forum 610

Week Three

Last week, you read about some very basic types of government organizations. These lead us to the concepts of organizational theory and development.  In week 3 we will explore the theories of public organizations and leadership and look how these help describe and explain organizational decision making.

While this is just a brief overview, there is a theory class that will allow you to learn more about how theory impacts organization.

 

 

Classical theorists were most concerned about improving productivity through systems and structures.

Taylor (n.d.) examined how people work in a systematic way. He conducted workplace experiments to determine best practices to enable employees to be most efficient.

Weber believed a formalized structure with rules and legitimate authority were the best way to ensure success. (Kim, 2012) Weber is most famous for his description and explanation of the bureaucracy, in which there is a hierarchical organization of the government or business entity. You may be familiar with this.

Fayol organized work of executives or managers using the acronym POSDCORB. (Planning, Organizing, Staffing, Directing, Co-ordinating, Reporting, Budgeting)

As you can see, they focused on systematic ways of doing things with rules to ensure productivity.

 

Neo-classicists moved into the concept of management responsibilities rather than productivity.

Chester Barnard wrote saw the executive as responsible for communication, securing services from those in the organization, formulating purpose and objective, and managing people. (Galdino and Chagas, 2010)

Herbert Simon (1976) thought that human decision-making was the major part of administrative theory. He wanted individual employees to identify with the organization’s goals and values. He determined that people make decisions based on the available information and termed this bounded rationality. Simon was known for the idea of satisficing or making decisions which were good enough.

The focus here was on what managers could do to improve the workplace.

 

Motivation in the workplace

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is probably one of the best-known theories and is used in many areas of psychology and sociology as well as in public and private management. Luthans, 1998). 

Douglas McGregor introduced the Theory X and Theory Y concepts. He may not have been the first to think about these theories, but he was the first to name them (The Economist (2008).  Theory X was based on the premise that people lacked responsibility and were lazy. Therefore, management had to control and direct that behavior.  On the other hand, Theory Y viewed employees as willing to work but needing resources. Therefore, management was to ensure the resources employees needed were available. This would allow employees to put their creative energies to use.

Herzberg thought managers had to provide positive motivators that would help people feel good about a job (Luthans, 1998) These allowed employees the opportunity to be recognized. What Herzberg named hygiene factors were those that prevented dissatisfaction. These might include organization policy or salary.

These theorists focused on what factors best motivated employees to perform well.

 

Decision making

Various models exist for making the decision.

You might use rational strategies to make decisions. These require you identify and evaluate each option then compare them to help you select the highest ranking or best option. Some of the models you might use are SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis, a Critical Path Analysis (identifying items that must be completed on time in order to finish on time), and Decision Trees (using a diagram). These strategies require comprehensive analysis.

You might use intuitive strategies when there is no rationale or logic. In this case, it might just “feel right.”

 

Lindblom (1959) elaborated on the idea of making decisions on what was known at the time rather than using a fully rational approach that took all the information into account. He referred to this as the science of muddling through.

This focus on decision-making was to help public administrators use the right mix of rational and intuitive strategies, since few if any decisions can be made using only one of those approaches.

 

New Public Management

At the close of the 20th Century, in the multidisciplinary applied field of public administration, public policy research and practice was besieged on all sides by new techniques for management. It began as the idea that ideas that were used by the private sector could be used by the public sector in order to be more efficient.

Osborne and Gaebler (1993) had notions of the reinvention of government Empowering communities so these communities are able to solve their own problems and meeting the needs of the citizens through results-oriented funding rather than meeting the needs of the bureaucracy were an important part of vision of Osborne and Gaebler.

 

Serving not Steering

This leads us to the consideration of serving citizens rather than customers that is embraced by Denhardt and Denhardt (2015) in their book The New Public Service: Serving, not Steering. Denhardt and Denhardt recognize that it may be difficult to extend public participation in the political process. They thought further about the essential character of public service and the motivation of public servants, as well as the moral, legal, and ethical aspects of decision-making for those who serve in the publics sector. 

