* External & Internal Design (more internal then external) – looking at crises and causes * Very little external analysis (no porter, vrine, swot) – confusing reporting relationships, not able to deal w/stress of…supervision problems, span of control issues,
* Staff: ability of supervisors to ensure, without putting clients at risk, that they are properly looked after. Strong pressure and amount of quality of care needed because of risk clients are put at is rising. * By product, by process, by customer, by geography?
* Try to present alternatives in org. charts – ex. reporting vertical, horizontal, supervision, staffing requirements
* 12 pgs, single spaced
* PAGE NUMBERS! Have enough white space
* Integrate analysis of different alternatives
* No executive summary, or introduction
* Key issue/challenge faced
* Causes & consequences
* Effectiveness? Burning out employees
* Approx. 1-3 alternatives
* What needs to be done
1. Primary issue facing Ken MacLellan: had meeting with Kathie Wolcott (HR), who received feedback from support workers about problems are occurring at Alice Saddy (non-profit agency supporting people with developmental disabilities, teaching them daily living skills to help enable them to live more independently – 125 people by 2007. Committed to responding to issues raised within a week. * Current org. structure is too confusing and frustrating, slowed decision making processes (therefore, fast response times were not met and communicated was hindered), and created potential risks for the people they serve.
2. How does the philosophy of Alice Saddy affect org. structure? * Believes all people have the right to be respected as valued members of their community and society. * All people must: have the opportunity to be active, contributing members of their community; be recognized as individuals with a unique and valued contribution; be treated with dignity and respect; have the opportunity to develop skills and/or be provided wit supports enabling them to choose to live in an independent or shared home environment in the community/neighbourhood of their choice. This mutual respect will enhance each person’s sense of self-worth and equality. * Discontinued group homes to be consistent with philosophy of independent living. * Referred to clients as “people supported” rather than “clients” – seen as dehumanizing, not acknowledging individuality. * Focused on enabling personal choice and individualized serviced, ingrained in organizational culture; “People supported first.”
3. How has environment changed at Alice Saddy? How have these changes influenced Alice Saddy’s ability to delver support to the people supported (how has performing tasks been affected)?
* More professional staff hired
* Executive Director: Ken MacLellan
* Supervisor of Support Services: Kathy Peters
* Human Resources Manager: Kathie Wolcott
* Financial Manager
* 4 Managers Support Services (reported to supervisor of support services)
* 1 Administrative assistant (part-time)
* Support service workers (96 – doubled in size in past 7 years) * By 2007: supported 50 people in nursing homes, some people with brain injuries, provided a drop-in centre offering social and recreational activities, opened a computer lab, and provided a volunteer program. * The system used to consist of conducting an extensive needs assessment once a person supported was accepted. If a change in support was needed, the support workers would informally discuss it with the supervisor of support services and a plan was developed. Later, support workers would report to manager of support services (experienced former support workers with Alice Saddy), who would then report to the supervisor of support services.
* Work load of managers doubled in 2007, including more high-needs individuals and aging population – each manager managed an average of 22 support workers and 31 people supported * Complex scheduling took a great deal of time to ensure adequate coverage and no conflicts: each manager scheduled support workers for their cases, but often 4 managers addressed 1 case. * Less informal communication proved challenging with more people supported, more managers, and more support workers.
4. Evaluate decisions making process:
* Support workers worked fairly independently (especially on evening and weekend when support service managers were not always available to consult). Therefore, required professional judgement, attention to detail, strong communication skills, experience working with people and developmental disabilities. * Managers were required to manage case-load of people supported, manage a group of support workers performance, and act as support worker in field. To the support workers who reported to them, the manager would provide, coaching, evaluations, scheduling, training, etc. The performance evaluation process was ongoing, meeting ever 6-8 weeks to discuss performance and needs of supported. Evaluations used when deciding to move a worker from part-time to full-time.
* When a new person was taken on by the agency, the supervisor of support services conducted a needs assessment. They were then assigned by the supervisor to a case manager based on current case-loads and skills of manager. Independent of the case managers choice, a team of support workers are assigned to the person support by the supervisor. The support workers could then report to any of the 4 managers (“cross-reporting”). Therefore, support workers often worked on cases addressed by 2, 3, or even all 4 managers. It was believed this structure provided the most flexibility, and coverage of all hours needed to support an individual. * Managers meet regularly to discuss case strategy and individual staff performance. * If challenged by support workers for more direction, the issue was discussed by managers to provide more clarity, but had to be presented for approval to supervisor, then managers would communicate back to support workers.
5. What are the factors that McLellan must balance as he develops a new org structure for Alice Saddy? * Providing each person with appropriate employment and volunteer opportunities. * Allowing support workers to efficiently and effectively communicate with families of people supported (where appropriate). * Highly demanding support staff position, often resulted in stress and burnout. * Matching Support Workers skills and personalities to the needs of people supported; some people need more help than others (20% were high needs individuals requiring 24-hour care could only be assisted by certain people with ability, patience and personal connection; therefore, more workers for fewer hours to reduce burnout; also allowed for easier accommodation of vacations and sick leave). 5-15 people could be a team supporting 1 person.
* Each manager of support services works 10 hours a week as a support workers, and 25 hours a week as a manager (less time spent and difficult to provide coaching to support workers given only 25 hours to complete managerial tasks). * Coordination of activity needed to deal with unusual situations of great case-loads, since each support worker on a team for a particular individual might have a different manager. * Scheduling conflicts had to be avoided – since some case loads were using all 4 managers, ensuring adequate coverage and no scheduling conflicts took a great deal of time. * Conflicting feedback on performance often received – a case manager might give different feedback that support worker’s manager; some concerns only spoken between managers and not directly to employee.
* Would want to ensure bi-monthly performance appraisals are being completed. * Frustrated managers working long hours (in need of more managers with increase in amount of people supported and needs required). * Contradictory direction about complex issues – often support workers addressed issues to more than one manager, in order to speed up process; but delay and different advice could end up hurting persons supported. * Changing structure could be disruptive and destabilizing to those supported who are highly attached to their support workers (esp. for those with high-needs).
6. What process would you use to develop and implement a new org. structure? What is decision making like?
7. What org. structures recommended
Courtney from Study Moose
Hi there, would you like to get such a paper? How about receiving a customized one? Check it out https://goo.gl/3TYhaX