Change Management and Organization - Case Study Example

PUBLIC MANAGEMENT STUDENT NAME PROFESSOR’S NAME COURSE TITLE DATE Case Study 3: Change Management and Organization: The State Mining Co. Diagnosis of the Problem The State Mining Co. (hereinafter referred to as “The Mining Co”) seeks to increase its production however, there are problems that make their goals unattainable include: Delays: The delays faced by the mining co. are attributable to the failure of the equipment at the coalmine and WL1 acts as a pilot in using a new organizational strategy to reduce the delays. These delays occasioned by geological, mechanical and geological factors. Where there is delay, in the production process, those concerned individuals seek to avoid blame or better or they try to place the blame on someone else. Ideally, the non-mining departments are defensive since for them they only expect machines to work properly despite the geological difficulties. Additionally, physical constraints occasioned by the inefficiency in collecting information and different versions of same incident may fail to filter up to the hierarchy due to different channels of communication. Non-co-ordination amongst the different levels of management: The top-level management in the three departments has some tension amongst them that can ultimately lead to misunderstandings amongst the departments. For instance, the chief electrical and mechanical engineers are technocratic and concentrate more on the overall system and technology while their deputies responds only to crisis and arranging machine repairs underground. Moreover, in other departments the mode of communication is diplomatic and milder whereas in mining and engineering hierarchy it is more direct and sharp. Moreover, within the organization some individuals enjoy higher levels of trust from the general manager unlike other deputy managers hence creating tensions within the organizations top-level management. No adequate levels of control and reporting mechanisms: The mining company has inadequate and a dysfunctional mechanism to report any happenings at the organization since the hierarchical reporting mechanism is dysfunctional. For instance, when there are delay all the departments rush to know what is happening from their subordinates, causes, symptoms and the breakdown. Moreover, before submission of the delay reporting it to another level in their management or replying to line management. Recommendations to the State Mining Corporations The recommendations in this case include: Focusing on Task Performance and Structure The aim of any company such as the mining company in this case is to improve its performance through reducing the effects of delays on production. The organization needs to ensure that its employees work within the scope of their job description, perform their duties limited to their positions, and adhere to the rules and procedures set out by the company and their job descriptions (Tannenbaum &Schmidt, 1973). The managers and deputy managers in the departments of the mining company need to ensure that they act within the rules and procedures, control the workers, and train them on what every subordinate need to do within the organization. Adopt a Functional Organizational Structure: A functional organization ensures that the workers professionalism and identity is maintained, easy to administer, allows specialization and that every department within the organization has access to expertise. One can classify the corporation as dysfunctional since each department acts on incident report at the same time instead of working together to find a common solution to the problems within the mining company. Despite the challenges that a functional organizational structure presents such as differentiating departments and it is difficult to allocate responsibility, the coalmine industry requires a functional organization to perform its task. Below Figure 1: Model Functional Organizational structure to be adopted by the Mining C In the proposed organizational structure, the Chief Mining Engineer remains the head of the mining company while the three departments remain working under him and reporting to him. Creating a new position of the Chief Operations Officer who is answerable to the Chiefs of the various departments would eliminate the attitudes of the mining engineers since a neutral person would be in-charge of conveying company’s information to the superiors. It will also eliminate the lack of confidence in the mechanical department since they will no longer have to explain or account to the line management for equipment failures. Ideally, supervisors who work under the Assistants of departments will be able to solve problems immediately reported by the workers and they will only involve the top echelons of management if the problem is serious requiring expert decisions. The structure also shows the hierarchy of the company structure mirroring the communication channel, superiority of different individuals. This will incorporate confidence and cooperation necessary for the success of the mining co. The ideal structure seeks to in relation to specialization, breaks down problems into specialized job functions. The coordination of the company is hierarchical through the immediate superior, the responsibility linked to individual in their working roles and that there is vertical interaction between the superiors and the subordinates (Chandler, 