How the work setting is organized
The work setting in my institution can be considered mostly formal but with certain informal elements. My organization is structured, and every employee has a well-defined set of professional duties and obligations, every person is assigned their tasks and held accountable for their performance, which ensures transparency. The employees’ relationships in the work environment are governed by the professional rules of conduct, which helps reduce the number of interpersonal conflicts that often arise in informal organizations. A strong hierarchical structure of my institution ensures the division of specialization and allows people to work and further advance in their primary areas of expertise. All final decisions are made by the management team members who are responsible for setting the organizational goals.
Nevertheless, there are informal organization features that are inherent to my institution, absolutely allowed, and often effectively used. First of all, these are weekly meetings where all employees can discuss the current issues and find proper solutions together; they help ensure that everyone’s voice is heard and considered. Moreover, when people work alongside each other for a long period of time, it is natural for them to establish informal groups. In my organization, these people are allowed to develop projects together since it improves efficiency, although it is important to control all the possible negative effects of such groups. There is a relatively short power distance in the organization, meaning that any low-ranking employee can ask a higher-ranking one for assistance and help.
Is power shared?
The power in my organization is shared to a considerable extent, not only among the managerial staff but also among the employees in general. Every person in the institution has a responsibility and a certain level of authority, which allows them to have freedom and better flexibility in their actions. The concept of shared power is relevant for my organization because it is a rather small institution, allowing everyone to communicate directly. Thus, people with different expertise can exchange information that will be useful in solving various tasks.
Power is also shared among the managers; every manager has authority over their department and holds the right to make the final decision in their allocated area. This ensures that managers do not interfere with one another’s processes and approaches, and have a significant room for independent actions. This is done partially to avoid granting major personal power to one manager since it will inevitably lead to conflicts, misunderstanding, and discontent. This facilitates the communication process between managers and employees since they can concentrate only on the issues that concern their department, which promotes an environment of trust.
How are decisions made?
The decision-making in my institution is a complex process that is affected by the opinions of both managers and subordinates. As it was mentioned earlier, all the major decisions in my organization are made by the managerial staff since they possess an ability to develop a strictly-defined plan of the necessary actions. Despite this fact, ordinary employees have areas where they are free to make their own decisions and not adhere to the managers’ requirements. For example, teachers can freely choose which methods and techniques of schooling they will use in different situations. They are not obliged to follow the established guidelines, allowing them to develop and test approaches that are most effective.
When making significant decisions, managers always have a meeting with all the staff members and ask them to share their opinions. This allows them to gain valuable insights into the organization’s state of affairs and evaluate employees’ attitudes towards new proposals and innovations. Thus, workers receive an opportunity to participate in the decision-making process, while managers ensure that the implementation of their plans will not be opposed. Despite this rigid hierarchy, every manger stays well-informed and regularly discusses all the work-related problems and matters with the subordinates. It can be concluded that although my organization does not have a horizontal power structure, the decisions made by the higher-ranking employees are always based on the information provided by the subordinates.
Are there evidence of principle-centered leadership in your workplace?
There is evidence of principle-centered leadership in my workplace, namely managers’ positive attitude towards the subordinates and their constant desire to advance their skills and knowledge, which inspires others. The organization’s managers are people-oriented, so they are ready to go to great lengths to provide support and help to all the employees who need it. They possess an ability to see the people’s potential and know how to unleash it by giving relevant advice. They take criticism positively and are always willing to admit their occasional mistakes, which indicates their wisdom. Moreover, they always strive to analyze and assess their mistakes and then learn from them in order to become better at their job, which serves as an example for other people in the organization.
The nature of the leadership roles implies that people who occupy managerial positions have to be keen on constantly progressing in their professional qualities. It is absolutely the case with leaders in my organization who lead by example and inspire everyone around them to set and reach new goals. They always share information about new courses and training events, as well as provide their perspective on the importance of those. My institution’s leaders stay proactive and seek to instantly address any issues that emerge in the organization. They serve as the biggest motivators, able to encourage others to improve their performance and offer guidance to those who struggle with their tasks.
The strengths and weaknesses of the organization
There are definitely both strengths and weaknesses in the organizational layout of my institution that is currently in place. The most notable strengths are the rigid system of operations and good internal communication in the organization. The system implemented in my institution is transparent and obvious, so every employee is aware of the responsibilities and tasks they have to deliver on. This allows them to concentrate on their primary objectives and devote all of their time and efforts to achieving them. Communication is one of the strongest factors of the success of my organization since every employee can easily contact the necessary person and discuss all their matters together. There are tried and tested channels of communication actively used in the organization that facilitate the operational processes and help avoid any waste of resources.
Speaking of weaknesses, it should be noted that when any significant problem that hinders the organization’s performance emerges, the management acts swiftly to eradicate it, which means that systemic weaknesses are rare in my institution. Nevertheless, occasional dissatisfaction of employees with managers’ decisions and a lack of a universal approach in certain areas can be considered the most topical of all. Despite all the managers’ efforts to establish a reliable feedback framework, there are still cases when employees feel dissatisfied with the managers’ decisions. This usually happens when people see that the managers’ final plan does not include their recommendations; as a result, it often negatively affects their self-esteem and motivation. Another weakness of the organization is teachers’ adherence to different professional methods, which impedes their cooperation while working on group projects since their approaches are often incompatible.
What improvements might be suggested
The problem of employees’ dissatisfaction cannot be avoided completely because conflict arises every time when at least two people have to work together. Nevertheless, there are possible ways to improve the situation and decrease the number of such instances. First of all, meetings of employees with managers have to take place at least two times a week to ensure that everyone has a chance to present their issues more often. Moreover, before the introduction of every change to the current processes, managers have to clearly explain to the employees all the advantages of the new approach and the reasons for its implementation. Thus, people will stay informed and better understand why their suggestions were not used in the final solution.
A variety of teachers’ approaches is, useful and beneficial for the schooling process, but, on the other hand, it creates a misunderstanding between teachers when they develop a project together. This problem can be solved with the adoption of a universal approach that would be strictly limited to all group projects. All teachers could participate in the creation of this framework, discuss its aspects, and contribute their ideas to it. This universal approach will mostly eradicate any conflicts that currently arise during the process of developing group projects and ensure that teachers have a reliable foundation to build on.
My organization is both formal and informal, it has a hierarchy where every person has their responsibility, but the short power distance makes it more flexible. The power is evenly shared among the employees and the decision-making process is treated as a collective task, even though the managers always have the final say. The evidence of principle-based leadership in my organization is managers’ positive and people-oriented approach, which plays a vital role in the institution’s greatest strength, its internal communication. The biggest weaknesses of the organization include occasional employees’ dissatisfaction and the lack of a universal approach, which can be overcome by holding meetings at least twice a week and creating a unified framework, respectively.