D3

profileWildchild
5.0fibersoforganizationPeople2.pptx
Home>Business & Finance homework help>Economics homework help>D3

The Fibers of Organizations: People

1

1

2

      

“Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much” ― Helen Keller

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Keller

Why Work For The People?

Threads” served as our metaphor for theories of organizations. “Fabric” referred to the interwoven forces that form organizations.

And “fibers”—the woof, weft, and tensile strength of organizations—describes people in organizations.

Sixty-three percent of government workers prefer to work for government rather than business (preferred by 36 percent),

and local government employees appear to feel the most positive about working for government.

3

3

The Draw of the Public Sector

The reasons why people enter, or do not enter, public service are reasonably clear.

Starkly Different Values

Those people who enter government careers have

high public service motivation (i.e., the desire to serve society in a secular context), positive views of the public sector, and negative perceptions of the private one.

Those who enter business hold values that are “completely opposite…

Money Does Not Make Their World Go Around,

It appears that high salaries are considerably less important to those who work in government than they are to those who enter the corporate sphere.

Note: When it comes to compensation, governments can’t win.

4

Making a Difference

The classic view of public administration is that of a calling, and, to a surprising degree, it still is.

Additional research confirms that mission matters.

Holding a public administrative office correlates more strongly with public service motivation than any other factor, including even one’s “personal characteristics.”

Personal characteristics that associate with high levels of public service motivation include women, people with more education, and members of professional associations.

There is a tangible connection between public service motivation and making a difference—a good difference.

There is an additional motivation that underlie why people work for government, and it eclipses all else. It is: job security.

5

The Draw of the Independent Sector

The sector with the most committed professionals is the independent one.

Money matters for the most part, much less to these workers than those in other sectors.

However a large number of nonprofit chief executives are paid between $500,000 and $1 million—compensation that exceeds that of any public counterpart—and the median CEO pay exceeds $120,000.)

The opportunity to do “something worthwhile” in their organizations means much more to the purpose-driven worker as to their wiliness to serve as volunteers more intensively than either their public or private counterparts.

Note: because job security means much less to nonprofit employees, many nonprofit employees are more inclined

to undertake riskier behavior and make riskier choices than are workers in the other two sectors.

6

Building A Bridge Through Public Service

7

Psychological Man

Administrative man

Rational, or Economic, man

“Administrative Man”

In Models of Man, Herbert Simon contrasted psychological, or Freudian, man, as the model of the human condition with rational, or economic, man, which is the model used by economists to predict the behavior of the economy.

Economic man has the same goal (acquiring money) as everyone else in the economy, and behaves (ration-ally) just like everyone else to achieve it.

Administrative man bridges psychological man and rational man. Administrative man has all the unique idiosyncrasies and limited reasoning power of psychological man,

but, like economic man, also understands the mission of the organization, and knows that his or her interests and those of the organization can be somehow synchronous and complementary.

This freakish fusion of the Freudian and the fiscal, when combined with any organization’s obsession with minimizing uncertainty, can produce “the bureaucratic personality,”

that can render the bureaucracy ever more rigidly where rule-bound can result in “over conformity” among its fellow, who have made inflexibility and indifference an art form.

8

The Energetic, Committed Bureaucrat

Americans work hard. On average, they work longer than do workers in other developed countries, or about thirty-four hours per week;

a fifth of Americans work forty-nine hours or more per week, and more than two-fifths take no vacations, not even of one day.

And their work hours are growing; Americans work eleven more hours per week, on average, than they did in the 1970s.

Public Administrators seem to “hang in there” with the same tenacity as their private-sector counterparts, and studies “do not indicate a terrible malaise in the public sector if the private sector is used as a baseline.”

Where employees in the public and private sectors diverge is in the depth of commitment to their jobs, and some research suggests that public administrators may hold a passion for their work that borders on the unhealthy.

Bureaucratic Burnout among American managers attains “serious proportions in both arenas,” but burnout in the public sector is “not appreciably worse” than in the private sector.

“City employees feel more time stress than their state and federal counterparts,” and it is indisputable that some types of local employment, such as public safety, have inherently high levels of stress.

Nonprofit Professionals may be the most devoted to their jobs.

They score highest in “total energy and investment in the job,” followed by government workers and corporate employees, respectively.

9

Job Turnover – Maybe?

Most Americans like their work. National polls taken over three decades find that, in nearly every survey, Americans report that they are satisfied with their jobs, and would take the same job again “without hesitation,” and

only one out of eight is dissatisfied with his or her job.

