Work, People, and Productivity - Assignment Example

Work, People and Productivity Q The Competing Values Framework came about because of several studies carried out in order to determine how effective organizations are and has serious implications on managers (Quinn and Rohrbaugh, 1981). This framework has two dimensions of effectiveness and includes organizational focus, which involves the internal emphasis on the human resource within the organization as compared to the external focus of the organization under study. It also entails the comparison between stability and control and how they affect change and stability within the organization. The Competing Values Framework has four important assumptions, which are also known as quadrants classified as the Internal Process Model, the Open Systems Model, the Rational Goal Model and the Human Relations Model. The Internal Process Model is based on the chain of command within the organization and emphasizes measurement, documentation and the management of information within the organization. These are aimed at having an organization that can be easily controlled and is stable and works best when the task to be carried out is well understood by the person carrying it out and time is not a key consideration. The Open Systems Model emphasizes how adaptable and ready an organization is and how it responds to growth, the acquisition of resources and support that comes outside the organization. The importance of this is model is that it inspires the human resources within the organization to be creative and thus innovative in whatever they carry out. The Rational Goal Model emphasizes on actions that can be deemed to be rational and is based on the need to make profits while assuming that the whenever the organization plans and sets its objectives, it becomes more efficient and productive in whatever it does. Finally, the Human Relations Model derives its basis on the need for the organization to have morale in whatever it carries out as well as the togetherness of the human resources within it and their training. Though the models seem to be different in their roles for any organization, they are complementary to each other and affect how an organization can manage its human resources, programs, people and policies effectively (Quinn and Spreitzer, 1991). Managers can therefore achieve flexibility through the human relations model and the open system model whereby cohesion and morale as well as flexibility and readiness are utilized to develop human resources and acquire resources. The internal and the external models can use information management, planning and the setting of goals to achieve efficiency and productivity as well as stability and control within the organization. Managers within organizations can therefore use the Competing Values Framework as a strategic tool in the development of programs for supervising and managing different factors within the organization. The organizations may also utilize these models to evaluate the culture within the organization and examine any gap that may be hindering the organization from achieving its desired goals and objectives (Cameron and Quinn, 1999). Managers within an organization may also use the Competing Models Framework to interpret and understand the various processes and functions within the organization for better management. These models are also important in helping the human resources within the organization compare and contrast the managerial leadership roles within the organization. Q.2 Douglas McGregor in The Human Side of Enterprise proposes two theories that can be used to evaluate how an employee is motivated and these include Theory X and Theory Y which are based on the assumption that the role of management is to bring together the factors of production for economic gain of the organization in genera (Heil et al., 2000). Theory X assumes that persons inherently do not like work as well as responsibility and will attempt to avoid work while at the same time lack ambition to lead (Heil et al., 2000). The theory also argues that an average person is self-centered and will not care about the goals of the organization but will resist change. Theory X can follow the hard approach or the soft approach whereby the hard approach relies on closer supervision of the human resources, hidden threats, coercion and having control of the processes and functions of the organization in order to execute the goals of the organization. The soft approach seeks at having harmony and cooperation within the organization with the hope that the human resources within the organization will reciprocate in executing their roles within the organization due to the favor offered to them. These approaches vary in the results achieved in that while the hard approach leads to hostility and thus low output by the employees, the soft approach leads to increased requests for rewards but decreased output amongst employees (Heil et al., 2000). Theory Y assumes that work can be as natural as play or rest and people will work under self-direction in order to achieve their objectives at the workplace through commitment. Further, this theory envisages that persons are likely to be more committed to their goals if rewards are offered to meet their desire to self-actualize and this makes them seek responsibility (Heil et al., 2000). This responsibility can only be handled due to the creativity and ingenuity of the human resources within the organization. When one these assumptions are made, the human resources within the organization can reorient their own goals to those of the organization as they are motivated to fulfill themselves which will also be beneficial to the organization. As a manager, I would adopt Theory Y as a strategy in managing my organization and spur productivity through the tapping of the motivational energy of the