Modern, Symbolic and Postmodern Perspectives as Applied to Organisational Management - Example

Assessment 3 Course Tutor Date Introduction Empirical evaluations and theoretical perspectives have been found to affect the wellbeing of individuals and organisations at large. Apparently, it is important to maintain a good organisational health if set goals and objectives are to be achieved with relative ease. In this journal, I tackle issues and benefits achieved from the study of employee empowerment, workplace management and the resulting culture. In the long run, I understand that these three topics of discussion are interlinked through approaches associated with primary organisational decision making. I learn that the interrelation of these topics comes in communication, their common purpose and willingness to serve others. These are the basic fabrics that hold the organisation together thus forming the base of my choice. The biggest challenge that I note however is that inasmuch as there are several approaches utilised by organisations in restoring sanity at workplace, there is still much to be done due to the conflicting nature of thoughts that existing among the modernists, postmodernists and those who subscribe to symbolic theory. It is however my thought that the self-conscious nature of any organisational manager shall always stand out no matter the school of thought subscribed to as this eventually leads to archaic practices which are sought after by the multi perspective approach. A critical analysis of the readings; what relationships exist between the readings? What patterns have emerged in the development of the theories? In my view, empowering employees, managing the workplace emotions and the ensuing culture form the same bottom line; respect at workplace. To begin with I learn that the link between empowering employees and managing work place forms a major lead towards recognition and manageability of a workplace. A really life example sets back to time when I actually had no chance to manage my own studies as my remedial timetable was managed by a tutor. I came to find that I was not motivated since I felt dictated thus the essence of empowerment and emotional management set in. Fast forward to my current system of study where I feel self-motivated, I am able to manage my studies well and even remain with some time for extracurricular activities. Likening this to the approach used in the study of organisational wellness, I choose a few published journals which I analyse to suit the chosen topics and even to understand them better. I have learned that in empowering employees, organisations have go to extreme ends in order to motivate and even ensure that motivations are conducive for work place management. Inasmuch as empowerment is indicated as a progressive approach towards achieving workplace control, there remains a lot to be done in terms of power, security and dignity. Comparing this to “Employee Empowerment: Democracy or Delusion” an article by Doughty (2005), I realized how the absolute achievement of empowerment is a fad. In his article he expounded greatly how most workplace administrations used cunning strategies to gull workers into self-made oppressions in the name of being noble proletarians. The end result is an important step towards evolutional organisational psychology and humane/ social arrangements which induce a strong lead towards employee empowerment due to its effects on workplace emotions. From the studies I have undertaken, I learned that workplace emotions are highly affected by the employee empowerment schemes that are set in place by the management. I also realize that employees are affected by the small things that the managements do to them in form of promotions, demotions and other forms of power struggle that are observed in the day to day life of an employee. Regarding this topic and its interconnection with the empowerment schemes, I thoroughly analysed research journals that I found to be very important to workplace emotions managements. For example Ashkanasy and Daus (2002), share the same views as I do in that they relate emotional intelligence and broader issues related with management theories that are studied within this course. The strongest area of hypothetical intelligence that is mentioned within their study is that management lacks the ability to pursue human resource emotions regardless of the challenges that this factor poses towards the culture and respect. Workplace management requires that everyone’s emotions are optimised in order to achieve the best of workplace goals. Therefore, it is important to consider this as a decision mover whether it might cost more in terms of transient efforts. In this study I also establish that subsequent culture and respect at workplace form the bottom-line in an employee centred workplace as it is happens in real life. The empowerment of employees in the subsequent management of emotions is in some countries coupled with civility as the main trick towards achieving the best out of the efforts deployed for betterment purposes. As observed in Anderson and Pearson (1999), the concept of culture has been associated with civility. Civility is among the prominent behaviours that is being sought by employers since those perceived as uncivilised are often seen as aggressive. Aggressiveness results from poor workplace emotions and single sided empowerment. This includes such acts of unbalanced employee appraisals which tend to deviate from the recommended leadership practices. Apart from cultural incivility, other issues that I also think of affecting the complicated nature in which traditions are established within organisations. Cultural analyses according to the thoughts to which I subscribe are seemingly situation specific in terms of generated knowledge. This