Analysis……………………………………………………….…………………………...……..11 Summary……………………………………………………….…………………….…………..11 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………….12 Appendices……………………………………………………………………………………..13 References…………………………………………………………………………..………….14 Abstract Every organization at one time or the other, comes across a major problem that requires proper intervention from the executive and other concerned stakeholders of the company before it escalates into a major disaster. As such, it is imperative for the organization to employ a formidable problem-solving plan that will enable the management deal with the crisis at the shortest time possible in order to save the company from incurring any loses brought about by the problem. Some of the common problems affecting the human resource department of a company are workers’ strikes and go slows, a high rate of workers’ turnover, lateness and absenteeism among workers, as well as, general theft and misbehavior of workers while at the premises of the organization (Avery, Auvine, Streibel, & Weiss, 1981). This research wants to focus on the best steps that the management can take in resolving a problem within the organization as fast as possible. The longer a problem runs within a company, the more risky and the less profitable the organization becomes due to increases inefficiencies, low productivity, as well as, low morale of workers, which might be the main cause of their underperformance. The research will evaluate the five main steps involved in the problem solving process, as well as, analyze its significance in the management and resolution of conflicts within an organization. This paper will enable an organization to define a certain criteria or standard of conflict resolution within the organization, and as such, empower the leadership of the company to take the forefront in effectively directing others in the research and resolution of issues. Key Words: Pinpoint, Measure, Feedback, Reinforcement, Monitor/Evaluate Problem Solving Process Problem Statement An organization in the modern world economy cannot go without a problem or a conflict that may threaten its performance or image in the market. As such, it is imperative for the organization to have an appropriate plan that will enable it maneuver through such a crisis without suffering any significant overhead complications. For example, the Airtel Corporation, a global telecommunications company with its base in India, once had workers strife. This became a global phenomenon whereby nearly 80% of the company’s dedicated workers at the home country went on an industrial action. The workers’ industrial action was to demand for a pay rise, as well as, demand for other benefits and allowances. Furthermore, these employees were not patient enough to let the organization resolve the issues and as such meet their grievances as some of them quit the organization for other greener pastures. Consequently, the Airtel Corporation had to come up with a fast plan to resolve the issues or risk a total meltdown, especially considering the high rate of workers turnover it was facing during the period of industrial action. Most of the Airtel’s competitors took this opportunity to snatch avid workers from the corporation, which apart from losing credible and dependable manpower, the company also risked losing its confidential information and secret patents to the competitors in case its employees who shifted gears. As such, under such circumstances, the company requires to have an elaborate problem-solving plan that will enable it to take care of the crisis long before it escalates into a bigger problem. The process of resolving a problem within the company requires total cooperation from all the concerned stakeholders otherwise the entire process will flop and lead to an even larger misfortune for the organization. Resolving a problem within a company is usually the prerogative of the management and leadership of the organization. However, the lower levels of the organization can also use this problem solving approach in undertaking certain small conflicts within their departments before they grow and affect the entire organization. As such, the problem Solving Plan is a handy tool for a manager or a supervisor at any stage or level of the organization. This tool enables the leader to quell a strife and restore peace and harmony within the organization before it makes substantial losses like was the case of the Airtel Corporation. For instance, if the company were fast in attending to the issues raised by its employees on compensation and allowances, then it would not risk losing some of its avid employees to its competitors at the height of the industrial action. Not to mention the massive losses that the company incurred during the period when its employees were demonstrating on the streets and demanding for their rights. An issue becomes a problem when it starts affecting the smooth operations of a company, such as demoralizing the workers, and as such, leading to a poor productivity in the output of the company. Such a problem always affects the performance and image of the company, and threatens to bring the company to its feet in case and intervention measure to contain it does not come in fast and effective. The effects of a problem are phenomenal, judging from the length through which it runs, and in most cases totals to millions of lost hours and slackened productivity within the organization, as well as, angry and confused customers within its market sphere. the organization needs to identify when an issue becomes a problem, and where in particular does it affect in order for it to be in a position to manage and contain it appropriately before it bursts out of proportion (Daniels & Daniels, 2004). Literature Review There is a wide literature covering the concept of Problem Solving processes within a company. This is particularly considering the avid differences between the procedural layout of each process and steps in involved in problem solving by the particular literatures. For instance, some empirical management source provides a seven-step process in problem solving, which is long and tedious as opposed to this five pack procedural steps in resolving a conflict within the organization. For instance, the JBS Executive Education provides the following