1962). A condition to all workers is that loyalty is to the mining company and that workers need to be dutiful to the superiors. Technology and Management In the coalmine industry, the main problem attributed to delays caused by the failure of equipment to work, as they need to work. According to Womack et al, (19910 they asserts that technology influences the way in which the organization works and that lean production is a result of efficiency in management. This is because there is a perception that an organization must take into consideration external organization factors in order to perform better. Therefore, in the mining organization in relation to ensuring the best working conditions for the equipment of the organization, then it needs to operate in small groups that are independent and responsible for performance of a task. For instance the supervisors are people with great technical skills and they need to work closely with workers at the same time have a smaller administrative structure. According to Mintzberg (1979), he asserts that in managing a mass production industry then there needs to be control of unskilled workers through supervision but the level of control must be less bureaucratic but more flexible and accommodating. Interpretation of the Problems in the Coalmine using Organization theory Concepts The scientific management theory as defined by Frederick W. Taylor (1911) focuses on increasing efficiency within the workplace by the differentiation of managers from those who play a non-supervisory workers and systemization of jobs of the types of employees (Taylor, 1911). In the scientific model theory, the managers are assigned all the responsibilities as opposed to workers and make use of science to determine the appropriate ways of performing work. Additionally, one needs to hire technocrats to perform each job, train the workers to perform the job, monitor work performance to ensure that the work procedures are followed correctly and the desired results is achieved and plan work while eliminating possible interruptions (Fiedler & Garcia, 1987). This theory used during the world wars to improve productivity; however in the current scenario one must incorporate modern equipment and technology in running coal mines (Edmondson et al., 2003). Applicable in solving the mining co problems; it will require managers to train the workers on how well to perform their work, the appropriate reporting procedures within the organization and at the same time enable the mining co to hire only those who know what they are doing based on experience, skill and knowledge. The way in which the coal mining co-operates reflects the failure of the company to administer the respective departments more effectively and efficiently. According to Henri Fayol he developed an administrative process in relation to management where function is based on hierarchical structure (Fayol, 1925). In the administrative theory of organization requires two approaches: coordination and specialization. In coordination the employees need to be accountable to one superior person, the person superior needs to only have subordinates whom one can easily manage and that the superior needs to be limited to those tasks that are special and the subordinates work on the other work (Simon,1976). In relation to specialization, the work needs to be assigned into working groups depending on the purpose, process and the geography (Fayol, 2000). The failure to have a proper administrative process that delineates the work of managers and subordinates within the mining co brings the confusion and tension. The company is unable to manage delays, the superior is unable to get information adequately about breakdowns and there are no functional procedures within the organization. Max Weber’s ideal bureaucracy theory, he defines bureaucracy as “a specific administrative structure based on a legal and rule oriented authority” (Scott, 1988). In this theoretical model one distributes work within the organization amongst members, there is an administrative hierarchical structure, it is rule oriented describing its performance and that the staff are selected according to their technical qualifications (Stacey, 2007). This model of organization is applicable to the mining company since most of the managers are technocrats and prefer to leave the work to others and do other jobs that are ideal to them. CASE STUDY 3: East Gate City Strategy What are the main Problems Affecting Eastgate’s Strategy Process Lack of Political Commitment and Internal Wrangles The main problem in the creation and implementation of Eastgate strategy is the lack of commitment from both the political leaders and the technocrats. For instance, the main players the Governor Troyan decides to launch a traditional-style industrial planning while at the same time the Mayor, Xavier launches a city strategy that seeks to imitate international standards. Moreover, there are internal wrangles within the organization, non-coordination and non-cooperation amongst the leaders such as Rohan, Fang, Xavier, Machen hence they derail the creation and the implementation of the strategy. Who controls the Strategy Process The Eastgate strategy fails to stipulate who is in-charge of the implementation and creation of the strategy. For instance, Machen the Head of Department of Economic Planning hires hundreds of specialists and representatives with huge information to gather