Reflective Practice:Using Theory and Skill to Inform

Download Report

Transcript Reflective Practice:Using Theory and Skill to Inform

Scenario Building for Successful Organizational Change

MPA 8002 The Structure and Theory of Human Organization Richard M. Jacobs, OSA, Ph.D.

For Bolman & Deal (1997)...

managing and leading organizations is a matter of utilizing four frames to diagnose organizational functioning

Structurally, managers and leaders...

1. set goals and policies under conditions of uncertainty 2. achieve a “delicate balance” in allocating scarce resources across organizational entities 3. motivate, coordinate, and control large, diverse group of subordinates

From a human resources view, managers and leaders...

1. help individuals and groups develop a shared sense of direction and purpose 2. balance task and process goals 3. endeavor to make group work both satisfying and efficient

Politically, managers and leaders...

1. confront workplace politics 2. apply ethics in the decision-making process 3. wield power effectively 4. act with authority

Using symbols, managers and leaders...

1. attend carefully to socializing new members into the organization 2. emphasize diversity in ideas and approaches to problem solving 3. manage and lead by example 4. develop and use code language to communicate organizational purpose

For Bolman & Deal, the goal is...

for managers and leaders to give appropriate emphasis to the positives associated with each frame…

Strengths of the structural frame...

…is rational and objective, data driven …uses logic to shape policies, procedures, division of labor, and span of control …is action oriented …provides for accountability

Strengths of the human resources frame...

…personal …practical …addresses fundamental human needs and interests

Strengths of the political frame...

…realistic …practical …addresses the reality of mixed motives, conflict, and power struggles present in the workplace …highlights the need for principled reflection and ethical action

Strengths of the symbolic frame...

…personal …illuminates the importance of creating and sustaining belief and meaning …inspiring, meaningful, motivational …focuses on the bonds uniting individuals into cohesive groups that pursue a shared purpose

While simultaneously...

managers and leaders to avoid each frame’s limitations…

Structural frame limitations...

…impersonal and bureaucratic: views workers as functionaries …overly simplistic …pessimistic about human nature …inflexible and rigid for decision making …overestimates the power of authority …neglects fundamental human, political, and cultural variables

Human resources frame limitations...

…naïve in its assessment of human nature …overly optimistic about integrating people, process, and technology …not realistic for a fast-changing environment …neglects the power of structure …neglects the realities of conflict and scarce resources

Political frame limitations ...

…impersonal in dealing with people …cynical view of human nature …assumes conflict and power struggles …reinforces conflict and mistrust …sacrifices opportunities for rational discourse, collaboration toward shared goals, and hope in a positive future

Symbolic frame limitations...

…an overly abstract, vague, and elusive concept …impractical for use in the workplace …can easily be manipulated

Using frame analysis positively...

effective managers and leaders engage in activities… …focused by their primary concerns

Using the structural frame...

effective managers and leaders are

…scientists …planners …social architects

whose primary concerns are

…good data …honest analysis …creative designs …the best process

Using human resources theory...

effective managers and leaders are whose primary concerns are

…personable and warm …thoughtful and kind …servants …catalysts for growth …challenging growth …providing support …expanding roles …engendering and sustaining good will

Using political theory...

effective managers and leaders are whose primary concerns are

…savvy and smart …polished …clear-headed …advocates …coalition-building …negotiating gray areas …upholding the common good

Using symbolic theory...

effective managers and leaders are whose primary concerns are

…prophets …poets …priests …substance …framing experience …inspiring …pointing a way

Using frame analysis negatively...

ineffective managers and leaders engage in activities… …focused by their primary concerns

Abusing the structural frame...

ineffective managers and leaders are whose primary concerns are

…petty tyrants …self-absorbed …self-interested …micro-managing …“snoopervising” …fault finding …ruling by fiat …issuing memos

Abusing human resources frame...

ineffective managers and leaders are whose primary concerns are

…linguini-spined …wimps …pushovers …how people feel …avoiding conflict …letting others decide …allowing events to take their course

Abusing the political frame...

ineffective managers and leaders are whose primary concerns are

…poker-faced …con-artists …hustlers …self-interest …plausible alibis …masking fraud …deception

Abusing the symbolic frame...

ineffective managers and leaders are whose primary concerns are

…fanatics …fools …full of “b.s.” …self-preservation …style …images …propagandizing

The strength of “reframing”...