as I came to learn occur due to employee understanding of employer requirements and the context in which the organisations exist. The patterns generated by the topics of study i.e. employee empowerment, management of workplace emotions and the ensuing cultural setups established as employee or organisation oriented. This translates to a multidimensional pattern that dictates the organization’s wellness through attributes such as respect for each other. The empowerment schemes that are set in place usually fail to address the individual definitions of the same. On the other hand emotions differ from one person to the other despite the fact that employers tend to equate one person to the other. Further, while setting up the culture, employee oriented patterns have not been adhered to in the near past owing to negligence from employers in what may be the agreeable behaviour pattern. The trends set by employers are generally task oriented in what employers believe that they have the right to dictate the general behaviour and work place mood. This is usually seen as forcible demands that cannot be met by some individuals who turn out to be defiant leading to subsequent elimination from the entire group. Another pattern that emerged in the last decade is based on empowerment and effective leadership is teamwork as opposed to clustering of employees without necessarily considering their abilities. In the near past, employers have been found to instil team work for purposes of psychological empowerment and change in organisational culture. Whereas team work may seem as a virtual empowerment tool, the strength it possesses in levelling the workplace moods and respect among employees and their employers too is drastic. I also come to realize that team work ensures bilateral growth among employees through recognition by their fellow employees unlike a situation which involves direct nomination by the administration. This betters the employees’ performance and later positive appraisal is likely because they are no longer incognito in any way. Since these readings are meant to complement each other in terms of the documented outcomes, I shall pursue this topic further in the heading below to indicate the interrelation between ideas and concepts that binds them together. How do the ideas and concepts in the readings interrelate? I do not have any reservations when it comes efforts that are set in place by organisations towards achieving desired levels off wellness. This is based on the personal observations made during the learning process that kicked off since this course started. Among the key concepts observed for achievement of organisational culture, emotional improvement and subsequent installation of respect within workplaces include communication, common purpose and the willingness to serve. Organisational goals and other set objectives are used as the basic yardsticks towards the performance appraisal. The effectiveness of the management to maintain and implement a healthy corporate environment cannot go without identifying with the key concepts noted above. The theory behind the objectives that are sort to be achieved through these concepts is that all organisations I have visited be it physical or their corporate websites tend to these three concepts in their outlook. To begin with, the major concept of corporate communication has been embraced by most modern organisations at all levels. Materials unearthed from the websites also indicated the communication can be wealthy if it is ingrained within the core determinants of organisational wellness. This may seem as a strategic orientation while in the real sense it is an integrated concept that cannot be divorced from all levels of organisational maturity. The only way by which a firm’s strategic orientation is likely to change is through installation of workable organisational communication. Culture is obtainable through enduring communication as one of the main methodologies towards a sustainable advantage. It is at this point that all the efforts made by organisations in maintaining the temperatures within their respective areas of work that attracts further studies into this topic. I have also observed that the backbone to key strategic implementation lies in how well an organisation can communicate its motives to the employees. In such scenarios where drastic measures have been taken to achieve corporate wellness, the moods and cultures determine the intentions of the administration. There are some strategies of communication that may be extremely against the organisational cultures and temperatures (emotions) of an organisation. Let us look at an example whereby the management believes that there is a crisis to be solved in order to restore sanity within the organisation. Multilevel communication in such circumstances cannot be of any help. It is good to communicate policy changes for example to the employees through personal approaches than doing it in a blanket manner that may be seen as disrespectful. Contingency meetings that are meant to bring emotional balances on the other side may be done through communicating to teams which may be allowed to discuss the problems facing them and coming up with employee oriented solutions. Other than the communication theory, the willingness to serve is observed as a leading factor towards the maintenance of organisational wellness. In way of example, this theoretical approach is observed in all organisational levels ranging from the management right to the subordinate level. Willingness to serve is paramount to the achievement of empowerment schemes through team work. The easy way to achieving the organisations’ motives is through ensuring constant employee motivation through empowerment. I on my opinion tend to think that there is a major connection