Download Organizational Theory in Action Paper (2)

Tracy Hanzal
Dr. Thomas Hall
ED 730
Organizational Theory in Action
There are many theories that explain the structure of an organization. In this paper, I will
discuss classical organizational theory and human relations organizational theory.
Classical organizational theory applies basic ideas from administrative management and
scientific management. In classical organizational theory, there is “one best way” to perform a
task. Smith (2004) created a division of labor to improve production which provided economic
rationale for the factory system. He used the example of a pin factory, where one worker could
make one pin a day, but dividing the work into a number of trades, would be able to increase the
number of pins made in a day. In my work environment, the Dakota Boys and Girls Ranch
(DBGR), this theory could probably apply to the fact that there are several departments working
on different programs for the same clients. My workplace utilizes the division of labor aspect,
not so much with making a product, but instead working with people. Taylor (1987) introduced
the idea of scientific management. Scientific management focuses on the management of work
and workers. He replaced the traditional methods of work accomplishments with scientific
methods of measuring and managing individual work elements. Taylor used four principles to
describe the duties management is responsible; time and motion study, development, incentive,
and redevising of the work. I think this theory applies to DBGR because we have many
departments, and each of those departments are required to manage common duties, such as
employee schedules, budget, documentation of residents, and others. It is up to the management
of the whole organization to make sure these departments have employees trained to properly do
these duties as well as trained for department specific duties. Fayol (2011) applied general
principles of management for organizations to become sound and have good working order.
This will depend on a certain number of conditions and circumstances in the organization. The
principles of management Fayol applied include division or work, authority, discipline, unity of
command, subordination, scalar chain (supervisors), and order. This management style created a
line of authority beginning with the highest level member of an organization stepping down to
the lowest level member of the organization. This theory is very common in any organization,
especially DBGR. We have a President at the top of our management tree, we then break down
to three Vice Presidents, each oversee several large departments. Under the Vice Presidents,
there are program (department) managers, then one level under the program managers are the
coordinators. Each coordinator is then responsible for the scheduling, hiring, and supervising
daily duties with the residents. To put it into educational perspective, the Director of Education
at DBGR is considered a program manager. The principals are then considered a coordinator
who supervises the teachers. Weber (2011) also contributed to management. Weber wrote about
the characteristics of bureaucracy. Bureaucracy is a structured method of organization that
distributes duties in a stable way to ensure highly qualified decisions made with a fixed amount
of resources.
Human relations organizational theory concentrates on the abilities of what a leader can
do and not as much the duties of the leader or management position. Follett (1987) discussed in
managed industries, the duties of leadership seems to be more important than what kind of
person the leader in the position is. Follett urges the idea that leadership can be learned. In some
situations, a person that is the leader in a group of friends, actually may have no leadership skills
and never creates an opportunity in their jobs to move up into a leadership position. I agree
entirely with Follett on some of the requisites required for successful leadership, which are; a
leader must have thorough knowledge of the job, ability to grasp the total situation, and have a
spirit of adventure. Also, skills that will help create successful relationships with people include
how and when to praise, point out mistakes and what attitude to take toward failures. Since all of
these things are skills, they can be learned. McGregor (2004) discussed how we need to utilize
social sciences and human energy to make organizations effective. He stated that a person at
their job will try to do as little work as possible. Most people lack ambition, does not like
responsibility and do not enjoy working at their job. McGregor indicated that poor management
comes down to motivation. I agree because I have difficulty getting something done at work if I
am not motivated. Managers or leaders need to find ways to motivate employees so they become
more productive and effective. Ouchi (2004) wrote by providing a close interchange between
work and social life, organizations will be able to retain employees longer and create an
enthusiastic working environment. He refers to organizations as “clans” instead of markets or
bureaucracies. Creating close relationships within the employees will help them enjoy what they
are doing. When management tells employees to do what we tell you because we pay you, it
makes employees feel alone and distant from the other employees, because the employees feel
they are not worth anything. Allow employees to mold together as a clan, this will create strong
relationships and trust. I feel this somewhat resembles what DBGR is all about. The employees
are very close and have strong relationships. One difficulty that Ouchi mentioned is that the clan
may develop a fear of outsiders. I might have to disagree on this idea because in my experiences
at DBGR, we have been very welcoming to outsiders or new employees.