five steps as the requisite procedures for problem solving within an organization, such as identifying the problem, describing the cause of the problem, brainstorming solutions to the problem, implementing one solution, and monitoring the solution to determine its success points. Even though this uses a construct of names to define the PSP process, it is similar to the standard PSP provided which has five main components such as Pinpoint, Measure, Feedback, Reinforcement, and Monitor/Evaluate (Dashiell, 1990). The previous studies carried out in the management and execution of the PSP program was equally strong in the sense that they enabled an organization to resolve its conflicts before they escalated into an explosion. This is evident through the JBS Executive Education profile provided above for the necessary steps taken in resolving a problem within an organization. However, the main weaknesses identified within this aspect are the lack of specificity in the outlining and profiling of a policy or step. As such, this would lead to confusion of users in these procedures and a total fail out in the entire process. However, judging from the previous provisions of the PSP steps provided by other scholars, it is important for every manager to know the standard procedure of resolving a problem or a conflict within the organization in order to ensure effective operations and smooth running of the company. For instance, every manager has the responsibility of ensuring that all employees under his or her command undergo an effective development in their career, as well as, performance of their duties in order to meet continuously better outcomes for the company. As such, a manager should be in a position to ensure that all his or her employees perform according to the set standards provided by the company, and as such, meet the performance threshold expected from them by the company. This in turn ensures that a company remains efficient and productive throughout its activities (Interaction Associates, Inc., 1987). In order to monitor the performance of their workers appropriately and deduce whoever is failing in the race to effective and enhanced production, a manager requires to have express knowledge on how to shape employee performance behaviors within the organization, a background of which is the Problem Solving process. As such, a manager with avid knowledge of the PSP will be in a position to undertake an in-depth analysis of the performance tendencies of all their employees, discover their shortfalls and what causes these shortfalls, as well as, come up with a distinct solution to resolve these shortfalls thereby catapulting the employee back to productivity. It is also imperative to note that if a single employee fails in undertaking his or her responsibilities at the organization diligently, the entire company stands a high risk of underperforming owing to the inefficiencies brought about by the poor output of a single employee. The manager needs to have appropriate knowledge of the five steps involved in the Problem Solving Process (PSP) and this will assist the manager restore peace and productivity within the company before it crumbles down after growing into a bigger problem. The five main steps involved in a standard PSP procedure are pinpoint, measure, feedback, reinforcement, and monitor or evaluate. The questions behind each of the five steps are varied depending on the aspect under scrutiny in each of the steps. For pinpoint, the question raised in the results or behaviors expected within a given case. The question behind measure involves the process of determining recognition when something happens, whereby it turns out that to count is always better than to judge. The feedback raises questions on how the performer will know of the impact of these procedures, probably using graphs and tables. The fourth step of reinforcement questions how the manager will unleash discretionary effort, whilst the last step of evaluation confirms whether the procedures produced the intended effect, or whether these results align themselves to the behaviors of employees. Pinpoint In resolving a problem, to pinpoint is the first step. This step enables the manager to identify the problem within the organization, such as in relation to both results and behaviors. This identification enables the company managers to know what is causing failure and introducing inefficiencies within the organization and as such project the necessary steps needed to resolve the entire issue. For instance, a manager can have a feeling that something is wrong in the business, but rather fail to point exactly as to what could be causing these problems. As such, this first step of PSP requires the manager to take time, and identify exactly the root cause of the problem in the company, as well as, why the company faces a repeated trend of difficulty. As such, this provides an opportunity for the manager to describe this issue in detail and create an elaborate picture as to who or what disrupts the profitable flow if operations within the business. This may also lead to the discovery of particular behavioral tendencies by employees at the company that negatively affect the productivity and efficiency at the organization (Lawson, Donant & Lawson, 1982). Measure The process of measuring requires the manager to know when certain things happen within the organization, and as such, profile them as problems that require immediate conflict resolution. It is best to count rather than to judge while measuring a problem in a company, as the number of occurrences provides the manager with a clear and exact figure of the magnitude of the adversities within the corporation. This step entails undertaking a proper description of the problem, such as the reasons as to why the problem occurs. Doing a mere identification of a problem does not outline its cause, and as such, a manager will be unable to determine why a certain problem occurs within his or her company. A dimple example of problem measurement may be, for instance, if an employee constantly disrupts meeting, the manager can dig deeper into its cause and discover that the employee feel that her talents do not get the right recognition as they deserve. On the other hand, if a company ships its products late continuously, the manager can investigate