between instilling a strong culture of this nature that setting unrealistic goals. Ensuring that employees are willing to achieve together with the organisation turns around to be the best approach as opposed to the tyrannical approach suggested earlier. This can also be achieved through establishment of cultures that attract employees towards laying bear their motives other than victimization. The willingness to serve though is seen as a cultural contemporary that is exaggerated in a bid to achieve excellence. In a study conducted on cultural approaches embraced by corporate entities, it was noted that cultural boom is an overriding factor towards the achievement of both cool organisational emotions and employee empowerment. Innovativeness employed by organisational head however affects the willingness to perform thus affects employee willingness to undertake tasks in a competitive manner that is likely to boost the organisation’s performance. Regarding, the same, organisational culture is affected by interest in identifying sharing, developing and using acquired knowledge in a systematic manner that is meant to receive considerable attentions from subordinates (Alvesson, 2012). Common purpose in an organisation determines the tranquillity achievable in terms of goals set in place for achievement. Cultural conflicts are as a results of mixed emotions that are as a source of poor organisational approach towards common goal of existence. The focus that is set by the management team should be communicated by the management to all employees if anything is to be achieved as per the set guidelines. The commonness in the undertakings of an organisation ensures that people are well managed thereby avoiding repeat jobs that are likely to cause disrespect in the hierarchical aspects. As observed, the financial issues might also be an issue but in such circumstances whereby the organisation is an established entity, the purpose of existence such as the mission objectives are to be revised from time to time in order to fit the dynamic purpose. I also realize that the innovativeness of a given corporate leadership is important towards the achievement of a motivated staff, seasoned culture and subsequent respect within the work place. Allowing innovativeness among employees achieves motivation since they believe that they are given a chance of growth and demonstration of their prowess other than areas whereby managers are forcibly enforcing strategies which in the eyes of employees are deemed to as failures. In order to ensure that the workforce adheres to the organisational objectives and goals, there is need to embrace democracy of thought and action. This aids in establishing cultures in which personalities are responsible towards their own deeds in a highly monitored environment. Social innovation according to a report published by the Bureau of European Policy Advisers (BEPA) in 2011 echoes the same sentiments as shared above. In their article BEPA reiterate the need of having improved social interactions within organisations as a way of optimizing performance. This is set to involve actively, the employees’ input of what may be defined in their best interest as allowable levels of innovation since it is very clear that the cognitive abilities differ from one person to the other. What has been revealed in organisations and management by the use of multiple perspectives? My thoughts with regard to multiple perspectives coincide with those of Palmer et al. (2009) who in their approach towards organisational improvement indicate the importance of viewing the world differently for each personal entity. The studied perspectives in this respect include modern, symbolic-interpretive and postmodern perspectives which are also widely demonstrated depending on the type of organisation under consideration. Organisations are faced by multiple problems thus there is need for them to be approached in a multiple perspectives that are likely to solve them. This approach is also based on the fact that there are particular perspectives in this light that may be considered far much superior over the others. I draw from this statement that multiple theories and perspectives are likely to offer greater knowledge to individuals thus pose importance to the corporate managers. The sociological paradigms that are embraced by Palmer et al. (2009) with regard to the organisational perspectives are likely to encourage individual goal seekers in coming up with assumptions on how to approach the reality that is posed by the day to day challenges. From a personal perspective, I make it out that the significant assumptions that are set in place by various scholars affect the way in which organisations are run. Though this may be seen as a theoretical approach, it comes to my realization that most of the documented facts with respect to organisational management emanates largely lead to practical demonstrations if one would keenly observed on the nature of operations. My commitment to the multiple perspectives is based upon the fact that the complexity of organisational management is becoming overly complicated by the day and might not be sufficiently addressed by a single perspective. Managers are for example entrusted to a limited number of employees who are supposed to deliver ever-growing number of objectives. Again in the same light, they are expected to address the performance issue in a sober manner that ensures that the humane and ethical nature of operation is achieved. With the existence of such contradicting remarks from one industry to the other, the requirement is that the broadest of theoretical categories are to be applied in order to achieve tranquillity in matters related to complexity and uncertainty. Further thoughts regarding organisational approach through multiple