Formal and Informal Organisations - Essay Example

 A Critical Review of Formal and Informal Organisations Insert Name Course Instructor Institutional Affiliation Date Formal and Informal Organisations Introduction From a theoretical stand point, it is obviously useful to depict elements of organizational designs as either formal or informal. Nevertheless, in reality, all organizations respond to conditions and economic situations in diverse ways. It is still useful to acknowledge that organizations are primarily designed as formal or informal according to the typologies of objectives and economic circumstances. Health and social organizations strive to meet very basic needs in the society and as such, most of their functions are organized according to the informal typology (Li et al 2009). The nature of clientele and the manner of activities that form their core objectives sometime demand that formality can be suspended to attain immediate outcomes as situations of health of patient might warrant. Nevertheless, for the reasons of administrative effectiveness, they must strive to retain formal organization to stand the challenges of the medical-legal issues, economy and the body politics medical professionalism. This critical analysis looks at the pertinent predicaments in the health and social services sector and evaluates the remedies that they may have to manage such exigencies. Background of the Organization Types in the Health and Social Organizations Social or health organizations derive their institutional power from the quality of services they render to clients. They must therefore objectify their systems to their most desirable outcomes without which they may have no regard. On the other hand, such organizations render very useful services to the public and therefore must be very rigidly controlled and regulated (Dror 2001). They organizational types they must embrace therefore result from a unique mix of opportunities and challenges. Conventionally, health and social organizations assume a formal design because of the centralized administrative practices in the public sector. Mixed systems in the institutional plan are therefore called for to bridge the gap of uncertainties and emergency (Mitchell & Shortell 2000). It is through the mixed designs that many organizations adjust to their real predicaments and survive the market. Without the ability to survive, organizations would simply perish to bankruptcy. The demands at the operations end of the organization are enormous. It is the nature of such demands that compel the organizations to adjust to informal approaches to such operations. It must be mentioned that such organizations retain perfect formal operations at the policy and administrative levels (Brugha & Zwi 2008). The necessity of such a mixed approach is widely justified by the demands and the randomness with which those demands take. A hospital for instance may never be able to plan the number of patients they will admit in a month for various illnesses. They have to take in whatever they receive. Sometimes, the administrative practices change rapidly and at other times the methods and practices change. In the light of such rapid changes, the best way to keep the pace is by adjusting to informality in the operations while making adjustments to retain formal structures at the administrative levels. Crisis of various forms demand customized approaches which would obtain the appropriate remedies. Institutions can either make adjustments or suffer the consequences because there are immediate repercussions to all inefficient in the business environment (Greenhalgh et al 2008). Formal and Informal Organisation Designs The typical organization must define its characteristics effectively so that employees are fully aware of their roles and functions and the values of their organizations. In this regard, the informal organization must acknowledge itself on the basis of routines and practices that they require employees to display (Priest et al, 2008). They thus tend to be dynamic, and excellent at attaining results for specific programs and objectives. Such organizations tend to evolve constantly and are guided by broadly defined objectives. The informal organization seeks flexible and easily adaptable employees because it deals with diverse conditions and demands which demand flexibility and the ability of the employees to exercise considerable creativity. They therefore tend to treat each employee as they would like because they are not apt to taking drastic measures. Instead, they gradually adjust to a compromised approach to the mechanisms of internal control (Christensen et al 2007). The informal organization must excel at the motivation employees because they are very fluid and sometimes very flat. They prefer collective decision making and as such, deploy consultative approaches in many instances. Such a design is therefore suited to the situations that change rapidly. They lay the foundation of their activities on trust and reciprocity between various players. The formal organization on the other hand is one based on broadly defined objectives and activities are specified in details. They have enduring traditions unless the company deliberately makes alterations to such, they have a missionary perspective to their agenda and approach to the business activities and they are largely plain (Lega 2007). Most formal organizations have roles specified and bureaucratic operations. They have hierarchical systems of authority and are largely bound by codified rules and programs. Their approach to the institutional design is easily explained and understood. They take a critical approach to the issues and situations in the organization that demand attention. Organizational Design in Health and Social Organizations The nature of institutions in the health and social services sector is unique and as such demand flexibility of operations at critical departments. This is due to the fact that emergencies are rampant and they are dealing in very critical services. Informal adaptation at given centres is theretofore useful because the employees need considerable autonomy to address their obligations with creativity and with a human touch. Day-to-day management in the health and social service sector entail many demands and emergencies like ambulance services to transfer patients in critical situations, emergencies of various magnitudes and concern for lives or family relations (Abernethy & Vagnoni 2004). These are not very easy to manage conditions. Informal adaptation at some departments is therefore desirable so that important obligations and duties are discharged expeditiously. Employees in such departments need frequent training and evaluation to keep the pace with standards and new inventions in the services they offer. According to Robert Dublin, informal adaptation facilitates to sustain organizations from self-inflicted rot resulting from over-reliance on rules and codified activities (Gershuny 2000). Conclusion It is necessary that organizations insist on a definite structure so that their employees are abreast of the expectations and options available during their activities. This is a necessary condition because employees need to be specialized and regulated by extensively defined operations and activities. However, the business climate in some sectors may not always allow very definite approaches. Mixed approaches in the institutional design are therefore called for to bridge the gap of uncertainties and emergencies. It is through the mixed designs that many organizations adjust to their real predicaments. In making adjustments, the management must specify to employees the degree of freedom and self volition that they may exercise in the light of each challenge. Bibliography Abernethy, M. A., & Vagnoni, E 2004, Power, organization design and managerial behaviour. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29(3), 207-225. Brugha, R., & Zwi, A. (2008). Improving the quality of private sector delivery of public health services: challenges and strategies. Health policy and planning, 13(2), 107-120. Christensen, T., Lægreid, P., Roness, P. G., & Rovik, K. A 2007, Organization theory and the public sector: instrument, culture and myth. Routledge. Dror, D. M 2001, Reinsurance of health insurance for the informal sector. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 79(7), 672-678. Franco, L. M., Bennett, S., & Kanfer, R 2002, Health sector reform and public sector health worker motivation: a conceptual framework. Social science & medicine, 54(8), 1255-1266. Gershuny, J. I 2000, The informal economy: its role in post-industrial society. Futures, 11(1), 3-15. Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., Bate, P., Macfarlane, F., & Kyriakidou, O 2008, Diffusion of innovations in health service organisations: a systematic literature review. John Wiley & Sons. Lega, F 2007, Organisational design for health integrated delivery systems: theory and practice. Health policy, 81(2), 258-279. Li, L. C., Grimshaw, J. M., Nielsen, C., Judd, M., Coyte, P. C., & Graham, I. D 2009, Use of communities of practice in business and health care sectors: A systematic review. Implement Sci, 4(27), 16. Mitchell, S. M., & Shortell, S. M 2000, The governance and management of effective community health partnerships: a typology for research, policy, and practice. Milbank Quarterly, 78(2), 241-289. Priest, N., Armstrong, R., Doyle, J., & Waters, E 2008, Policy interventions implemented through sporting organisations for promoting healthy behaviour change. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 3. Read More