…is its focus upon the multiple uses of organizational processes

    strategic planning decision making reorganizing evaluating     goal setting communicating meetings motivating

PROCESS

strategic planning

FRAME

:

Structural Human Resources Political Symbolic

strategies to set objectives and coordinate resources gatherings to promote participation arenas to air conflicts and realign power rituals to signal responsibility, produce symbols, and negotiate meanings

PROCESS

decision making

FRAME

:

Structural Human Resources Political Symbolic

a rational sequence to produce right decisions an open process to produce commitment an opportunity to gain or exercise power a ritual to confirm values and provide opportunities for bonding

PROCESS FRAME

:

Structural Human Resources Political Symbolic

reorganizing realigning roles and responsibilities to fit task and environment maintaining balance between human needs and formal roles redistributing power and form new coalitions a ritual confirming core values and providing opportunities for bonding

PROCESS

evaluating

FRAME

:

Structural Human Resources Political Symbolic

a way to distribute rewards or penalties and to control performance a process for helping individuals to grow and improve an opportunity to exercise power an occasion to play roles in a shared ritual

PROCESS FRAME

:

Structural Human Resources Political Symbolic

approaching conflict to maintain organizational goals by having authorities resolve conflict to develop relationships by having individuals confront conflict to develop power by bargaining, forcing, or manipulating others to win to develop shared values and use conflict to negotiate meaning

PROCESS FRAME

:

Structural Human Resources Political Symbolic

goal setting to keep the organization headed in the right direction to keep people involved and communication open to provide opportunities for individuals and groups to make their interests known to develop symbols and shared values

PROCESS FRAME

:

Structural Human Resources Political Symbolic

communicating transmitting facts and information exchanging information, needs, and feelings influencing or manipulating others telling stories

PROCESS

meetings

FRAME

:

Structural Human Resources Political Symbolic

formal occasions for decision making informal occasions for involvement and sharing feelings competitive occasions to win points sacred occasions to celebrate and transform organizational culture

PROCESS FRAME

:

Structural

motivation economic incentives

Human Resources

growth and self actualization

Political Symbolic

coercion, manipulation, and seduction symbols and celebrations

However...

these frames, as well as the interpretations they offer, imply that...

…control is a fact...

when it is an illusion …sensemaking is prospective… when it is retrospectiveunderstanding is predictable… not confusion (Weick, 1995)

The managerial/leadership reality...

the facts associated with life in human organizations...

…run contrary to common perceptions and opinion...

• First:

turbulence

, not stability, characterizes organizational life.

• Second: people in organizations possess

pluralistic

, not unitary, views about organizations.

• Third:

intuition

, not rationality, proves to be of greater value in the decision-making process.

• Fourth: managers/leaders make

few

, not many, decisions.

the consequence of this organizational reality is that managing and leading human organizations is more like...

…“white-water rafting” (Sergiovanni, 1992) …“muddling through” mazes of messes (Lindblom, 1979) …“garbage can decision making” (Cohen, March, & Olsen, 1992)

MANAGING/LEADING ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE “...it should be considered that nothing is more difficult to handle, more doubtful of success, or more dangerous to manage, than to put oneself at the head of introducing new orders. For the introducer has all those who benefit from the old orders as enemies, and he has lukewarm defenders in all those who might benefit from the new orders.” Machiavelli,

The Prince

, 1985, p. 23

The question, then, is...

What does successful

and

involve and require?

A lesson to remember...

successful managers and leaders...

successful managers and leaders...

For managers and leaders...

the challenge is not so much “reframing” the problems impacting organizational functioning (Bolman & Deal, 1997)...

…and acting

based on calculations and contingencies

whether to manage/lead through participation, delegation, selling, or telling (Hersey & Blanchard, 1977)

instead, managing/leading human organizations is a matter of the human intellect and creative spirit… …a process of “scenario building” …in an overall effort directed at improving organizational functioning

Scenario building...

a methodology to assess organizational functioning...

