6:00pm
Announcements, Syllabus
6:30pm
Thought for the quarter---- don't hit the auto pilot button.
10 minutes: Personality Test exercise with observers 5 minutes for feedback---- point is to evaluate how “good the fit” is between personality test results and behaviors in organizing. What about context or situation? If our personality is linked to how we lead or manage, then perhaps pigeon holing ourselves into prescribed models is not appropriate.---- things change, notice that the scores may be high, moderate or low---- this allows for flexibility in how we act in the world. What do you depend on? Best practices, gut feelings, or both? Requires self reflection which Larry will discuss later.
How important is it for you to be aware of the personality types of others? Would this test be something useful for you to give to your employees or not? Why?
6:50pm
Organization Theory Lecture
Question #1) What is a public organization?
Henry provides a wonderful overview of organization theory, but states that “organizations are different creatures to different people” that this is unavoidable and, therefore, “organizations are defined according to the contexts and perspectives peculiar to the person doing the defining.”
What is your definition of an organization? Is this class an organization? -----
Organization: a noun (person, place or thing), organizational: an adjective (action)---- organ= part of the whole, tion= action, doing (motivation, refrigeration)
But what is a “public” organization as opposed to a private organization? express public not private values…..democratic, consensus seeking, public ownership/responsibility
note what concepts people latch onto first ----- size, structure, institution, rules, components, humans, mission, function, shared interests, population served ----- that is all the different theories of organizations are about--- they emphasize different aspects of what organizations are.
The unit of analysis is all that has changed over time in organization theory, like a pendulum swinging back and forth. With Weber it was structure (bureaucracy), with Taylor and Gulick it was the science of efficient processes, and with Maslow it was the individual human self.
There is no such thing as “the” theory of organizations. There are many theories about organizations and the people in them. Therefore, arguably, we are talking about organization theory in every class because we are always discussing the pieces of organizations (administrators, leadership, ideologies, budgets, policies, decision-making).
Some debate that org theory/behavior is a field in and of itself. However, others believe it is a topic area within the field of public administration. You can decide, but here is what org theory adds to our learning (highlighted):
Classics: Efficiency, Facts, Science, Objectivity, Administration (Experts), formal authority (structure), sameness (rational model, closed, gender/race/class doesn't matter because we all are part of the same organization using the same means) ….. versus….
Challenge: Effectiveness, Values, Qualitative Analysis, Subjectivity and Politics, informal authority (the faces of power), otherness (difference, open)
Org theory: Public vs. private, centralization ( Hamilton ) vs. decentralization ( Jefferson )
The classics were focused on the means of organizations : what are the most efficient institutional structures that can best support a rational emphasis. (production model)
Critique?--- loss of freedom, no questions of justice, effectiveness, desirability. Assumes that public administrators are rational actors, that human behavior can be predicted and controlled, that organizations can operate like machines, and that success and failure are defined in terms of efficiency.
The challenge theorists are focused the means (inclusivity at the decision making table, flattening hierarchy, community involvement, subject as expert) and ends (effective) of organizations.
Critique?--- lack of unity, too complex
Within the study of organization theory these are separated into “schools” of thought about organizations:
Classical Organization Theory (prime in the 1920s & 30s) - assumes that humans need organizations to control them. We seek structure because we desire simplicity. It came out of the Enlightenment, supported the rational model, scientific management ( Taylor 's one best way- experts are the experts, not workers- reinforced hierarchy & Gulick's- work division key to organizations/precise functions of management). It is considered classic because all other theories in the “study” of organizations build on or critique the theories from this time.
The Enlightenment : (17 th and 18 th centuries) sought to establish a new nature of knowledge where subjective ideas such as religion did not rule the landscape. Instead, philosophers and scientists would rely on “reason,” proof, physical observation and verifiable predictions to claim knowledge. They were looking for basic objective truths of the world ( UNIVERSAL TRUTHS ). The central claim was that there was an objective truth of reality out there to be discovered that was separate from the observer , instead of the subjective views of reality expressed in religion and politics. This could be discovered through the scientific method: observation/characterization, hypothesis, experimentation and verification. The order of the scientific method was seen as a way of keeping chaos out and ordered efficiency in……things were seen in absolutes, either you could prove something scientifically or you could not. This was what is known as “empiricism” or dependence on evidence. Western societies felt protected by “scientific experts” rather than ruled by mystic traditions or a King. For example, in the judicial system and in public policy controversies, if decisions deviate from accepted scientific/objective practice…..they are thrown out of court as unreliable or disregarded as too political.