employees to achieve better results. Theory Y can help in decentralizing and delegating control by reducing the number of levels of management that helps in easier making of decisions as responsibilities are divided amongst subordinates. Theory Y also helps in enlarging jobs by broadening the scope of the tasks carried out by employees thus adding variety and opportunities to satisfy the sense of self of employees. This theory is also effective as it encourages participative management as all employees will be involved in the making of decisions and this makes them share their creative capacity as seen at the work place. Utilizing Theory Y as a manager also helps me in the appraisal of the performance of the employees as I can help them set their goals and evaluate how they execute them. Q.3 Quinn suggests that the transformational cycle of an individual goes through four faces namely the initiation phase, transformational phase, uncertainty phase and the last stage of routinization, which means that a manager must have a goal and strive at achieving it. At the initiation phase, the individual develops a vision and thereafter take risks towards achieving it and the vision must be implementable. The individual therefore endeavors to try achieving the vision without trying to involve in what cannot be achieved or illusions (Quinn, 1996). Every individual tries to achieve excellence at the work place and this requires that the individual depart from the usually held norms of an organization no matter painful it may get to. The excellence can therefore be achieved only through deviance of the existing controls within the organization, which when altered routinize the efforts put in place by the individual. A person will therefore deviate from the norms as at times this is the right thing to do and has got enormous satisfaction to the individual (Quinn, 1996). When uncertainty sets in due to differentiation and continuous change, the individual usually lacks direction and meaning and therefore desire to have a vision (Quinn, 1996). The individual may lack the capability to come up with persuasive or passionate visions, as they are unable to conceptualize anything meaningful. They may conceptualize a vision but this may be undesirable as it may not be consistent with that of the team and this may require that the vision is changed to conform to that of the organization. Long Island University has undergone change in the way it runs its programs in order to catch up with the competition from other institutions of higher learning. This has been through changes in the structures by individuals from their personal level despite painful or undesirable it may seem. Though these changes have been painful, the vision set by the students and the staff have been made a routine in the university and are now widely accepted by both staff and students. Q.4 Torbert’s developmental model for managers has significant influences on mangers as it posits that what differentiates leaders from one another is their internal logic for action and not their style of management or the philosophy that informs their leadership (Torbert, 1987). Leaders must therefore understand their internal logic or alternatively try to change them in order to change their capabilities as well as that of the organization that they work in. Torbert argues that there are seven ways in which managers can exhibit their logic in the management of organizations. The manager can be an opportunist meaning that he is manipulative in his style of management and self-oriented and such kind of manager is always good at handling the opportunities for sales or in emergencies. A manager may also be a diplomat and such kind usually avoids conflicts and obeys the norms of the organization making them good at enhancing the cohesion of the human resources within the organization. The manger may also be an expert who runs the organization through expertise and logic and such are always good as individual contributors. At times, the manager is an achiever who meets the strategic goals of the organization and is well suited in executing the managerial duty as well as meeting the demands of the market. The manager may also be individualist and meets both the personal missions and company actions and such are effective in roles that may involve ventures or consulting. Torbert also states that a manager may be a strategist in that such a manager causes a change at both the individual level as well as the company level and are usually effective in transforming organizations. Finally, according to Torbert a manager may be an Alchemist who is keen in generating social transformations and are good at changing the perceptions of the society (Torbert, 1987). Therefore, whichever style the manager chooses in the running of the organization, the results will be dependent on the strategy model adopted by the manager. References Cameron, K.S. and Quinn, R.,E. (1999) Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Heil, G., McGregor, D., Bennis, W. G., & Stephens, D. C. (2000). Douglas McGregor, revisited: Managing the human side of the enterprise. New York: Wiley. Quinn, R.E. and Rohrbaugh, J. (1981) “A special model of effectiveness criteria: Towards a competing values approach to organizational analysis.” Management Science, 29: 363-377 Quinn, R. E. (1996). Deep change: Discovering the leader within. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey- Bass Publishers. Quinn, R.E. and Spreitzer, G.M. (1991) “The psychometrics of the competing values culture instrument and an analysis of the impact of organizational culture on quality of life.” Research in Organizational Change and Development, 5 : 115‑142. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Torbert, W. R. (1987). Managing the corporate dream: Restructuring for long-term success. Homewood, Ill: Dow Jones-Irwin. Read More