IMPLEMENTATION BY TEAMS
Ideal Organizational Model
Desired Organizational Model
Possible Organizational Model
Prospective Organizational Model
As management, especially HRM, has been pointing out, it is not geared towards discovering ideal organizational models or techniques.
The HRA approach is situational or contingent, a model considered ideal in one situation may be totally inappropriate in another.
Every company as a social unit, as an organization, must be managed following the most appropriate techniques, models and principles according to the particular situation, whether when planning, organizing, coordinating, directing or controlling.
For an organizational role to have meaning for people, it must include:
a) Specific and verifiable objectives, which constitute an important part of planning
b) A clear idea of the main duties or activities
c) An unspoken area of discretion or authority so that the person fulfills a function knows what he can do to achieve the goals.
The viable organizational structure cannot be static, therefore there is no way or model to organize that works better in all kinds of situations.
The effective organizational structure depends on the situation.
According to Koontz and Weihrich (1996, p.257), the organizing process consists of the following steps:
• Set clear business goals
• Formulate objectives, policies and support plans
• Identify and classify the activities necessary to achieve them
• Group these activities according to the human and material resources available, and the best way to use them, according to the circumstances
• Delegate to the head of each group the necessary authority to carry out the activities
• Link groups horizontally and vertically, through authority relationships and information flows.
Some of the most common mistakes in the organization are:
• Inability to plan properly: It is not unusual to find a company that maintains a traditional organizational structure long after its objectives, plans, and external environment have changed.
• Inability to clarify relationships: probably more than any other mistake, the inability to clarify relationships in the organization is the cause of friction, politicking and inefficiency; It implies a lack of knowledge of the tasks that the members of a company team must perform.
• Inability to delegate authority: A common complaint in organizational life is that managers are reluctant to refer decision-making to the lower levels of the organization.
• Misuse of functional authority: Perhaps more dangerous for good administration are the problems caused by the indefinite and unlimited delegation of functional authority.
• Excess and lack of organization: excess organization is caused by the inability to put into practice the idea that the company's structure is a system that enables efficient staff performance.
Administrators overorganize when they multiply activities and “staff” departments when they appoint unnecessary line assistants, excess procedures, excess work committees for decisions that can be made by one person (Koontz and Weihrich, 1996, pp.318 -322).
One of the intervention strategies that uses group processes in order to achieve desirable changes are organizational development (OD) techniques.
These strategies constitute a process that requires diagnosis, information, feedback and confrontation, action planning, team building, intragroup development and follow-up.
Within these DO techniques is training and teamwork.
According to Davis and Newstrom (1993, pp. 371-373), in order to implement teamwork, the following requirements must be considered:
• Enabling environment: management must create a supportive environment for the team. Trust, cooperation and compatibility should be promoted.
• Clear Skills and Roles: Team members must be adequately qualified to do the job and have a desire to cooperate. In addition, they must be clear about the roles of each one and the rest of the team.
• Higher-order goals: supervisors or managers must be careful that the group does not lose sight of the purpose of teamwork. It is therefore necessary to establish clear objectives that integrate the effort of two or more people, they are necessary to focus attention, unify efforts and stimulate the cohesion of the teams.
• Team Awards: This item is useful because it encourages teamwork. Awards can be financial, recognition, or delegated authority.
Teamwork, also called a committee or commission, is a group of people who are assigned, as a group, some matter. Some specialists affirm that the working groups go through four stages:
• Training: members start to get to know each other
• Brainstorming: members determine the purpose of the meeting and conflict occurs
• norm setting: the group comes to an agreement on the norms and rules of behavior
• Performance: the group begins to solve the assigned task (Koontz and Weihrich, 1996, p.515).
As a desirable organizational model, teamwork arises for many reasons to implement this type or technique of work.
Koontz and Weihrich point out some of the reasons for the use of committees:
• Deliberation and group criteria: generally the most complex problems and tasks require the evaluation of more than one person. The committees help clarify problems and develop new ideas.
• Fear of concentrating too much authority on a single person: they are useful for making recommendations on specific problems and giving more freedom to superiors, and directors generally do not want to take full responsibility for making a decision.
• Stakeholder representation: to effectively solve a problem or task, all parties involved must be represented.
As has been pointed out and repeatedly repeated, the administration, especially the ARH, does not have universal principles, models or techniques for application. Each case is explored in particular and the model to follow is appropriate to the situation.
Koontz and Weihrich point out the advantages and disadvantages of APO (1996, 158-161) that are presented below: Advantages of APO
• Better administration: generates a much better administration because of the results-oriented planning. Managing by objectives forces managers to think about planning to get results, rather than just planning activities or jobs. How they will achieve the results, the organization and staff they will need to do so, and the resources.
• Clarification of the organization: forces administrators to define organizational roles and structures; positions must be created around the fundamental results expected.
But this type of administration also has its disadvantages:
• Administrators must be “experts” in APO, know and understand a great deal about it, its philosophy and orientation.
• When developing objectives, they must be clear, results-oriented and somehow foresee the future.
• Really verifiable goals are difficult to set.
• Short-term goals are emphasized
• Administrators are often hesitant to change or modify established goals
• You can also forget that management is about much more than setting goals.
In short, the basic elements of APO include.
• Adherence to the method at all levels of the organization
• Effective planning and goal setting
• Integrate individual goals with company goals by promoting the joint participation of managers and subordinates.
• Considerable autonomy in the development and selection of means to achieve the objectives.
• Constant performance evaluation (Stoner and Wankel, 1989, p. 114)
From the foregoing, in addition to the contingency approach, management requires the consideration of future changes and requirements.
All administration activities: planning, organization, coordination, direction and control; It must be done taking into account the present reality and the specific aspects of the current situation without neglecting future projections.
Koontz and Weihrich (1996, pp. 344-346), summarize it as follows:
• The purpose of the organization: to help achieve that objectives have meaning and contribute to organizational efficiency. * Principle of unity of judgment: An organization's structure is effective if staff are allowed to contribute to business objectives.
• The cause of the organization: * Principle of the administration leg: there is a limit to the number of people that can be effectively managed by one person but there are no universal exact numbers.
• The structure of the organization: authority: the organization is made possible by authority. Authority is the tool with which the administrator is able to exercise his discretion and create an environment for individual performance.