I feel that DBGR uses both classical and human relation theories. The aspects in each
theory are very important to the success of DBGR. In classical theory, the division of labor is
important because of the extensive number of programs we offer to our clients. We need many
people doing many different programs, such as the direct care programs including therapy,
counseling, education, residential services, as well as the business side including accounting,
fund raising, and politics. On the other hand, I believe DBGR utilizes the human relations theory
more than the classical theory. When we look at the type of facility we are, our first priority is
the safety and welfare of our residents. We provide daily structure and guidance to actual human
beings. We have to have good human relations so we can handle the residents. I believe that the
care we give to the residents is reflected in how we treat each other in the workplace. A major
part of our facility is to create successful relationships not only with the residents, but with each
other as employees. Our leaders do an excellent job praising the employees in the work they are
doing and express the importance of how much we affect the lives of our residents.
Next, I would like to look at a “Framework for Leadership” proposed by Fullan (2001). I
believe the figure can be implemented directly into what we do at DBGR. In the leaders
diagram, enthusiasm, hope, and energy are excellent motivating factors when we are working
with the employees. The interesting idea here is that this same figure can also be utilized by
employees directly to the residents. On the inner part of the circle, each of those pieces are
practiced by our leaders and employees, as well as introduced to the residents. I think we have
an advantage as an organization because the employees themselves have the opportunity to use
the leadership framework as well. As a leader in education at DBGR, I feel each component
represents positive change, and that is what our mission is. First, moral purpose is acting with
the intention to make a positive difference. We exist to help residents and I believe that is what a
positive difference is, not only with the residents, but with employees as well. If this positive
difference is taking place with everyone at our facility, we are making a positive difference in
society as well. Next, understanding change is vital to moving forward because we need to
understand what our moral purpose is to make a positive difference. I believe relationship
building is vital in any organization, if the relationships with people improve; things within the
organization get better. Leaders are responsible for making that happen, especially at DBGR
because the workplace can get rather stressful working with at-risk teenagers and strong
relationships will help get through those difficult times. Knowledge creation and sharing is also
vital to making our facility run smooth. We need to know what types of disabilities our residents
have and gain the knowledge of how to handle those with the disabilities. There are many
different disabilities we have to work with and sharing what we know with the each other, even
if it is to remind each other what to do, will help the organization succeed. Lastly, coherence
making will help the leader provide consistency in the workplace. There are a lot of parts that
need to be working correctly to get to this consistency and sometimes it might be difficult to get
to, creating some confusion or chaos along the way. But, once the employees recognize patterns
and buy into the program, the coherence making will be able to exist.
The result of successful leadership leads to the members committing to the program. I
can relate this to getting the teachers to buy into the rules and mission of the DBGR school. The
commitment by the teachers in my situation will result in our school to be a positive learning
environment for our students, which I think qualifies as a good thing happening.
As an educational leader, there are many theories and ideas out there in the world that can
be used to help understand what to do as a leader and to improve leadership skills. I feel the
Myers-Briggs test and other measuring tools that assist in determining the type of leader we are
is very helpful in many ways. I was able to learn specifically what my strengths and weaknesses
are once I found the results of the Myers-Briggs. Even though, I had an idea of what my
qualities and skills are, the results helped me determine specifically what skills I and how to
improve and expand on those skills as well as work on getting rid of the weaknesses I have. I
plan on giving the Myers-Briggs to my teachers so it gives them an idea what kind of personality
they and what strengths and weaknesses they have. This information will help promote being a
leader, because I feel leadership can be learned by employees who have the desire to be a leader.