The rational model : based in efficiency and cost benefit analysis. Rational model of reasoning is 1) identify objectives, 2) identify alternative courses of action for achieving objectives, 3) predict the possible consequences of each alternative, 4) evaluate the possible consequences of each alternative, 5) select the alternative that maximizes the attainment of objectives. This model is still dominant because it gets things done. Describes the world as it is, predicts how the world will be and, in turn, aims to control it. Assumes that everything has one clear meaning, that perfect information is available to all, and definite answers are known. The rational model of organizations is bureaucracy - structure that constrains power, objectivity, division of labor/ specialization, exercise authority through hierarchy, fixed rules, routine, professionalism, vocation, training.
Neoclassical Organization Theory : (prime in the late 30s, 1940s &50s) the neoclassical school is critical of classical org theory because it minimized the human-ness of organizations, coordinated decision making power amongst administrative units, closed off organizations from external environments. The neoclassical school advocated for a new approach to control- recognize human character traits through economic and psychological modeling, recognize the external environment- but figure out a way to keep these things out of organizations.
Barnard- an essential element of organizations is the willingness of persons to contribute their individual efforts to the cooperative system. He was the first to suggest that organizations are sets of cooperative systems and defined the organization at the group level (two or more persons). Managers need to motivate employees not just through economic incentives, but through meeting their social needs. Barnard recognized the informal organization existing within the formal org. He found that the informal organization (water cooler meetings) were the main channel of communication.- embrace the informal and control for it. Advocated practice as the basis for scholarship rather than the other way around.
Human Resource Theory (prime in 1960s & 70s): (Follett- power with not power over, Maslow- hierarchy of needs, McGregor- theory x & y) Human resource theory assumes that 1) organizations exist to serve human needs, 2) organizations and people need each other, 3) the fit between the individual and the organization must be right for both, 4) a bad fit will hurt both. The unit of analysis in this school is the individual mind and emotions- therefore, organizations are open systems. Workers who like their jobs will be more motivated and productive. The essence of the relationship between the organization and its workers is redefined from dependence to codependence—people are considered to be as or more important that the organization itself --- the organization influences human behavior just as behavior shapes the organization.
Structural Organization Theory – (prime in late 60s, 70s) competed with human resource school, believed structure can enforce closed organizations- based on Weber's bureaucracy - there is a best structure for any institution, most problems in an organization result from structural flaws and can be solved by changing the structure. Organizations shape their environment rather than their environment shaping them.
Systems Theory and Organizational Economics : (prime in 50s, 60s &70s)- challenged closed, hierarchical organizations. OPEN systems approach. Argued that organizations are complex sets of dynamically intertwined and interconnected elements related to their environments (social economy). Therefore, a change in any one element changes the other elements. Managers and employees have agency.
Katz & Kahn – an organization is an open social system with characteristics that are manifestations of the goals of its founders. Individuals who work in the system have their own values and personal goals that might be different from those of the organization. Organizations maintain their stability and predictability by using patterned reoccurrences= roles assigned to its members.
Power and Politics Organization Theory : (prime in the 80s) all of the aforementioned schools offer a variety of alternatives for thinking about organizations, but still embody inequality, power hierarchies and control. Powerlessness (or perceived powerlessness) can be a more substantive problem than the possession of power. [feminism- women encounter unique problems related to power and politics in organizations] Power is relational- for someone to have power, others must accept that they do. Conflict is inevitable- power, politics, and influence are permanent facts of organizational life.
Organizational Culture Reform Movements : (prime in the 90s) —reinventing government (Gore)- change the structure and how people approach their work (be servants instead of administrators).
Postmodernism, Poststructuralism & the Information Age : (now) we construct our own realities, there is no universal truth, never claim to have answers, structure should be flexible by being connected to individual behavior- pa is a process (discursive democracy) not a structure. Due to technology, a generalist can do the work of an expert.
Bergquist - organizations are like fires: 1) fires are irreversible, 2) fires are elusive, hard to measure, and hard to document in terms of their actual impact. In postmodern/ poststructural/technological organizations the texture between individuals, the organization and their work is changed irreversibly: like a forest after a fire, they cannot revert to their prior state.
One culminating question asked in organization theory & PA: How do we manage our resources (human or otherwise) to get done what the organization needs to get done?
7:30pm
10 minute break
7:40pm
Johari Self Assessment Window Handout
8:00pm
10 minute break and transition to seminar A2107 & A2109—put seminar list on pad cam