Symbols in Organizations

“An organization’s culture is revealed and communicated through its symbols,” (Bolman and Deal, 2008, p.254).   According to Bolman and Deal (2008), one of the assumptions of the symbolic frame is, “What is most important is not what happens but what it means.” (p. 253).  The United States Marines Corps (USMC) uses several symbols:  the eagle, gold and anchor emblem, the sword, and rank to award each marine.  The eagle, gold and anchor emblem is used to symbolize the commitment to defend the United States (US) in air, land or sea (USMC, 2014).  It represents pride, world presence and naval traditions (USMC, 2014).   It instills a sense of authority through legitimacy.  Recall that people will obey authority when they perceive it to be legitimate, without legitimacy a leader is powerless (Bolman & Deal, 2008, p. 343) 

The sword is used in ceremonial services as a reminder to Marines of America’s former defenders in the first battle on foreign oil which took place in Tripoli (USMC, 2014).  “Marines had marched across 600 miles of North African desert to rid the “shores of Tripoli” of pirates and rescue the kidnapped crew of the USS Philadelphia” (USMC, 2014, para. 8).  The sword is a reminder of those who served in the past and their unrelenting strength and determination to accomplish their mission.  This symbol helps solidify one’s purpose and reason for serving in the USMC.   

The various insignias for rank serve to identify those who earned great levels of leadership and responsibility; it is issued to those enlisted or in officer positions (USMC, 2014).    It serves as a reminder that she/he possesses recognizable qualities of a leader; helps gain the respect from peers; and motivates the individual to want to escalate up in rank.  If you are motivated, then you see your position as meaningful and valuable. 

According to Sharfritz, Ott and Yang (2008), most people have a desire to have “a high evaluation of themselves, for self-respect, or self-esteem,” (p.175).  Providing opportunities to reach different levels in the hierarchy helps satisfy the self-esteem.   “When the self-esteem is satisfied, it leads to feelings of self-confidence, worth, strength, capability and adequacy of being useful and necessary in the world” (Shafritz et al. 2008, p. 175).  The USMC uses these symbols to unite, motivate, and create commitment to the organization to help accomplish its mission and goals (Bolman & Deal, 2008, p. 253). 

Symbols of the Marines

References

Bolman, L. and Deal, T. (2008).  Reframing organizations. San Francisco, CA: John

            Wiley & Sons, Inc. 

Shafritz, J., Ott, S., Suk Jang, Y. (2008). Classics of organization theory.   Belmont,CA:

            Wadsworth Publishing Company

United States Marine Corps. (2014). Symbols. Retrieved from http://www.marines.com/history-   heritage/symbols

United States Marine Corps. (2014). The symbols of our corps.  Retrieved from     http://www.marines.com/videos/-/video-library/detail/video_symbols

Leadership

In Deep Impact the president uses the political and symbolic frame.  There is ambiguity or uncertainty about what to do with information that has been obtained in advance by a reporter.  According to Bolman and Deal (2008), “when ambiguity increases, the political and symbolic perspectives become more relevant” (p.318). The president weighs his options and attempts to influence and persuade the reporter to delay her from delivering the news that will impact the people, when he feels that she may proceed despite his request to delay, he appeals to her using the nation as a symbol to attach significance.  The president then attempts to negotiate with the reporter and intimidates her with posturizing while reminding her of his position in the hierarchy.

In the movie 300, provided by Nunarri, Canton, Goldman, Silver and Snyder (2006), under threat that Sparta would be invaded by Persians, Leonides, King of Sparta exhibits all four modes:  structural, political, human resource and symbolic.  While it is recommended that the movie be viewed in its entirety, two links are provided as a glimpse to what can be expected  

AND 

 

Diversity

With regard to the readings by Shafritz and Suk Yang (2008), it is understood that a diverse workforce can bring innovation and help broaden the vision of an organization.  Having a diverse culture brings an assortment of ideas to the table and helps break away from long-standing resistant like attitudes or processes that develop within an organization. One should be cautious about simply mixing the workforce without providing education on cultural differences and benefits; doing so can instill resentment among groups that have not been exposed to training in diversity.  To help eliminate gender designated roles in the workplace and promote equality across the board, organizations should help support discussions where employees can engage in healthy debates to “air out” their differences and develop policies that help promote the advancement of women in the workplace.    

