The SDG was established by a group of dedicated medical professionals with a common vision to administer medical care of the highest order, and to make SDG the leading provider of health care in the locality. With full conviction that the patient’s total health needs is the primary concern of the hospital, it recognizes therefore, that the physical, emotional and spiritual care of the patient must be the very core of its operation.
The patient should be regarded as more than just a “sick person” to whom one simply administers medication; he must be treated with care, dignity and courtesy he is entitled to as a patron. SDG believes that the best way to deliver patient care is through uncompromising dedication to the Total Quality Approach which strives for continuous improvement. To this end, SDG shall provide the necessary training and conducive environment for all the people behind the health care delivery system – working teams of health care professionals, other employees and contract personnel.
WHO is the organisation? SDG is a small enterprise owned by five families originally who met and planned to start a hospital. They were doctors with established clinics and professions of their own at the locale. A survey of the local hospitals shows that they will be able to somehow compete among even the tertiary level. Their competition is quite fierce though they are now regarded as the number three in the industry in both the private and public hospitals arena.
They aspire to offer reasonable health care among the people within the region not only in the locality. In the survey they have made, since all of the owners are doctors, they were privy to hospitals in the vicinity as well and they are cognizant of the manner of corruptions in both the government hospitals and in the private as well that they are moved to make promote an excellent, honest, and quality health care for all but not at the cost of the pockets of most of those who are the majority which are the least fortunate in the community (Maier, 1966).
SDG opened “shop” 1995 and was closed in 2004 due to Labor Union (Employee/Employer Bargaining Agreement) conflict and eventually reopened just two years ago to new management; that is, to the new breed, the new doctors who are now the second generation children of the first generation owners. They decided to streamline the needs and purposes of the hospital and many small to large changes begin to take place. Firstly, leadership changed hands; i. e. from parents to children which is a critical point in the process.
The traditional folks though very intelligent and highly trained doctors, they were no longer in touch with the trends in health care delivery which had been dynamic and revolutionary. Even the management of people within the hospital personnel in the contemporary setting has gone through great changes that the hospital had to keep up with the demand of its environment for it to be competitive, and not only survive but to surpass its own targets. The owners employed the services of local consultants to check their organization’s health meter and accept the diagnosis.
They were already prepared to meet head on whatever the organization’s needs will be with regards interventions that the consultants will be giving in accordance to the diagnosis of the SDG organization. One of their problems includes lack of accountability among many of those in the records section, lab technicians, and some nurse staff and even among clerks. There are many attitude problems; some HR policies that are not clearly followed because the policies are also unclear themselves. To sum up, the organization lacks quality management and Human resource management streamlining.
The consultant came up with an organizational audit and it was an overhaul they did from top to bottom. Leadership was examined and so the leaders themselves obliged to make themselves available for evaluation. Then the rest of the staff and the nurses had undergone the psychological evaluation. After that, series of interviews were made among department members and the management. It was time consuming but it was all worth it. The change became apparent the first month immediately. There was resistance but the rest as they say became food for thought.
People opened up and started to communicate. Critical Analysis of the Change Process All work occurs within some sort of social-psychological organization. Whether the organization is formal or informal, it dictates ways of behaving, thinking, and feeling to its members. As such, the organization is a powerful influence in the world of work. The field of organizational psychology is concerned with the study of various organizational climates and styles and the ways in which these affect the worker on the job (Baron, 1983).
The two basic organizational styles, classic and modern, differ in terms of degree of control, rigidity, permanence of structure, and amount of worker participation (Baron,1983). The clearest example of the classic style of organization is the bureaucracy, once a humanistic social protest movement against the dictatorial management systems at the beginning of the industrial revolution. Proposed by Max Weber, bureaucracy was intended to be a rational structure in which rules of conduct and lines of authority were rigidly drawn and in which personal bias and prejudice had no place (Gordon & Miller, 1984).
Bureaucracy has four major dimensions: (1) division of labor (making jobs simpler and more highly specialized); (2) delegation of authority (decentralizing management into small units); (3) span of control (number of workers for whom each manager is responsible); and (4) structure (height and width of the organizations depicted by an organization chart) (Baron, 1983). Criticisms of bureaucracy include the charge that they ignore the human element – the worker’s values, needs, and motivations.
