In healthcare organization like Omega House, organizational culture and structure of managerial relations influence performance and service quality. Thus, the uniqueness of this concept is that organizational culture can be interested and understood differently and have different implications for management practice. The aim of the research paper is to evaluate and analyze the impact on some perspectives and theories of organizational culture on management practices. In general, organizational culture can be described as a theory of interpretation for understanding the significance of human feelings and actions. Its application to examining organizational life moves us beyond the scientific search for observable facts and truths; rather, it offers a theory and practices for ascertaining the meaning of human relations and experiences at work-meanings found in the unconscious and latent processes of social systems. Organizational behavior theorists attempt to locate the intent of human experience by focusing on psychic reality in contrast to objective reality.
The comparison between the hierarchical autocratic systems and the cross program task force approach is not an easy one as both of these approaches have some limitations and opportunities for certain types of organizations. The hierarchical autocratic systems is beneficial for Omega s they prevent indecision and flexibility in medical decisions. While rapidly growing from the small healthcare agency, it tries to fight with hierarchy keeping the decision-making process at its current level, when each employee is able to make his/her own contribution toward the internal and external corporate processes and development. The overall structure of Omega looks like the following: dozens of individual contributors report to middle managers who report to division managers who in their turn report to the management team (Armandi et al, 2003, p. 1076).
The cross-program task force approach is also beneficial for Omega as it permits greater sensitivity and micromanaged valued by Ellen. Still, increased decentralization of organizations, like increased globalization, creates a tension between local needs and practice on the one hand and the need for consistency within companies on the other. When decision-making authority is distributed, whether functionally or by geographic region, performance management can be used as a local management tool or as a tool to reinforce overall company principles and objectives as employees are evaluated along dimensions that support the company’s business strategies (Bolman and Deal, 2003, p. 83). The challenge is to develop a system that can do both. An increasing number of company-to-company partnerships and alliances have created new types of work situations in which employees from different companies work side-by-side on the same projects, often in the same location, sharing responsibility for outcomes (Segriovanni and Glickman, 2006, p. 34). These types of working relationships present a challenge for performance management systems when they create incentives for different work behaviors and reward performance based on different criteria. Flexible performance management systems that vary in content, criteria, frequency, and evaluators are likely to be more effective than traditional performance measurement systems because they can respond to changing organizational forms (Carlopio et al, 2005, p. 66).
The organization’s structure has a direct impact on culture and relations between employees. The hierarchical autocratic systems lead to formal relations and bureaucratic nature while the program task force approach allows employees to establish more flexible and informal relations (Lagone and Rohs, 2003, p. 252). Changes in organizational structure that are reshaping our approach to performance management include the growing number of flatter organizations along with increasing decentralization and globalization, the need for individuals to be flexible and agile, and a number of company-to-company partnerships and alliances. Although flatter organizations are thought to be more versatile and efficient, the people working in them often find themselves with an expanded scope of responsibilities and fewer resources available. In addition, managers may have fewer opportunities to observe performance, whereas employees have increased discretion over their work and how they do it (Campbell, 1997, P. 99).
The problems with George are more structural than personal as his approach and attitudes towards organizational performance differ from the established ones. The main question about George is whether the company’s approach to management and innovation, thus, organizational culture, is a cause of its success or a product of its success. Omega is now owned by SAC so George has dual lines of authority (from Omega and SAC managers). The main personal problem of George and a real danger for Omega is that George pays little attention to organizational performance and his own responsibilities but for personal benefits only. George thinks SAC will be more beneficial for him as an individual so he is working for his own aims. The theories and ideas mentioned above vividly portray that organizational culture can be interpreted differently, so it leads to different perspectives in management and performance. The study on differences may be useful for our study because may understand and conclude that organizational culture theories play an important role in the management and HRM (Mabey and Salaman, 2003, p. 83). Thus, the conclusion can be made from everything said above that. Particularly, in business, where increasing diversity and multiple readers simply increase the chances that one will be misunderstood, word choice is a matter that must be managed with great care. Hover, these changes can be reduced if writers become familiar with four kinds of problems that are prevalent in the writing of working professionals. Bureaucratization and ritualization are institutionalized forms of control that promote dependency on rigid and routinized impersonal structures. Group affiliation needs come to dominate contrary demands for personal identity and autonomy (Price, 2004, p. 38). The strategy of an organization involves how it plans to achieve its mission and goals and is partly determined by its culture. Organizational culture can also become one of the factors that influence the evolution of culture. Given that leadership becomes particularly important, it is crucial to understand the role and influence of leaders in the acculturation process and healthy organizational culture (Charan et al, 2001, p. 49). The unethical behavior of George is a real threat to Omega’s performance and profitability.
For George, unwillingness to perfume well and his unethical behavior may be a function of a number of factors, such as a desire to avoid unpleasant conversations and confrontation, lack of organizational norms for honesty, and amount of time spent outside of the manager’s job to complete an employee appraisal. But when content is meaningful in the eyes of the appraiser, it is in the appraiser’s best interest to evaluate employee performance accurately and conscientiously and overcome these barriers. In the eyes of the individual being appraised, the performance measurement and management system may offer a critical avenue for controlling the future. By engaging frequently in honest discussions of performance effectiveness with their managers, those on the receiving end of an appraisal can learn how to modify their behavior to create the greatest value to the organization. Appraisers may view this opportunity as a hedge against downsizing or becoming obsolete. Employees were key to improved business outcomes by producing more at higher levels of quality with fewer resources and by continuously innovating in the workplace in an effort to reduce costs and improve product and service quality. More emphasis on employee contributions to overall business success led to a number of changes in the workplace and in particular to changes in the relationship between employees and their managers (Conger, 2002, p. 371).