...by developing unitary solutions (i.e., “scenarios”) designed from an accurate diagnosis of the situation (i.e., “framing”)

then… ...evaluating the strengths and weaknesses associated with each scenario ...envisioning probable outcomes associated with each scenario

forging a pathway… ...maximizing the positive outcomes …and minimizing the negative limitations associated with each scenario

that is...

...to formulate a principled plan of action to guide organizational decision making …and acting courageously to implement the plan in the face of many obstacles (McWhinney, 1992)

and

require...

…women and men who:   understand the organizational context exhibit an abiding concern for people  and task are ethical and virtuous in word and act

who possess attributes and competencies:

task competence intelligence decisiveness vision commitment passion inspire trust take risks are flexible self-confident understanding courageous

these innate and learned attributes and competencies enable managers and leaders...

...to engage in a process of self change …enabling them to influence others by setting an example

With the desired outcome...

that people in organizations learn and feel free to act...

professionally

purposefully

cooperatively

ethically

...by using their personal authority and power to enact the organization’s purpose through their individual projects.

Successful scenarios...

evidence structural thinking, as managers and leaders...

1) do their homework 2) incessantly reconsider the relationship of structure, strategy, and environment 3) focus on implementation 4) experiment, evaluate, and adapt to achieve best practice (Weber, 1911)

evidence managers considering people and their needs...

1) believe in people and communicate this belief 2) are visible and accessible 3) experience delight when others act purposefully, that is, with authority and power

reflect astute politics as managers and leaders...

1) clarify what they want and what they can get 2) assess the distribution of power and interests 3) build linkages and relationships with key stakeholders

all, the while...

…seeking to persuade, first; …engaging in negotiations, second; …using coercion, only if necessary.

demonstrate culture building, as managers and leaders use symbols...

1) to attract the attention of others 2) to frame experience so others can interpret it 3) to communicate a compelling vision 4) to tell meaningful stories that motivate

thereby producing...

…a synergy of cooperative effort (Barnard, 1938) through normative compliance (Etzioni, 1975)

in the service of...

…organizational purpose (Barnard, 1938) …and the ethics of both the leader and the led (Aristotle, 1958; Barnard, 1938; Chaleff, 1995; DuPree, 1992, Kelley, 1988)

This module has focused on...

scenario building

…and how managers and leaders use their minds and spirit to foster successful organizational change efforts.

The next module will focus on...

improving leadership practice

...and how successful managers and leaders integrate reflective practice, conceptual pluralism, and ethical decision making in practice episodes.

References

    Aristotle. (1958). The Nicomachean ethics (W. D. Ross, Trans.). In J. D. Kaplan (Ed.),

The pocket Aristotle

(pp. 158-274). New York: Simon & Schuster.

Barnard, C. I. (1938/1968).

The functions of the executive

. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1997).

Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership

(2 nd San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

edition). Chaleff, I. (1995).

The courageous follower: Standing up to and for our leaders

. San Francisco, CA: Berrett Koehler Publishers.

     Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1992). A garbage can model of organizational choice.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 17

(1), 1-25.

Etzioni, A. (1975).

A comparative analysis of complex organizations

. New York: Free Press.

DePree, M. (1992).

Leadership jazz

. New York: Currency Doubleday.

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. (1977).

Management of organization behavior: Utilizing human resources

. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kelley, R. E. (1988, Nov-Dec). In praise of followers.

Harvard Business Review, 66

, 142-148.

      Lindblom, C. E. (1979). Still muddling, not yet through.

Public Administration Review, 39

, 517-526.

Machiavelli, N. (1985).

The prince

(H. C. Mansfield, Trans.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

McWhinney, W. (1992).

Paths of change: Strategic choices for organizations and society

. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Sergiovanni, T. J. (1992). Reflections on administrative theory and practice in schools.

Educational Administration Quarterly, 28

(3), 304-313.

Taylor, F. W. (1911/1967).

The principles of scientific management

. New York: W. W. Norton.

Weick, K. E. (1995).

Sensemaking in organizations.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.