Employees are seen as interchangeable units, passive and dependent on the organization with neither the ability nor the desire to have any say over the conditions of their working lives. Bureaucracies are also criticized for their insistence on rigidity and permanence, making them generally impervious to change. They do not adapt well to changing social or technological innovations. The more heavily bureaucratic employees perceive their organization be, the lower is their job satisfaction (Baron, 1983).
Modern organization theory, by contrast, focuses on the individual human beings who comprise an organization. It is concerned with the intellectual, emotional, and motivational characteristics of employees. Based on McGregor’s Theory Y assumptions about human nature, modern organization theory argues that an organization must enrich and enlarge jobs and worker’s opportunities to express their full human potential. To accomplish this, job enrichment, less autocratic leadership, and participation by workers in decision-making at all levels of the organization are favored (Landy, 1985).
The quality of work life has been explained in several ways. One definition includes four dimensions: security, equity, individuation, and democracy. Another combines job satisfaction, motivation, general life satisfaction. An empirically based definition includes seven components: respect and confidence from superiors, variety in work, challenge in work, good future opportunities, self-esteem, impact of life off the job, and extent of the work’s contribution to society (Landy, 1985).
The humanizing changes involved in modern organization theory mark the third stage of industrial revolution. Many organizations are humanizing work through quality-of work-like programs. These movements in the United States and Western Europe involve a restructuring of jobs and managements. Quality-of-work-life movements are time consuming and require flexibility, experimentation, and increased worker participation in decision-making (Landy, 1985).
Several conditions must be satisfied if worker participation in decision-making is to be effective: (1) employees must be psychologically involved; (2) employees must agree with the idea of participation; (3) decisions must be viewed as personally relevant to employees; (4) employees must have the ability and experience to express themselves; (5) sufficient time fro decision-making must be allowed; (6) the cost must not be prohibitive; (7) employees must be protected from retribution; (8) participation must not undermine management; (9) efficient communication channels must be provided; and (10) employees must be trained in the participative process. Worker participation is most likely to lead to increases in production when it is combined with financial incentives (Landy, 1985). Another approach based on worker participation is the quality-control circle movement from Japan. Small groups of workers meet periodically to solve problems relating to the quality and quantity of production. A useful by-product is employee growth and development.
Quality circles are popular but more research is needed to determine their level of success (Landy, 1985). A problem faced by many organizations is employee resistance when a new work method, piece of equipment or other change is introduced. However, it has been demonstrated that when workers are allowed to participate fully in decisions concerning the change, they will enthusiastically support it. This positive effect of worker participation has been shown to last more than four years after the introduction of a major change (Gordon & Miller, 1984). A series of techniques for successfully introducing large-scale organizational changes is organizational development (OD).
The process is carried out by consultants (change agents) who diagnose the organization’s problems and devise appropriate strategies to eliminate them. The implementation of those strategies is called intervention, which operates throughout the organization, usually beginning with top management. Most OD programs, although differing in their particulars, are oriented toward making the organization less rigid in structure and more openly participative (Gordon & Miller, 1984). New employees in an organization must undergo a period of adjustment as socialization. This is the post-hiring phase of organization entry; selection is the pre-hiring phase. A poor socialization program can lead to frustration and dissatisfaction.
Proper socialization involves providing new employees with a challenging job, proper training, feedback, a caring supervisor, co-workers high in morale and in regard for the company, and a relaxed orientation program (Gordon & Miller, 1984). Membership in a labor union can affect job satisfaction and productivity. Belonging to a union can satisfy the physiological and safety needs through better pay, job security, and fringe benefits. It can also satisfy belonging, esteem, status, and power needs. Union membership decreases satisfaction with the task itself, with supervision, and with promotion policies. It increases satisfaction with wages and fringe benefits. Union grievance procedures can serve as an indication of job dissatisfaction, provide employees with a means of upward communication, and serve as a safety valve for discontent (Gordon & Miller, 1984).
In every organization, informal work group develop and this exerts considerable influence on employee attitudes and behavior on the job. Beyond the control of management, these informal groups have their own standards of conduct in regard to production levels and relations with management. Often, the ideals and standards of these groups conflict with those of the formal organization. New employees who do not conform to the group norms may be ostracized (Gordon & Miller, 1984). Is what is happening in the organisation similar or different to what the theories/literature say happens/can happen? By answering this, you can compare & contrast the theories/literature with the practices and show relevance/irrelevance.