perspective offers knowledge regarding the underlying issues that face the management in their daily routines. These may include but not limited to social responsibilities, reactions towards information leaks and other associated scandals. The managers have in most cases been revealed as irresponsible when it comes to addressing such matters due to utter ignorance that exists when it comes to consciousness regarding undertaking reasonable actions for matters at hand. I have observed managements being in a position of dilemma when it comes to making fast decisions that may salvage organisational dignity. The multiple perspectives are also meant to theorize and create an understanding of how to differently influence and interpret the experience seen in other organisations that may have existed before the respective organisations in question. This is in my view not supposed to create any stir but to bring the reality in order to create more effective approach towards management. The assumptions made by most existing organisation’s management overlook the assumptions of the underlying theories thus ending up with wrong approaches towards conflict resolution (Palmer, Akin, & Dunford, 2009). One of the most important perspectives with regard to management is ontology. Ontology refers to assumptions that are made by managers with regard to organisational reality. I have observed more often that managers are taking issues for granted when they should be treated with utmost importance. The questioning power or the cognition behind the organisational existence seems to have dimmed because of the lack of philosophical approaches within their skills. In Dorn et al. (2012) indicates that in reality, the keenness of the managers affect the ontological assumptions that are made with respect to existing phenomenon such as culture and empowerment as examples. As opposed to the objectivists, more subjectivists whose ontological beliefs are merely dependent on experience do exist in large numbers. It is in my opinion important that with the current trends of complexity for managers to question the reality in order to come up with decisions that are best suited for the betterment of the organisation. Epistemology is yet another management perspective that raises questions regarding human’s knowledge. The discriminate nature in which this perspective approaches the reality is based on sheer assumptions (Dachler & Enderle, 1989). Positivist epistemology is said to ensure that one discovers the organisational categorisation through scientific measure of behaviour. Considering the nature of operations in the contemporary world, I back up this theory with remarks that the modernists should develop general theories in order to explain various perspectives of extreme overarching realities. For interpretive categories, the created understanding should be understood from an individual perspective that seeks to reinvent the organisational culture. Lastly I wish to point out the comparison between the modern, symbolic and postmodern perspectives as applies to organisational management. For one, it is important to realize that the limiting factor is the extent to which they demystify their respective knowledge. They all use senses in order to tell the reality from the false findings that may emanate during knowledge analysis phase. While symbolic interpreters for example extend reality to all the senses of human, the modernists shall only deploy four senses in believing what they perceive as the reality. The differences in these schools of thought equally affect my way of thinking since there it is basic argument that the modernists perceive themselves as superior thus luck the general knowledge that is attached to their biased pursuits. Postmodernists have critically refuted the approaches used by both symbolic and modern in that they look towards self-conscious assumptions whose theories are committed to application of ideas borrowed from high level social sciences. Conclusion Organisational management and wellness entirely depends on a diversity of factors that are interlinked. In this journal I successfully demonstrate the factors that determine organisational wellness through three basic topics i.e. employee empowerment, workplace management and the resulting culture. Although this is done in a structured approach as dictated by the course guidelines, I manage to show the links that exist among the topics identified for study. The differences that emerge in the multi perspective approach are also noted to be based upon the ability to use senses effectively. References Alvesson, M. (2012). Understanding Organizational Culture. City Road, London: SAGE. Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, pp. 452-471. Ashkanasy, N. M., & Daus, C. S. (2002). Academy of Management Executive. Emotion in the Workplace: The New Challenge for Managers, pp. 76-86. Bureau of European Policy Advisers (BEPA). (2011). Empowering people, driving change; Social innovation in the european union. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Dachler, H. P., & Enderle, G. (1989). Epistemological and ethical considerations in conceptualizing and implementing human resource management. Journal of Business Ethics, pp. 597-606. Dorn, J., Naz, T., & Pichlmair, M. (2012). Ontology development for human resource management. Vienna, Austria: Technical University Vienna. Doughty, H. A. (2005). Employee Empowerment: Democracy or delusion? The Innovation Journal: Public sector innovation journal, pp. 1-24. Holden, L. (2001). Chapter 13: Employee involvement and empowerment. In I. Beardswell, & L. Holden, Human Resource Management: A Contemporary Approach (pp. pp. 559-597). Pearson Education Limited. Palmer, I., Akin, G., & Dunford, R. (2009). Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Read More