 

As you read the assigned reading materials this week, consider how the various theories may be at work in your own organization.

 

 

 

 

 

Brown, R. (2004). Consideration of the origin of herbert simon's theory of "satisficing" (1933-1947). Management Decision, 42(10), 1240-1256. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/212061154?accountid=8289

 

Cruise, P. L. (2004). Positively no proverbs need apply: Revisiting the legacy of  Herbert A. Simon. International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, 7(3), 363-384. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/212047257?accountid=8289

 

Denhardt, J. & Denhardt, R. (2015) The New Public Service: Serving, not Steering. New York: Routledge.

 

The Economist. (2008) Douglas McGregor. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/12366698

 

The Economist. (2008, October 6). Theories X and Y. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/12370445

 

Evans, Harold (2004). They Made America. Frederick W. Taylor: Innovator. PBS Series.

 

Galdino, F. and Chagas, M. (2010). Applying an extension of Chester Barnard’s theory as a contribution to the understanding of project’s nature. Conference: EnANPAD 2011. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225034512_Applying_an_Extension_of_Chester_Barnard%27s_Theory_as_a_Contribution_to_the_Understanding_of_Project%27s_Nature

 

Govekar, P. L., & Govekar, M. A. (2012). The parable of the pig iron: Using taylor's story to teach the principles of scientific management. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 12(2), 73-83. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/1021381498?accountid=8289

 

Heshmat, S. (2015, June). Satisficing vs. maximizing. Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/science-choice/201506/satisficing-vs-maximizing

 

KHANACADMEY (n.d.). Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Retrieved from https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/behavior/theories-personality/v/maslow-hierarchy-of-needs

 

Kim, Sung Ho, Max Weber, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2012/entries/weber/

 

Lindblom, C. E., (1959). The Science of "Muddling Through" Public Administration Review, 19(2), 79-88. doi:1. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/973677

 

Luthans, F. (1998). Organizational behavior (8th Ed.). Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill.

 

Maslow, A. H. (1943) Psychological Review 50(4) 370-96

 

McMahon, D., & Carr, J. C. (1999). The contributions of chester barnard to strategic management theory. Journal of Management History, 5(5), 228. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/210942200?accountid=8289

 

Mindtools. (2016) Fredrick Taylor and Scientific Management. Retrieved from https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTMM_Taylor.htm

 

Mindtools. (2016). Herzberg’s Motivators and Hygiene Factors. Retrieved from https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/herzberg-motivators-hygiene-factors.htm

 

Parker, L. D. (2016). The global Fayol: contemporary management and accounting traces. Entreprises Et Histoire, (83), 51-63,3-4,153. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/1799187386?accountid=8289

 

Poros, M. V., & Needham, E. (2004). Writings of Robert K. Merton. Social Studies of Science, 34(5), 863-878. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4144349

 

Rainey, H.G. (1997. Understanding and managing public organizations (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.

 

Scott, W.G. (2001). Organization theory: An overview and an appraisal. In J.M. Shafritz and J. S. Ott Eds.) Classics of organization theory (5th Ed.) (pp. 248.-*256). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

 

Simon, H. (1978). How do we make decisions? UBS. Retrieved from https://www.ubs.com/microsites/nobel-perspectives/en/herbert-simon.html

 

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2012). Max Weber. Retrieved from. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/weber/

 

Taylor, F.W. (n.d.) The Principles of Scientific Management 1910  Chapter 2 “The principles of Scientific Management excerpts.

 

Towns, S. (2013). Ted Gaebler: government transformer in government technology; May 7, 2013. Retrieved from http://www.govtech.com/e-government/Ted-Gaebler-Government-Transformer.html

 

vanVilet, V. (2014). Five functions of management by Henri Fayol. Retrieved from http://www.toolshero.com/management/five-functions-of-management/