One piece of writing that I will take with me and use in my school is Fullan’s
“Framework for Leadership.” As I have expressed already, I think that the diagram is an
excellent guide to effective leadership and it is written in a way that is easy to understand. I can
relate to each component and will now be able to concentrate more energy on what to do and in a
specific order. Before this class, I thought I knew how to motivate people and be an effective
leader. But I’m not getting the results I would like and honestly had difficulty knowing what to
do to get the results I was seeking. I have been doing some of the framework but I wasn’t as
specific and was doing the component in the wrong order. The “Framework for Leadership”
now gives me direction on what to do first and I’ll be able to present the idea to my teachers. I
am excited and have confidence that my team of teachers and staff will buy into the idea. We are
a small group of seven and I believe we have excellent communication with each other. This is
an advantage I have to utilize because I think it is easier to bring a small group of people together
than it is a large group of people, especially in the environment we work in.
Lastly, Goleman (2000) wrote about the six leadership styles that I took particular
interest. It was also helpful to have the opportunity to discuss this topic with my classmates. I
really found it interesting and helpful how Goleman was able to determine the six leadership
styles and if they positively or negatively affected the overall climate of the work environment. I
feel I would be effective using two of the leadership styles, democratic and coaching. In using
the democratic style, especially having the small number of teachers that I have, I find myself
doing a lot of listening and making team decisions. This gets everyone on board and we can
defend the decision we made together. However, I do understand and have experienced the
drawbacks of the democratic style. It does take a lot of time and several meetings to come to a
decision. In the coaching style, we currently have a vision at DBGR to expand our facilities
educational program and right now we are trying to come together and prepare for our future. If
we are going to make this expansion successful, we need to develop our skills together and use
the strategies that work for us. As the leader, it is my job to help the employee continue to
improve their teaching style and motivate them to develop skills that will benefit our students
and create positive learning environment.
I did not realize there are so many different theories and ideas that we need to study to
continue to become effective leaders. I learned how to identify strengths and weaknesses and
was able to determine what theories I relate to and can utilize in my leadership. Also, I have an
excellent “Framework for Leadership” to follow and pass on to my teachers and have identified
what leadership styles work best for me to be an effective leader.
References
Fayol, H. (2011). General principles of management. In J.M. Shafritz, J.S. Ott, & Y.S. Jang
(Eds.), Classics of organization theory seventh edition (pp.52-64). Boston: Wadsworth,
Cengage Learning.
Follett, M. P. (1987). The essentials of leadership. In L. E. Boone & D. D. Bowen (Eds.), The
great writings in management and organizational behavior second edition (pp. 49-61).
Boston: Irvin, McGraw-Hill.
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, A Wiley
Company.
Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. In Harvard Business Review (pp. 78-90).
McGregor, D. M. (2004). The human side of enterprise. In J. M. Shafritz, J. S. Ott & Y. S. Jang
(Eds.), Classics or organization theory sixth edition (pp. 179-184). Boston: Wadsworth,
Cengage Learning.
Ouchi, W. G. (2004). The Z organization. In J. M. Shafritz, J. S. Ott, & Y. S. Jang (Eds.), Classics
of organization theory sixth edition (pp. 179-184). Boston: Wadsworth, Cengage
Learning.
Smith, A. (2004). On the division of labor. In J. M. Shafritz, J. S. Ott, & Y. S. Jang (Eds.),
Classics of organization theory sixth edition (pp. 37-41). Boston: Wadsworth, Cengage
Learning.
Taylor, F.W. (1987). The principles of scientific management. In L.E. Boone & D.D. Bowen
(Eds.), The great writings in management and organizational behavior second edition
(pp. 32-48). Boston: Irwin, McGraw-Hill.
Weber, M. (2011). Bureaucracy. In J. M. Shafritz, J. S. Ott, & Y. S. Yang (Eds.), Classics of
organization theory seventh edition (pp. 77-82). Boston: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.