Introduction
Orlando Health is a not-for-profit health care organization serving the southeastern United States. Its team comprises highly skilled professionals providing treatments for various diseases. Orlando Health clinicians have pioneered life-changing research, including late-stage breast cancer treatment and biomarker detection for traumatic brain injury. The secret to Orlando Health’s success is its people; therefore, there is special attention to leadership recruitment. The company’s directors are committed leaders who direct the team and work jointly to improve the organizational design.
Leadership Philosophies
In an environment where fierce competition and high levels of uncertainty are an everyday reality, the value orientations and attitudes of the leader become especially important. Today, leadership is the modern ideal of individual behavior. It has necessitated a reflection on the influence of philosophical ideas and concepts on leadership theory and practice. The specific nature of Orlando Health suggests different philosophies. They can be described using the examples of the CEO and the chief of staff as representatives of transactional and transformational leadership. The Chief of Staff’s philosophy is to constantly teach the team how to discover unique ways to solve incoming challenges, take advantage of various opportunities to learn new things, and gain new experiences. To accomplish this, he is constantly working with individual employees, providing support and encouragement to whoever is needed.
Moreover, he is always open to communication to help everyone as much as possible, creating an atmosphere where subordinates are not afraid or shy to share ideas and ask for help. The peculiarity of the chief of staff’s philosophy is that he helps others become leaders. This behavior style is entirely consistent with the concept of transformational leadership because it suggests a type in which the leader is passionate about work and constantly interested in those they lead (Gandolfi & Stone, 2018). Through a vision of change in the organization, the transformational leader strives to inspire employees throughout the company to support that vision.
Transformational leaders not only seek to change the business and those they lead, but they also desire to change themselves. Concerning the employee, the transformational leader usually listens, solves problems, and motivates with great enthusiasm (Cortellazzo et al., 2019). This style usually encourages the leader to work closely with employees to ensure their needs are met, focusing on freedom, fairness, equality, and the well-being of all. The behavior characterizes the chief of staff, and it is uncontroversial that he is a shining example of a transformational leader.
Orlando Health’s CEO, on the other hand, has a different philosophy and leadership style. His main goal is to ensure that everything runs smoothly and as a single mechanism. The CEO’s core values are to achieve the desired results and to make the connection between the goal and the reward. It implies that he adheres to a transactional philosophy, as evidenced by his actions. The CEO monitors the work of his followers, takes corrective action when there are deviations from standards, and enforces the rules to avoid mistakes. He intervenes when a problem becomes severe but refrains from taking steps until the issue is brought to his attention.
The director clarifies subordinates’ roles, shows them respect, and initiates structure but does not interact closely with employees. Transactional leadership is a style in which aides seek motivation from their leaders through punishments and rewards in the workplace (Cortellazzo et al., 2019). It is this concept that underlies the behavior of a company executive. It correspondingly implies a degree of passivity and a focus on the bottom line rather than on the individual needs of each employee. Therefore, it is possible to conclude that the CEO uses transactional leadership as the primary way to lead. At the same time, the director of the staff prefers transformational leadership. Both types have their disadvantages and disadvantages, but combining them helps to build a competent organizational culture.
Organizational Design
Orlando Health is committed to one critical goal: to meet the demand for health care services and provide quality and affordable health care to the public following the license to practice medicine. The organization sets itself the need to ensure accessibility of care, compliance with standards and procedures of care, and create a favorable environment for employees to perform their job duties (Sipayung et al., 2021). The company uses a corporate strategy to achieve these goals, which describes the general directions of the organization’s development. It provides for actions to improve the organization’s overall performance, create priorities for its development and investment support, and obtain a synergistic effect by coordinating the activities of individual structural parts of the organization. Strategic decisions of this level are the most complex. At the level of particular areas, Orlando Health develops a strategy to ensure the long-term competitive advantage of a specific type of service.
Orlando Health is a matrix organization that has several management reporting structures. The subordination to a division manager functions similarly to a traditional work structure. Ultimately, all reporting relationships lead to the CEO, who is responsible for shaping the overall goal. In a strong matrix, the head of the department has the maximum amount of authority related to decision-making for the department. In contrast, the source of the head of the division is more limited. It directs to a solid organizational structure since the head of the department is fully responsible for each. It is likewise consistent with the leadership philosophy, as the chief of staff is wholly accountable for the team, and the CEO is responsible for the coherence of the work more than achieving short-term goals. Such structures have advantages when they work, but they also have the potential to cause conflict and turn work into chaos (Sipayung et al., 2021). The significant gap is that the team may not know to whom and when to report.
While the matrix organization is designed to benefit groups, it can correspondingly complicate projects and confuse the overall flow of projects. The most reasonable way to prevent reporting failures is to ensure everyone in the matrix understands to whom and how to report (Sipayung et al., 2021). An intuitive project management platform that facilitates work between teams can make the matrix structure less complex. The intricacy of the matrix can lead to slow response times for both leader and staff, which in turn delays project delivery. It is a significant limitation on meeting goals, but it can be prevented using information management systems.
The primary difference between a matrix and a hierarchical structure is that employees report to two managers in a matrix structure. It makes the matrix organization more complex and more responsible for the participants and leaders (Sipayung et al., 2021). That is why leaders must constantly interact with both staff and each other. It is up to the heads to make the organizational structure function smoothly and efficiently. Therefore, they must set clear objectives and work together to deliver quality health care services.
Conclusion
Organizational leadership is about aligning the components of an organization to implement strategy and remove barriers. Corporate design is a leader’s job; therefore, every leader must strive to maintain an optimal atmosphere and resources in the company to achieve its goals. Regardless of what type of leadership the manager has, it is crucial to comprehend that the primary task is to build competent relationships between team members to build a solid organizational design.
References
Cortellazzo, L., Bruni, E., & Zampieri, R. (2019). The role of leadership in a digitalized world: A review. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 1938.
Gandolfi, F., & Stone, S. (2018). Leadership, leadership styles, and servant leadership. Journal of Management Research, 18(4), 261-269.
Sipayung, F., Ginting, L., & Sibarani, M. (2021). Organisational design, organisational climate and burnouts in health services companies. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change [revista en Internet], 15(3), 257-275.