Bureaucratic Satisfaction Bureaucrats provide some variation on these themes, although the research on this topic is singularly opaque, and contradictory findings on the job satisfaction of public administrators are “equally abundant.”51

There is, however, at least one commonality: public employees who possess emotional intelligence, or the ability to comprehend, harness, and manage moods in themselves and in others,

are more satisfied with their jobs than are those who lack such intelligence.

From the 1960s through the 1970s, the job satisfaction of federal workers was low and falling lower. For the last three decades, however,

job satisfaction has risen steadily, and, over thirty years federal employees report that they are not only satisfied in their jobs, but

would recommend their government as a place to work.

10

Today’s Management Challenge

In sum, the public and nonprofit managers’ maze: Compared with business administrators, government executives are faced with employees who are:

Hypercritical loners determined to do something of social importance,

Employees demanding unremitting recognition but who are uninterested in being bought off with monetary bonuses.

Managers in the independent sector share these same characteristics—with a vengeance.

They are more committed to making a difference in society and have lower needs for wealth, recognition, and job security than either public administrators or private ones.

According to some research, nonprofit employees also have a greater need to dominate colleagues and may be wilier in getting their way than are their private-sector counterparts.

Certainly, these are precisely the kinds of qualities that we want in our public and nonprofit administrators.

But they make for a tough workforce to manage—and to be managed by.

11

Are We a Product of Our Birth Environment?

The circumstances under which people are born and how they mature determine how people perceive their organization and behave in it.

It appears that the order in which they were born caused the child to behave and develop certain characteristics. In specified cases, the firstborn child that was studied as an adult, continued to demonstrate the identical traits as seen when they were a child.

It has been observed that the first born is often raised with more attention than the following child or children, which causes

the first born child to develop certain leadership characteristics.

Studies that were related to the U.S presidents, discovered that more than half were firstborn, the rest were middle and four were lastborn. After investigating the birth order of the U.S presidents,

important leaders were also looked at and showed the same outcome; a large number of every type of leader was firstborn rather than last.

Note: Although not infallible, birth order is the major determining factor in explaining why some people defend the establishment and other revolt against it.

Firstborns are, literally, born to conserve. Laterborn’s are, literally, born to rebel.

12

Organizational Culture Vs Turning Points

Birth order plays a large part in the progressive mastery of psychological tasks that determine what sort of

leader, follower, or stakeholder one becomes.

How one approaches these tasks is known as “turning points.”

The first turning point occurs from birth to year one, when trust or mistrust is inculcated into one’s psyche as a result of one’s early experiences with others.

From one to six, the development of autonomy versus shame and doubt.

From six to ten, initiative or guilt.

From ten to fourteen, industry or inferiority.

From fourteen to twenty, identity versus role confusion.

From twenty to forty, intimacy or isolation.

From forty to sixty-five, generativity versus stagnation.

And from sixty-five until death, ego integrity as opposed to overwhelming despair.

Should one take a negative path at any given turning point, all is not lost; with effort, a positive path can be taken at the next turning point.

13

Is the Organization a Product of our National Culture ?

Just as birth order and aging influence how people inside organizations behave in them,

so does the larger society in which they live.

National culture, or “the collective mental programming of people in an environment,” is perhaps

the single greatest external determinant of organizational behavior.

One indicator:

senior corporate executives judge a startling 42 percent of their managers assigned to projects overseas to have failed.

14

Yes We Are!

National cultures are reflected in their bureaucracies,

even when those bureaucracies administer cultures far removed from their own.

15

Organizational Behavior

National Culture

Turning Points

What Is Leadership?

Leadership is both a research area and a practical skill encompassing the ability of an individual or organization to "lead" or guide other individuals, teams, or entire organizations.

Folks who attain the position in a administrative organization most likely embrace the creed that “the superior of all is the servant of all.”

Leadership “at the political level is an influence relationship among leaders and followers who intend real change that reflect their mutual purposes.”

These definitions stresses

non-coercive manipulation by both leaders and followers;

the presence of multiple leaders as well as multiple followers;

the purposeful attainment of substantive change;

and teamwork.

Despite the fact that most of the country’s founders questioned the whole idea of political leadership,

the United States is the focal point for much of the leadership literature.

16

Leadership or Administration?

Is leadership different from administration? Yes. Is one more important to organizational success than the other? No.

Leadership deals with change. Administration copes with complexity. Both are equally vital to organizational success.