Shafritz, J., Ott, S., Suk Jang, Y. (2008). Classics of organization theory.   Belmont,CA: 

Wadsworth Publishing Company

What is Appreciative Inquiry?

What is a “life-centric view” or organizations?  What is Appreciative Inquiry?  How does it differ from traditional problem-solving in organizations?

According to Cooperrider and Whitney,  “life-centric” view of organizations is to view organizations as the center of vital connections and life-giving potentials;  where relationships, partnerships, alliances, webs of knowledge and action harness the power of a variety of strengths (as cited in Shafritz, Ott and Jang, 2011, p. 395).   Appreciative Inquiry (AI) is the practice of using “positive strength-based approach to organization development and change management” (Shafritz et al., 2011, p. 395).  It is discovering the “best in people, their organizations and the world around them” (Shafritz, et al, 2011, p. 397); it is a systematic discovery of what gives life to an organization when it is most effective and most capable in economic, ecological and human terms (Shafritz, et al, 2011, p. 397).   It is the ability to focus on the positives of an organization to make it superior, as opposed to focusing on the negatives.   It is the “art and practice of asking unconditional positive questions that strengthens a system’s capacity to apprehend, anticipate and heighten positive potential” (Shafritz, et al, 2011, p. 397). 

It is quite different from the problem solving approach.  The problem solving approach instills negativity because it allows groups to focus too much time on what is wrong which can eventually lead to low morale (Luechauer, 2000). It creates a grid-lock between upper management, middle managers and staff, where everyone blames each other for the problem which leads to an unwillingness to generate ideas on how to find a solution (Luechauer, 2000).  In problem solving you identify what the problem is, analyze the causes of what brought the problem about, present solutions and then treat the problem with an action plan (Shafritz, et al. 2011, p. 399).  Whereas in AI, you appreciate and value the best of what is, you envision/design what might be and discuss what something should be (Shafritz, et al. p. 399).   This philosophy helps extract innovation from groups and makes them feel that they are part of a positive change, it transforms people.  

To help gain a better understanding of appreciative inquiry, please view these videos: 

  

References:

Luechauer, David L. (2000). Applying appreciative inquiry instead of problem-solving techniques to facilitate change.  Management Development Forum, Vol 2: 1(99).  Retrieved from 

http://www8.esc.edu/esconline/across_esc/forumjournal.nsf/3cc42a422514347a8525671d0049f395/5a8d486a2c5f9b0e852568fd00561f17?OpenDocument

Shafritz, J., Ott, S., Suk Jang, Y. (2008). Classics of organization theory.   Belmont,CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company

The Drucker School (Producer). (2011, September 1).  Appreciative inquiry:  A conversation  with David Cooperrider.  Podcast retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzW22wwh1J4

Townsin, Jon. (nd.). Appreciative inquiry. Podcast retrieved from       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzW22wwh1J4

Managing Power and Conflicts

          Organizations are complex systems arranged by individuals and coalitions that exist with their own beliefs, interests, values, preferences and perceptions (Shafritz, Ott, Jang, 2008).    The mention of power among organizations is primarily seen as negative, as organizations that devour smaller organizations in their quest for advancement. That too much power is not good because organizations can manipulate and control the market in their favor. Power does not reside only in organizations but with groups that exercise their power from bottom up, such as unions or civil rights group.