the issue and discover that a failure of machinery that breaks down constantly might be the real cause of the problem. As such, finding the cause of a problem will suggest the possible workable solutions to the challenge. Feedback Determining the feedback in the problem statement is the next step to eliminating the problem. This feedback paints a clear picture of what exactly the company is losing or stands to lose if the situation with the problem persists. In most cases, graphs and tables work best in portraying a clear picture of such scenarios. This also requires the manger to brainstorm solutions to the problem. By having a wide variety of possibilities, a manager can select one of the most promising alternatives as a solution to problem facing the company. Having several options as solutions to the problem gives the company an extended lease of life such that in case one strategy fails, it can quickly take on another option and continue to resolve the problem. Reinforce Reinforcement requires the manager to unleash discretionary effort, and as such, implement one solution that is best for the company in resolving the crisis at hand. A manager in this case needs to pick one out of the numerous solutions or alternatives deduced as probable solutions to the problem the company is facing. This alternative should guarantee the best results for the company, and a fast solution to the problem the company is currently facing. Consequences such as the ABC Model, as well as, using consequences in shaping employee performance are instrumental in determining the best strategy to select among the variety of alternative presented as possible solutions to the problem at hand. The ABC Model technique is a brainchild of Albert Ellis. This model empowers the mangers to think more optimistically basing on the personal explanatory styles of the mangers. As such, it entails on how best the mangers can explain a stressful or difficult situation, across three major dimensions, which are personalization, pervasiveness, and permanence. As such, these thoughts guide a manager over their beliefs in the causation of the events or problems at the company. The model also prompts these managers to analyze the three aspects avid in a situation, which are the Adversity, Beliefs, and Consequences. Whenever a manager encounters an adversity within the company, they immediately develop thoughts and beliefs concerning the situation, which in turn leads to consequences. A manager needs to be optimistic and this will change what they believe about the situation or problem facing the company. Henceforth, whenever the manger encounters an adversity, they will develop positive beliefs leading to positive consequences, and apparently a more positive outlook (Mathis & Jackson, 2011). On the other hand, usage of consequences to shape employee performance behaviors is also a suitable solution in the reinforcement step of the PSP process. For instance, if the employees are doing something negative on purpose, then they will fear the negative consequences related to the actions as initiated by the company, and this will instigate a positive change in the corporation. Evaluate In evaluation, it should be evident that every alternative taken by the organization should lead to positive results, and a possible solution to the problem at hand. This entails proper measurement on the chosen solution in order to resolve any previous difficulties encountered. In case the monitoring and evaluation process reveals that the choice of solution for the problems was incorrect, then it would be imperative to switch immediately to a new solution. Research Methodology The research covers both primary as well as secondary sources of data regarding the PSP process. The internet also plays an important role in the research process. This literature provides the various aspects of the five core steps used in resolving a problem within the company, the Problem Solving Process (PSP) (Meacham, 1980). Analysis An analysis of the application of these processes in resolving a problem within a company provides that the process is effective. Most of the companies that used the PSP program in undertaking solutions for their problems came out successful and this point to the effectiveness, as well as, efficiency of the program in managing conflicts or problems within the company. Summary The PSP contains five major steps, which require a diligent implementation systematically in order to guarantee a firm output in the solutions selected. For instance, it would not result in positive effects in case the manager skipped step three and four of the PSP process. This means that every step in the procedure is important, and as such plays an instrumental role in guiding the performance of the management in coming up with a solution to their problems. Conclusion In conclusion, it is imperative that every manager at an organization has appropriate knowledge of the necessary problem solving process in order to take charge of a situation within the company as soon as they notice it. This will enable the company abate certain losses that accrue from the occurrence of problems within the organization (Morrison, 1994). Appendices Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 References Avery, M., Auvine, B., Streibel, B., Weiss, L. (1981). A handbook for consensus decision making: Building united judgment. Madison, WI: Center for Conflict Resolution. Daniels, A. & Daniels, J. (2004). Performance Management: Changing Behavior That Drives Organizational Effectiveness. Washington, D.C: Performance Management Publications Dashiell, K.A. (1990). Managing meetings for collaboration and consensus Honolulu, HI: Neighborhood Justice Center of Honolulu, Inc. Interaction Associates, Inc. (1987). Facilitator institute handbook. San Francisco, CA: Author. Lawson, L.G., Donant, F.D., and Lawson, J.D. (1982). Lead on! The complete handbook for group leaders. San Luis Obispo, CA: Impact Publishers. Mathis, R. & Jackson, J. (2011). Human Resource Management: Essential Perspectives 6th ed. Stamford, Connecticut: Cengage learning. Meacham, W. (1980). Human development training manual. Austin, TX: Human Development Training. Morrison, E.K. (1994). Leadership skills: Developing volunteers for organizational success. Tucson, AZ: Fisher Books. Read More