Both leadership and administration involve

“deciding what needs to be done,”

creating the work and relationships to achieve it, “

and then trying to insure that those people actually do the job.”

Leadership’s way of accomplishing these three tasks is to set a direction—create a vision—for the organization, and then

align people, communicate, and inspire to fulfill it.

Administration plans and budgets for the vision, and

organizes, staffs, controls activities, and solves problems to implement it.

In periods of slow change and a placid environment, administration is of greater significance; in times of rapid change and a turbulent environment, leadership is.

“A peace time army can usually survive with good … management up and down the hierarchy …. A war time army, however, needs competent leadership at all levels.

No one yet has figured out how to manage people effectively into battle; they must be led.”1

17

Full Range Leadership Model

The Full Range of Leadership Model (FRLM) is a general leadership theory focusing on the behavior of leaders towards the workforce in different work situations.

The FRLM relates transactional and transformational leadership style with laissez-faire leadership style.

18

19

Transactional Leadership

is a part of a style of leadership that focuses on supervision, organization, and performance; it is an integral part of the Full Range Leadership Model.

Transactional leadership is a style of leadership in which leaders promote compliance by followers through both rewards and punishments.

Through a rewards and punishments system, transactional leaders are able to keep followers motivated for the short-term.

Unlike transformational leaders, those using the transactional approach are not looking to change the future, they look to keep things the same.

Leaders using transactional leadership as a model pay attention to followers' work in order

to find faults and deviations.

This type of leadership is effective in crisis and emergency situations,

as well as for projects that need to be carried out in a specific way.

20

Transformational Leadership

is a theory of leadership where a leader works with teams to identify needed change,

creating a vision to guide the change through inspiration, and executing the change in tandem with committed members of a group;

it is an integral part of the Full Range Leadership Model.

Transformational leadership serves to enhance the motivation, morale, and job performance of followers through a variety of mechanisms; these include

connecting the follower's sense of identity and self to a project and to the collective identity of the organization;

being a role model for followers in order to inspire them and to raise their interest in the project;

challenging followers to take greater ownership for their work, and understanding the strengths and weaknesses of followers, allowing the leader to align followers with tasks that enhance their performance.

The transactional approach has its limitations. It concentrates only on the problems confronting the leader in dealing with a small group, but not the leader’s subordinates and the problems confronting them.

What kinds of transactions, or exchanges, occur between and among leaders and followers that facilitate or impair both the leader’s and the group’s effectiveness?

21

What is Political Culture?

Political culture is defined by the International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences as the "set of attitudes, beliefs and sentiments that give order and meaning to a political process

and which provide the underlying assumptions and rules that govern behavior in the political system".

It encompasses both the political ideals and operating norms of a polity.

Political culture is thus the manifestation of

the psychological and subjective dimensions of politics.

A political culture is the product of both the history of a political system and the histories of the members.

Thus, it is rooted equally in public events and private experience.

22

What is the Relationship of Political & Civic Culture?

The term “political culture” refers to the specifically political orientations, attitudes toward the political system and its various parts, and attitudes toward the role of self in the system.

We speak of a political culture just as we can speak of an economic culture or a religious culture.

It is a set of orientations toward a special set of social objects and processes

In describing the values of a nation, civic culture is a subspecies of the political culture which includes:

positive orientations toward a democratic infrastructure;

the acceptance of norms of civic obligation;

and the development of a sense of civic competence among a substantial proportion of the population.

Note: A civic culture is one committed to democracy and civic engagement.

23

Political Culture Of The United States

Political culture is a part of a society for which shared attitudes and beliefs establish a unique identity with regard to public and private governance.

In the United States, at least three political cultures took root during the colonial period.

They were formed in New England by religious refugees from England, in the Mid-Atlantic region by Dutch settlers, in Virginia by English adventurers seeking fortune in the New World, and in Carolina by English investors who envisioned a model constitutional society.

In Virginia and Carolina, and later elsewhere in the South, Scots-Irish settlers influenced the cultural hearth that created the American South.

Each began with established cultures of the British Isles and the Netherlands, evolving into unique cultures that remain in existence today in the United States.

24

How Does Political Culture Impact Leadership?

Because leadership can be defined as a process of influencing others to agree on a shared purpose, and to work towards shared objectives.

Although leaders may be required to undertake managerial duties as well, leaders, whether politically or administrative, typically focus on inspiring followers and creating a shared organizational culture and values.