            Power that lies in organizations and those that help lead it should understand their structure as an organization and learn how to work with internal and external forces that help form the organization.  There are too many interests and at times scarce resources which can lead to struggles and conflicts,  but conflict should not be viewed as negative but rather good because it challenges the status quo (Boleman and Deal, 2008), which organizations often cling to when new ideas, innovation or approaches are introduced.  Boleman and Deal (2008) point out that a leader must have vision and strategy and should learn when to use power, especially when it can affect change in precarious situations.  A key factor taken from the readings:  learn to develop, maintain and balance business relationships among your constituents (organizational subordinates, competitors, the public/customers, political leaders, or your board).  Shafritz et al. (2008) point out that influence is your primary “weapon” in competing and conflicts, therefore, be influential.  A good leader who learns to master this knows that he/she will at one point need to call upon the relationship if they wish to advance organizational interests.  A powerless leader breeds lack of respect, low morale with increased criticism and resistance towards the boss (Shafritz, et al., 2008).  According to Kokemuller (nd.),  a leader’s influence motivates workers to complete tasks, encourages other leaders, aligns organizations mission and vision and goes on to explain that  influencing others to move in a certain direction is a major element of leadership.  A wise leader with influence picks and choose the issues pertinent to an organization and those they think they can win.  If you lack the skill to influence, Tardanico (2011) recommends that you understand your style, understand who are your stakeholders, identify your gaps to determine if you need a different approach, develop yourself in areas that you know you need to improve and practice on smaller scale using individuals or situation to influence. 

A good leader should know how to agenda set, map political terrain, create coalitions, network, bargain and negotiate (Boleman & Deal, 2008).  A leader should not always assume that power is top down but know that power can be bottom-up through the use of pressures or resistance from groups.  A leader with power should proceed with caution because too much power can ruin an organization (Boleman & Deal, 2008).  This was the case with leaders from Enron who used their power to drive the organization into the abyss by financially collapsing the organization.  It is important to understand that your ability to influence bears a great deal in how far you can take an organization but one must be wary of the use of power an individual(s) has over its stakeholders as well as external powers that can change an organization. 

References:

Bolman, L. and Deal, T. (2008).  Reframing organizations.  San Francisco, CA: John Wiley &Sons, Inc.

Kokemuller, Neil. (n.d.). The advantanges of influence in leadership.   Retrieved June 29, 2014            from eHow:  http://www.ehow.com/info_12134514_advantages-influence-leadership.html

Shafritz, J., Ott, S., Suk Jang, Y. (2008). Classics of organization theory.   Belmont,CA:        Wadsworth Publishing Company

Tardanico, Susan. (2011, December 1). Five ways to increase your influence.  Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/work-in-progress/2011/12/21/five-steps-to-increase-your-        influence/

Organizing Groups and Teams

Organizing Groups and Teams within Organizations (chapter 5)
A reflection from the reading of Bolman and Deal (2008) on organizing groups and teams helped me think and answer the following:  Why is it important to organize teams in an organization?  What does it take to have a successful team? What should we look for when we need to create one?

A successful group or team helps an organization advance its mission, vision and goals.  It’s important to have successful teams as it can raise the performance of individuals or it can diminish the well-intended and motivated spirits of those around them (Bolman & Deal, 2008).   Individuals should know what their role and responsibilities are so that they may understand how their contribution will affect the group.  A well put together team is motivated, uses creativity, is driven, and should have such a high level of trust and reliance among each other that it should be visible from the outside in, much like when the basketball team the Miami Heat plays.  The level of interconnectedness along with reframing makes them extraordinarily exceptional as a team.  A team should be a structure where members can express their ideas or views without fears of retribution and where members together reach a consensus.   In a poorly constructed team, there can be dissention in the group, feelings of isolation, individuals with unmatched skillsets, lack of trust and morale, all which can bring a project to a halt or fulfill below average expectations.  Essentially, the structure involves understanding what needs to be done, identifying who will be in charge, what or who needs to be coordinated and taking time to analyze the skillsets of staff to determine what responsibilities can be assigned in order to build a cohesive team.  Teams can be basic or complex.  Basic structures have “clearly defined roles, elementary forms of interdependence and coordination by plan or command; complex structures have flexible roles, a give-and-take, organized using lateral dealings and communal feedback" (Bolman & Deal, 2008, p. 102). The structure of a group can be defined by the group and can be either tight or loose.  What is important is that the team be able to adapt to the situation.  The reporting structure or hierarchy and flow of information can vary; it can be from top-down, be shared, circular or networked.  In circular and networked, communication is much simpler where groups or individuals may communicate with each other with fewer restrictions.  This is a preference over the one boss, dual or simple hierarchy arrangement.   Circular and networked allows the teams to interact easily and transfer information to each other, instead of waiting for information to flow to/from the top and waiting long periods for a decision to made.  Although, the nature of business may influence the structure, for example, in healthcare you may need a more top down approach because it involves patient safety.  Size matters, if the structure of a team is too large it becomes unmanageable, if so, then additional team leaders should be added to help alleviate oversight.

