Friday, June 12, 2009

Discuss the concept of organisational analysis and organisational diagnosis.

Discuss the concept of organisational analysis and organisational diagnosis. Describe the different perspectives of organisational analysis by citing examples. Describe how organisational analysis is conducted in your organisation or an organisation you are familiar with. How far it was successful? Describe the organisation you are referring to.

A systematic attempt to design work was first made in the wake of emergence of machine technology and mass production system immediately after industrial revolution in Western Europe. Since then several experiments in this field have been carried out at different times by different enterprise around the world. In India too, as elsewhere, the need to bring about changes in the way work is organised has arisen from the following socio-economic conditions:
1) Organisations, today, are increasingly getting automated and using new technology to attain the organisational objectives of increased efficiency. This has had a corresponding effect on a greater specialisation, simplification, standardisation and routinisation of a larger number of jobs.
2) Transfer of technology from a developed country to our own along with the associated organisation of work which nay not fit with the prevailing socio-cultural framework of India may have an adverse effect on the social structure and system of values of the people.
3) Organisations have become larger and more bureaucratic in their functioning. This has resulted in increased authoritarianism and inflexibility of management. Decision making is becoming more and more centralised.
4) Even as organisations have continued to increase in size, became mechanistic, and more task-oriented etc. the people working in the organisation are younger, highly skilled, better educated and therefore want to be involved in decision affecting them and their work. They are today less willing to accept routine, monotonous work and look for opportunities to utilise and develop their potentialities. Thus, it
appears that the way most organisation function is in conflict with the needs and expectations of the people working in them. This failure to adequately match the needs of the organisation from an efficiency point of view with the needs of employees on whom the organisation depends are reflected in increased alienation, poor performance, absenteeism, disputes etc.
In view of such problems, it is believed, that ways of structuring jobs and managing organisations that worked earlier may not work now, simply because the people who work in such organisation will no longer put up with them. An important question facing organisations, thus, relates to how they can achieve a fit between persons and their jobs so as to obtain both high work productivity and a high quality organisational experience for the people who work in them. The answer lies in the way work is organised and managed in organisations.
TRADITIONAL APPROACHES TO THE ORGANISATION OF WORK
The traditional approach to the organisation of work has been one of rationalisation involving the specialisation and subdivision of tasks, the minimising and standardising of skills and the development of methods of management prediction and control.
The approach has long history beginning from the writings of Adam Smith who in the "Wealth of Nations" had analysed the division of labour in a pin factory.
"One man draws out the wire, another straightens it, a third cuts it, a fourth points it, a fifth grinds it at the top for receiving the head: to make the head requires two or three distinct operations: to put it on is a peculiar business, to whiten the pins is another; it is even trade by itself to put them into a paper, and the important business of making a pin is, in this manner, divided into about eighteen distinct operations, which in some manufactories, are all performed by distinct hands, though in others the same man will sometimes perform two or three of them".
Of all the principles of management expounded by the classical theorists, the principle of 'division of labour has the greatest implication for how the work is designed in organisations. The principle specifies that maximum work efficiency
will be achieved if jobs are simplified and specialised to the greatest extent possible. In other words, people in an organisation, be they workers or managers, will function more efficiently if they perform the same specialised functions repeatedly rather than spreading their energies on a number complex tasks.
BURAUCRATIC ORGANISATION THEORY
The importance of the division of labour principle was also argued by Max Weber, in his model of bureaucratic work organisation According to him the bureaucratic model of work organisation was the most efficient form of work organisation in which impersonality and rationality are developed to the highest degree. Bureaucracy, in Weber's analyses, describes a form or design of work organisation which assures predictability of the behaviour of individual in the organisation. To achieve the maximum benefits of the form, Weber believed that certain design strategies must be adopted, specifically:
1) All tasks necessary for the accomplishment of goals are divide into highly specialised jobs. Similar argument in favor of the division of labour principle was put forward, namely, that job holders could become expert in their jobs and could be held responsible for the effective performance of their duties.
2) Each task is performed according to a consistent systems of abstract rules to assure uniformity and coordination if different tasks.
3) Members of the organisation obey the law of the organisation because it is their duty and because those who administer it are superior in technical knowledge. It is also legitimised by the fact that it is delegated from the top of the hierarchy. A chain of command is thereby created.
4) Each official in the organisation conducts business in an impersonal formalistic manner, maintaining a social distance with sub ordinates and clients. This rationality and impersonality can be seen as a protection against arbitrary and abusive rule, a way of making his life in the organisation more predictable and stable and less dependent on the personal whims of an arbitrary leader. In turn, the member is expected to do his duty.
5) Employment is based technical qualifications and promotions on seniority and achievement.
The bureaucratic model of formal organisations is rarely found in pure form. Yet, in some way, all organisations exhibit some degree of one or more of its characteristics. It is a pervasive pattern of organising work in most large organisations including government and educational institutions. The reasons for this lie in the strengths of the system and its appeal to rationality and orderliness. Apart from being logical, it is the most complete system of organising work. Another important strength of bureaucracy is its ability to deal with emergency situations. Studies of floods in India by different scholars have shown how successfully the bureaucratic machinery was set into motion to deal with the problems without loss of time.
Other recent studies have also shown that bureaucracy has marked advantages for emergency administration, though having serious disadvantages for more innovative and developmental tasks. In their study of district administration, Dayal, Mathur and Bhattacharya found that bureaucracy allows grassroot administration to be carried out in a more orderly manner than other systems of management. The rationality and rule-bound approaches (typical of bureaucracy) involve the confidence of the public in its impartiality.
One may, therefore, conclude that all features of bureaucracy are built around the structure of a large-scale administration. Obviously, such organisations rely heavily upon hierarchy, specialisation, rules and impersonality with a view to accomplishing their goals efficiently. However, bureaucracy possesses several dysfunctional traits frequently overlooked by its advocates. For example, hierarchy, which theoretically purports to maintain unity of command, coordination and communication in the organisation, in practice, frequently wastes efforts of people and hampers the growth of their personality. Again, bureaucratic rules as implied in red tapism
(obstructiveness), usually become goals in themselves for human behaviour rather than means for accomplishing organisational objectives. Pai and Reddy in their
study of the Secretariat and heads of Departments, analysed 69 files to determine as to how the actual process of administration operates, how orders are given and how they are executed. The analysis revealed that government administration was highly inefficient. It was noted that the maximum time taken for the disposal of one case was 1,010 days, the average time taken being 211 days. Finally, the impersonality feature of bureaucracy overwhelms the personalities of its followers to such as extent that they eventually become" the slaves of rules, procedures and discipline.

No comments:

Post a Comment