in development of the strategy. At the same time, the person in charge of implementing the strategy monopolizes the whole process with the working groups, committees falling into disuse. Further most of the players in the creation of the strategy isolate other important players in the creation of the strategy Delegation In any organization, when creating or implementing a strategy, one needs to ensure that they execute their responsibilities to the latter. However, one problem in the creation of the strategy is the failure of Machen in delegating the important work of drafting a policy document to Niais a young historian showed a high level of incompetence, non-commitment to the success of the work and the disobedience of top-level managers in seeing the strategy’s implementation. Shahin though, assigned the task to launch a city strategy then he goes ahead to delegate it to his subordinate Marchen. Different Strategies The other problem facing Eastgate, is the opposing interests in amongst the top-level leaders in the organization. For instance, Governor Troyan launches a new strategy with a traditional style of industrial planning while the Mayor Xavier chooses a style that meets international standards. Recommendations A strategy in any organization or a municipality system refers to the “plans that an organization creates when responding to the changes that occur externally or internally within the organization” (Morgan, 1986). The Eastgate Strategy needs to appreciate the relationship that exists between the thoughts and actions by the leaders in organizing and creating a strategy. The leaders need to recognize that the key to successfully carrying out the Eastgate strategy is recognizing that a municipal system is just the same as an organization. The Governor and the Mayor need to have a working relationship, organize their specific teams to ensure efficiency. They need to stem out the supremacy battles amongst the top-level management team since it derails the implementation of Eastgate strategy (Mintzberg & Waters, 1985). The technical assistance teams cannot delegate responsibility for the strategy but the municipal administration needs to retain ownership of the process. This solves the issue of Fang taking over the implementation, monitoring and coordinating the strategy despite being the ‘savior of the city’ from a weak strategy. Technical assistance is important since it sets up organizational structure, identification of the right mix of people, talents and groups and creation of the methodological framework. In the East Strategy case, Michen draws hundreds of specialist from businesses, NGOs with no clear clarification of what their duties entail. The first thing that Eastgate needs to do is to ask the citizens of what they want to see in their own city. The opinion given by the citizen is important since it enables strategy creators to know the direction in which the plan will take. Involving the citizens also enables them to own the strategy and support the Governors in the ideas they give in relation to the organization. Further the Governor and the Mayor need to develop the objectives and priorities that are to be adopted by them in creating the Eastgate City Strategy. According to Mintzberg & Waters (1985), they assert than in any organization, the “to-tier management consultants manage the project known as either the intended or deliberate strategy. However, in this case scenario the municipal system requires the input of all the stakeholders to make the project a success. According to Robert (2004), he states that in order to have a good strategy, there needs to be a simple plan, representing the “big picture” of what the strategy aims to achieve, its versatility and whether departing from the plan will yield a better result (Spulber, 2004). An important factor for the creators of the Eastgate strategy is to co-relate to the goals and objectives of the organization and that the structure of the organization conforms to the strategy. Eastgate’s strategy co-relates material to the structure of the municipal systems because those who work within the organization have the ultimate task of bringing the reality According to Fredrickson (1984), the importance of technical assistance in coming up with a strategy is essential for its success. A technical assistant is someone who has no hidden or ulterior interest in the strategy, someone who is able to use their expertise, skill and experience honestly something that so far lacks in the Eastgate’s strategy (Lin & Kleiner, 1999). For instance, Niais is a young historian and since he is inexperienced in producing reports, he gives a laughable report while the expert Machen fails to utilize his abilities. The Eastgate strategy requires technocrats internally driven regardless of their interest to perform their duties by adhering to the procedures and rules of the organization while taking into consideration the opinions of those who work under them (Mathias & Jackson, 2005). The municipal system of administration in Eastgate requires a divisional kind of management structure whereby it is structured in a way that all the departments at Eastgate have specific duties to do (Robert, 2004). This will ensure that no one will monopolize the creation and implementation of the strategy since everyone will know exactly what to do. It will imply that the Mayor and the Governor the top management will have limited decision-making