When Government Fails to Oversee Treatment of Foster Children

When People and Organizations Are Too Rigid

Interpretation of Bolman and Deal (2008) is understood as the job role of the individual has become so rigid that that they fail to focus on the big picture or are just unclear about what their job responsibility is.  The person lacks creativity and does not consider how their behavior will impact the end result when dealing with a customer, client or citizen. The individual is boxed into a role or an organization functions with stringent rules and procedures that does not allow them to veer away from the job function or use proper judgement when dealing with the public.  

I found two interesting articles that reflects this: 

The first case - TSA and the elderly.  Here two elderly women were humiliated and tremendously embarrassed as they were stripped search by TSA employees at Kennedy Airport.  The women were 89 and 85 in age.  

According to Shapiro (2012), one woman was forced to show her colonoscopy bag and the other, who declined to go through the scanner and admitted to wearing a defibrillator bag, had her clothing removed instead of being patted down. Apparently, TSA said they had volunteered.  There is nothing about volunteering when you have the pressure of the TSA standing in front of you.  One of the women was in a wheelchair and with a walker in her lap because she had injured her leg (Shapiro, 2012).  TSA later admitted publicly that they the workers had violated procedures (Shapiro, 2012).   

Reference:

Schapiro, Rich. (2012, January 18).  TSA admits wrongdoing in in cases of two elderly woman who claim there were stripped search.  New York Daily News. Retrieved from http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/tsa-apologizes-elderly-women-strip-search-kennedy-airport-article-1.1007725# 

The second case - Fish and Wildlife Service goes after a tree trimmer. 

Structure and Organization

This week’s reading of Boleman and Deal (2008) provided an interesting read.  Essentially, they discussed organizational structure, provided examples of what happens when an organization has a fluid structure and when the structure fails; who developed structural perspectives; and raised the question on whether organizations and people need structure.    According to Boleman and Deal (2008), structure is a blueprint of official sanctioned expectations and exchanges among internal players and external constituents which can help or hinder an organization.  They presented two cases:  management of the USS Kennedy which exemplified the complex workings of an aircraft carrier and the 9/11 terrorists attacks.  The aircraft contained more than 5,000 workers managed by a captain, yet on this aircraft everyone is assigned to a job and color coded in uniforms to identify who does what.  Seems as if everyone had a clear understanding of what their job role was.   In times of war you would need to know, otherwise small mistakes could lead to large catastrophes.  The case of 9/11 demonstrated what happens when you do have structure but that structure is so rigid with many layers that it fails the system.   In this case, government agencies had internal structures but failed miserably when external factors weren’t considered in communications.   Government agencies seemed to have worked more as an individual unit as opposed to working as a whole with external agencies. 

There were two important people that developed structural perspectives, Frederick W. Taylor and Max Weber.  Taylor termed “scientific management,” which is an approach to breaking down tasks and retraining workers to get the most out of each motion and second while at work (Boleman & Deal, 2008).  Then there was Weber.  He believed in a “monocratic bureaucracy,” where you have fixed division of labor, hierarchy of offices, rules, separation of personal from official property and rights, ability to select personnel and employment is long-term (Boleman & Deal, 2008). 

Do we really need structure in an organization?  Yes we do, whether large or small.    That is, if we are to have a successful business or be capable of providing public services.  In a small organization it might be acceptable to have an informal structure due to its size and the ability to manage people and their roles better, but large organizations cannot do without, primarily because of the number of personnel that needs to be managed.  In my opinion, a well put together structure in a large organization is one where a hierarchy exists, both employees and leaders understand their respective roles and use their positions to help advance the organization.  It is organized with leaders that know how to use their core processes, technology,

Structure in the Workplace

Structure creates order. With rules and policies in place, workers understand that employment is contingent upon meeting the organization's requirements.    It creates a hierarchical view and allows employees to identify where authority and responsibility ultimately lies; it creates accountability among workers. Structure delineates who does what job with an understanding that if you stray too far away from your responsibility there is disruption in workflow. Structure creates a level of respect in action, regardless of how you truly feel about management.   According to Fayol, a good leader possess and instills in others to have the courage to accept responsibility, while creating a sense of discipline among workers is imperative to the flow of business.   Structure develops by identifying the best methods to run an organization by analyzing your workforce and the skills they possess to determine whether technology or further training is needed so that your organization can be more effective and efficient (Taylor).