The main point to remember here, is to be a critical thinker / debate the issues. Every person in direct supervision of employees or workers knows the intricacies of leadership and management of people under his/her care. Whenever possible, it is to the best interest of the organization and employer in general that the workers perform their respective jobs efficiently and on a continuous or consistent manner. This is the aspiration of every owner of a company or those delegated to deliver their/his/her goals. However, this will only work so long as the individuals in their various places or positions know and understand what they want and where they want to go in the context of the overall goals of their organization.
Intertwined in this idea is the fact that individuals are motivated to work not only for them but that the vision and mission, goals of the corporate world where they belong must be their own also. Ownership as a motivational factor is critical for the survival and sustainability of both the individual worker and the organization as a whole. Studies reveal that how an organization runs depends upon every human person within the workplace functioning as he/she should be in order that productivity is achieved. This is actually a cyclical picture; both the organization or employer level and the rank and file levels must understand the team and group dynamics that must work to achieve their own objectives. However this seemed to be easy to understand, the applications of which are complex involving multiple disciplines (ACCEL, 2006).
Motivation, when properly understood, underscores the fact that the problem with the implementation lies in the root of the complexities of human behavior itself (ACCEL, 2006). The word motivation is derived from the word “motivate” which means to move, impel, or induce to act or satisfy a need or want. Any consideration, idea or object prompting or exciting an individual to act or move him to do what his leader wants to be accomplished is motivation. Motivation may therefore be defined as a willingness to exert effort to achieve a goal or objective for reward. Without motivation or will to do, not much by way of accomplishment can be made. It is the need, want, or motive within the individual that will urge him to accomplish his motives (“Organizational motivation”, 2007).
Motivation implies a promise or expectation of reward as a result of one’s action. The reward is usually in the form of satisfaction of the individual’s wants, desires or needs – his objectives (“Organizational motivation”, 2007). One of the most important tasks of management is how to arouse and maintain the interest of its employees to work willingly and enthusiastically to achieve the company’s goals. Anything that is designed to make the individual or group of individuals obtain or satisfy their needs is motivation (King, 1970). There are two types of motivation – positive and negative, both of which are used by managers to achieve goals.
Positive motivation is a human relations or leadership approach whereby subordinates enthusiastically follow the leader’s will because of some possible gain, reward or satisfaction they expect to get such as feeling of achievement, sense of responsibility, appreciation, promotion, etc. , (Lazaro et al. , 2000). Negative motivation on the other hand, also influences others to follow the leader’s will, but not because of any expected advantage but of fear of punishment or the application of certain sanctions such as losing some money or status, recognition, or even one’s job (Lazaro et al, 2000). Specific studies substantiate the influence of certain factors on motivation.
Generally, these studies reveal that rank ordered needs in many government entities ranked as follows: 1) physiological; 2)self-realization; 3)security and safety; 4)social; 5)status and prestige (King, 1970). In another study, workers from among workers and middle management groups ranked security and physiological needs of utmost importance. These data show that factors mentioned here must be the concern of the individuals in their executive positions (King, 1970). Organizations in whatever form or state thrive fundamentally on communication. Inherent in the understanding of progress, development and growth of any institution is the reality that in order to be ahead, its members should be able to know what its goals are and are united towards accomplishing those goals. As expected, team communication is a must for this to occur.
It is very important that communication is always flowing and open to everyone involved. Without effective communication, an organization as teamwork, like a human body, will experience atrophy at some point and eventual deterioration of the whole system if the problem is not addressed early on. However, overdoing the system of communication or doing little for crucial areas can also become detrimental for the overall organizational health (Guffey, 2003). It is for this purpose that this paper is an attempt to elucidate a generic strategy for effective team communication. By generic, in this thesis, it means an effective communication strategy (with revision and / or modification) that can suit any particular organization.
The focal points of this paper are centered on the (1) Nature and timing of communication, (2) the Methods or technology necessary for implementation and effectiveness, and (3) the Various functions or placements of individuals and team members within that communication network (Kimball at http://www. groupjazz. com/pdf/matrix,accessed Feb. 15, 2007). Many more can be added on the list except that these three are the most important when it comes to building a strategic structure on team communication. It is precisely through this rationale that a team is able to survive or flourish in the context of a bigger organization. When its individual members have highly developed communication skills then the whole team will enjoy the benefits of its resources which include the achievement of its goals.
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