capacity and will see that decision making on the strategy will be at different levels. In creating a good strategy then the organization needs a “master planner” who is able to coordinate the organizations strategy and ensure that the Municipality gets the best workable plan (Clegg et al. 1996). Motivation in many instances has been referred to as “ the extent to which persistent efforts is directed towards a goal” (McCelland, 1985). Motivation thus when used in the right way by the top-level management would yield better results in the creation of the strategy rather than derail the process. In the case of Eastgate strategy, those working to create city’s strategy are constantly working to bring their rivals down. For instance, the Governor gives an invitation for Shahin to leave the mayor’s administration and in future become the mayor’s rival. Rivalry in any organization is considered a motivating factor however; the management should use it for the good of the organization. Offering rewards for those who perform better and promotions will ensure that the technocrats and leaders chosen maintain their positions regardless of any incentives offered to them by the organization (Chandler, 1962). Motivation may involve focusing on the needs of those working in the creation of the strategy, capacity building and developing the individual through training growth in knowledge and experience. In reconciling the Eastgate problems in relation to the implementation and creation of the strategy, then the authority and responsibilities of the top-level managers needs to be felt. The municipal administration needs to show those working for it that they are in control and should not let them take over the project because of their expert contribution (Fayol, 2000). The hierarchical structure of issuing commands and communication needs to be in place to ensure that those working for the project will not have two superiors undermining the authority, discipline, order and stability within the entire administration system (Chandler, 1962). The municipal administration needs to have an agreement on what are the objectives of the municipality in creating the strategy and that the interests of those who work for the strategy creation are treated with respect regardless of whether they are individual interest or the administrations interests. The municipal administration in create a centralized system in relation to ensuring that the top-level leaders retain their authority to control and instruct those working on creating the strategy (Duncun, 1979). Since they need direct information and communication, it will eliminate the chances of those working for the administration from taking over the project of the organization. Stability of the tenure of office holders is instrumental in ensuring that the Eastgate strategy adopted as desired. In conclusion, the recommendations needed in the Eastgate city strategy is entirely related to the structure of organization, identification of the objectives of the strategy and using rivalry to improve performance of the technocrats and the strategy implementation teams. REFERENCES Chandler, A 1962, Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History if Industrial Enterprise, MIT Press, Cambridge Clegg, S., Hardy, C., & Nord, W. 1996, Managing Organizations, Penguin Books Ltd, London Duncun, R , 1979, What is the Right Organization Structure? Decision Tree Analysis Provides the Answer, Organizational Dynamic, pp. 431 Edmondson, A., Roberto, M. & Watkins, M. 2003, “A Dynamic model of top management team effectiveness: managing unstructured task streams”, The Leadership Quarterly, vol.14, pp. 297-325 Fayol, H. 1925, Industrial and General Administration, Dunod, Paris Fayol, H 2000, “Managing in the 21st Century”, The British Journal of Administrative Management. Fiedler, F. & Garcia, J. 1987, New Approaches to effective leadership: cognitive resources and organizational performance, Wiley: New York. Fredrickson, J W 1984, ‘The Comprehensiveness of Strategic Decision Processes: Extension, Observations, Future Directions’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 27, no. 3, pp.445-446 Lin, Y, & Kleiner, B 1999, ‘How to hire employees effectively’, Management Research News, vol. 22, pp. 18-25 Mathias, R, & Jackson, J 2005, Human Resource management: Essential Perspectives, 3rd edn, Canada, Southe Western Australia. McClelland, D. C. (1985). Human Motivation. Glenview, IL.: Scott Foresman. Mintzberg, H 1981, “Organization Design, Fashion or Fit” Harvard Business Review, pp. 103-106 Mintzberg, H. & Waters, 1985, “Of Strategies, Deliberate and Emergent”, Strategic Management Journal, vol.6, pp.257 Morgan, G 1986, Images of Organization. Sage Publications, London Robert, M G 2004 Contemporary Strategy Analysis: Concepts, Techniques, Applications, 5th edn, Blackwell Stacey, R D 2007, Strategic Management and Organizational Dynamics,5th ed, Harlow:FT Prentice Hall Scott, W., Mitchell, T., & Birnbaum, P., 1981, Organization Theory a structural and behaviorial analysis, Richard Irwin Inc, Georgetown Scott, R.W., 1998, Organizations-rational, Natural, and open systems, Prentice Hall, 4 Udgave Spulber, D.F. 2004, Management Strategy, McGraw-Hill Companies Inc, New York Taylor, F.W., 1911, The Principles of Scientific Management, Harper, New York.. pp. 34-40 Tannenbaum, R & Schmidt 1973, “How to Choose a Leadership Pattern”, Harvard Business Review. Read More