While I prefer the classicl view, I believe that public organizations have become less bureaucratic because technology has replaced some of the of job responsibilities that were formerly held by public employees, leading to less red tape.  For instance, tolls on public highways allows the flow of traffic to flow more easily due to scanners in place.  Before, tolls were occupied by public employees who needed to take the time collect and exchange money with the client.  In the past you had to visit a local government entity to pick up a form from an employee, technology now allows you to download a form by a click of a button.  On a larger scale, although technology may have removed some responsibilities on a lower scale, when major issues occur, ultimately the people and the bureacracy look to higher-ups to hold accountable, such is the case with Hillary Clinton and the Benghazi issue.    

What is Reframing?

1.    The organization I work for can best be described as using the human resource frame.  I work in a non-profit health care organization whose focus is patient care.  That being said, the organization has created a culture of patient and family centered care.  Everyone from clinical staff to environmental is trained to understand that the work they do impacts patients and their families.  For years, skills were valued more than education, but the tide is turning and now both are valued.  Staff is encouraged to seek self-development; the organization offers to pay tuition for public state schools.  The organization is committed to developing a culture where the employees and organization as a whole are aligned to deliver quality care, through constant in-house training which includes a mentoring program. The organization understands the importance of strategies to keep employees “on the bus” which leads to successful patient care and outcomes and affects the bottom line. 

  

2.    A frame is a mental map of ideas and assumptions that you carry with you, it helps the manager understand and negotiate territories they will enter (Bolman & Deal, 2008).  You develop it and look in as if a window.  It allows the manager to create a picture of what is happening by registering and assembling information (Bolman & Deal, 2008). 

3.    Reframing is when you break away from your pre-set map to quickly make judgment calls when situations may suddenly change (Bolman & Deal, 2008).  It’s important to be able to break away and reframe because one can plan and execute but unforeseen circumstances do change in an organization, as a manager, you need to have the ability to view your surroundings and make adjustments.     

4.    It seems to me that the initial structural barrier that was created between Hoover and Donovan from the FBI and CIA (President Roosevelt created the CIA), continues to resonate.  The relationship seems to have improved as well as communication between both agencies since the tragedy from September 11, 2001, but according to Graff (2012), "FBI agents  recently used a meeting with executives from major manufacturing companies on the West coast to instruct them to cut off contact with the CIA."  In the meeting, an FBI agent relayed the message that they were in charge and unbeknown to him, one of the executives was an undercover CIA officer (Graff, 2012).  To make matters worse, and in a separate situation, the FBI found itself having to evaluate complaints about the CIA hacking into a network reserved for Senate investigators (Hosenball, 2014).  Situations like these places the directors that manage these agencies, the FBI and CIA, in difficult positions where they try to build a sense of teambuilding yet are forced to investigate the very same team they work with.  Past history indicates that a sense of mistrust is embedded among both agencies and while life scenarios have somewhat changed the relationship, mistrust seems to immediately trump the progress that may have been made. 

References:

Bolman, L. and Deal, T. (2008).  Reframing organizations. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Graff, Garrett. (2012, June 12). FBI-CIA tensions linger a decade after CIA warned of  “problems”. Washingtonian.  Retrieved from http://www.washingtonian.com/blogs/capitalcomment/fbi/fbi-cia-tensions-linger-a-decade-after-cia-warned-of-problems.php

Hosenball, Mark. (2014, March 18). FBI evaluating complaints about hacking by the CIA and Senate Intelligence Committee. Huff Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/18/fbi-cia-senate_n_4988627.html