Although managers deal with complexity, while leaders deal with initiating and adapting to change,

many organization leaders take responsibility to direct and guild the tasks of planning, budgeting, organizing, staffing, controlling and problem solving.

This is accomplished by take on the task of setting a direction or vision, empowering people with shared goals and objectives ,

and communicating, and motivating along cultural guidelines.

25

Are Leaders Needed?

The dramatic and inspiring image of “The Leader” at the head of charging warriors persuades the less palpitating among us to ask: Are we being conned? Do we really need leaders?

More precisely put, do organizations need hierarchical leaders, or those people who occupy high executive office?

This question is even more radical than that of whether we need leaders, because chief executives do a lot more than lead.

“Leadership” is only one of ten distinct roles, such as disturbance handler and spokesperson, that an executive plays, and these executive duties are common to both the public and private sectors, perhaps because “the private sector is becoming more like the public sector.”

How do organizations get things done?

The answer: Those who get things done in organizations are those who have the knowledge and skills that are crucial to the achievement of organizational objectives.

The Limits of Leadership. But is it possible that organizations really do not need chief executives and top administrators?

Well, yes, at least in a fairly substantial minority of organizations in all sectors.

Why? Because environmental forces, and, less commonly, internal ones (such as smoothly functioning teams of employees), can render leaders moot.

26

Who’s In Charge: Leader Or Follower?

Contingency theory is an organizational theory that claims that there is no best way to organize a corporation, to lead a company, or to make decisions. Instead, the optimal course of action is contingent (dependent) upon the internal and external situation. A contingent leader effectively applies their own style of leadership to the right situation.

Fred Fiedler research is perhaps the prime contributor to this theory.

Fiedler found that when a group trusts its leader, has a clear task structure, and the leader has the power to reward and punish followers, the leader has high control of the group.

In a high-control situation, a task-motivated leader is the leader with the most effective set of behaviors.

When the group is distrusting, its task structure is ambivalent, and the leader has less power to reward and punish, the leader has moderate control.

In these situations, a relationship-motivated leader is needed because an invariably frustrated task-motivated leader moves too quickly, too punitively—and less effectively.

When the group is not supportive of its leader, its task is foggy, and the leader’s authority to dispense rewards and punishments is ambiguous, low control is the consequence.

In a low-control situation, which often amounts to a crisis situation, the task-motivated leader once again surfaces as the most effective.

Although the contingency model has been the subject of some controversy, most empirical tests of it find it to be reflective of the real world.

27

Are Public Leadership Successful?

Administrators in both the public and private sectors agree that leaders in government have considerably less discretion and authority to lead than their private-sector counterparts, and, logically,

it follows that public executives also “are evaluated as better “transactional leaders” than transformational ones.

Public versus Private Leadership Public and private leaders display virtually identical “power-motivation behavior,” or the desire to make an impact and enhance one’s position but, beyond that similarity, leaders’ behavior differs sharply in the two sectors.

In contrast to the private sector, successful public leaders are more desirous of change, organizational growth, and new projects, and they are more lawful and less directive. Superiors and subordinates perceive the executives of public agencies as being much less successful when they direct and coordinate their agencies and much more effective when they closely monitor their subordinates’ work for legal compliance and reach out to lend a helping hand to their fellow workers (again, just the reverse in corporations).

A Supportive, Affective Public Leadership Helping their employees is exceptionally important to public-sector leaders.

The most effective leaders in the high-stress fields of first responders, law enforcers, and social workers are “affective leaders” who are skilled in “emotional labor” that involves relationships and rapport, compassion and connectedness. “Emotional labor is inherent in effective public service.”

28

Successful Public Leadership – Maybe?

Attaining Agency Objectives? Well, Not So Much Unlike business leaders, public leaders do not perceive that there is much of a match between their leadership abilities and actually accomplishing their agency’s goals. This, admittedly dubious, distinction may be ascribed to at least two possibilities.

One is that many agencies, at least those that have quantifiable goals, have been shown to be fulfilling them.

The other is the fact that,, agency missions are frequently saturated by a pervasive and ethereal vagueness compared with crisp corporate ones.

Because of this that top public executives are “consistently, and often dramatically, more optimistic” about their agencies’ organizational successes than are lower-placed agency workers, agency clients, and other outside stakeholders.

When organizational success itself cannot be readily understood, a condition that is not unknown in the public sphere, then leadership’s success, when defined in organizational terms, is far less tenable. Thus, in the public sector, successful leadership is cast in human terms.

29