In order to change the situation, George and Ellen should agree on the structural changes and develop a unified approach in management. The first problem is to demonstrate to employees that they stand to benefit from cooperating in the process. The prospect of participation in planning and decision-making may arouse fears and possibly resistance among employees new to this process, based on their previous experience that workplace changes are frequently accompanied by deskilling and the elimination of jobs (Mabey and Salaman, 2003, p. 88). They know that too often they bear the negative consequences of “work improvement” projects. In addition, many employees have found that management has failed to act on their input and suggestions for improvements in the past. These types of experiences do not provide positive reinforcement for continuing to participate. Other barriers emerge from the concern that employee participation may eliminate the privileges of some groups in the organization. In real life, many supervisors fear the loss of control and decision-making power. They are worried that employee participation means less decision-making latitude and influence for them. Employee participation, hover, is intended to open up new domains of responsibility and decision-making for supervisors as they are freed, for example, from certain tasks that the workgroup can take on (Cole, 2005, p. 78).
Rapidly advancing technological knowledge also tends to limit observation of behavior. Technology affects where (for example, at home) and how (for example, in semiautonomous workgroups) work is performed. Including contingent workers, independent contractors, and employees on temporary assignments under managerial direction makes performance measurement and management more complex. These workers are less likely to be well known to the managers and thus more difficult to appraise and manage. As the nature of employment shifts from secure and paternalistic to insecure and independent, employees are less likely to be committed to the organization or to care about performance improvement. A relatively new set of criteria includes conformance to company values and critical success factors. These are organization-wide variables through which employees can also influence business success. As organizations define individual performance more broadly to include such variables, more of these variables will be included within the performance measurement domain (Kouzes and Posner, 1995, p. 88). These attributes were incorporated into individual performance assessments by generating behavioral examples of job performance that reflected the quality-of-work behavior the company valued. Managers then evaluated employees on the degree to which they performed their jobs in the manner described by the examples. This added an important missing component to this company’s previous performance measurement system. Top management of Omega realizes they need to change how people worked in order to achieve better outcomes, so they introduced new performance expectations and criteria to motivate this behavioral change (Cunningham and Hyman, 1995, p. 7).
Omega should introduce clear and well-structured relations inside the agency.
In this way, individuals can be held accountable for company-level initiatives by including job-specific behaviors that enhance the company’s capabilities in performance measurement. By managing their employees toward higher individual performance, managers and supervisors will be more likely to achieve their own performance goals because these goals are also tied to organizational success. As long as performance measurement at all levels is tied to critical aspects of organizational success, managers and supervisors will be more likely to see the connection between their own success and employee success. Thus, performance measurement will become a personally meaningful process and performance management will become a meaningful tool for obtaining critical organizational outcomes. By necessity, members of such relationships must learn to balance two careers as well as extensive family responsibilities. Individual workers have also adapted to the new work environment by showing a willingness to try new work arrangements. The increasing number of people choosing to undertake entrepreneurial careers is at least partially attributable to the new reality of work and the related alterations in the psychological contract. In summary, a number of environmental and individual factors are changing the basic foundation of personal and career development and in turn have consequences for organizations and individuals as they attempt to optimize performance and satisfaction. In the next section, we discuss these consequences in more detail, paying particular attention to their influence on the new conceptualizations of career competencies. The personal meaning of organizational experience, discovered in organizational identity, helps to explain the unconscious intentions of those who plan and structure organizational action.
Armandi, B., Oppedisano, J., Sherman, H. 2003. Leadership theory and practice: a“case in point. Management Decision. 41 (10), pp. 1076 – 1088.
Bolman, L., Deal, T. 2003. Reframing Organizations- Artistry, Choice and Leadership, 1st ed. Jossey Bass: San Francisco,
Campbell, D.J. 1997. Organizations and the Business Environment. 2nd ed. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Carlopio, J., Andrewartha, G., and Armstrong, H. 2005. Developing Management Skills. 1st ed. Pearson: Australia.
Charan, R., Drotter, S., Noel, J., 2001. The Leadership Pipeline How To Build The Leadership-Powered Company, 1st ed. Jossey Bass: San Francisco.
Cole, K., 2005. Management –Theory and Practice, 1st ed. Pearson: Australia.
Conger, S. 2002. Fostering a career development culture: reflections on the roles of managers, employees and supervisors. Career Development International 7 (6), pp. 371 – 375.
Cunningham, I., Hyman, J. 1995. Transforming the HRM vision into reality: The role of line managers and supervisors in implementing change. Employee Relations..17 (8), pp. 5-20.
Lagone, C. A., & Rohs, F. R. 2003. Community Leadership Development: Process and Practice. Journal of the Community Development Society, 26 (4), pp. 252-267
Kouzes, J., Posner, B., 1995. The Leadership Challenge, 1st ed. Jossey Bass: San Francisco.
Mabey, C., Salaman, G. 2003. Strategic Human Resource Management, Blackwell Business, Oxford., 1st edn.
Mabey, C., Salaman, G. 2003. Strategic Human Resource Management, 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Business.
Price, A. 2004. Human Resource Management in a Business Context, 2nd ed. Thomson Learning.
Segriovanni, Th., Glickman, K. 2006. Rethinking Leadership: A Collection of Articles. 2nd ed. London: Corwin Press.