Department Of Nuclear Sciences And Applications

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

Speed of Feedback: 2/5

-Feedback is given after completion of a project (this can take 6 months) or in the yearly performance review appraisal.

Degree of Risk: 1/5

It’s an Agency wide approach to guarantee to our Member States who are providing the budget that we are achieving our goals. For that reason we have a systematic approach to quality and our department of internal oversight services is evaluating whether the agreed goals were achieved in a timely and most efficient manner. This department is reporting tour Director General and to our Member States. Amongst other we also have the mid-term progress review to reflect on the performance of the project and to take where needed corrective steps to ensure the wanted outcome.

Department of Nuclear Energy (the department for I was working with):

Speed of Feedback: 3/5

-Feedback is given after completion of a project (this can take 6 months) or in the yearly performance review appraisal.

- I have rated here 3/5 because in this department feedback was given here as well in supervision sessions which were held, so the staff member could take corrective steps on time. This prevented a bad reflection on the performance review report.

Degree of Risk: 1/5

It’s an Agency wide approach to guarantee to our Member States who are providing the budget that we are achieving our goals. For that reason we have a systematic approach to quality and our department of internal oversight services is evaluating whether the agreed goals were achieved in a timely and most efficient manner. This department is reporting tour Director General and to our Member States. Amongst other we also have the mid-term progress review to reflect on the performance of the project and to take where needed corrective steps to ensure the wanted outcome.

According to above, my organization is a process culture, which is identified by the slow feedback and emphasis on how things are done.

IAEA:

The IAEA has a mixture of a task and a role culture.

I identified this by following facts:

Task culture:

Job or task orientation: tasks are agreed in advance, during the programme and budget discussions in September. 12 months work plans are agreed and discussed with every staff member during their performance review appraisal

Employees typically belong to different teams for

different purposes: When a project needs to be carried out, teams are formed from different departments which exist until the task is completed

Coordinators and project team leaders are central figures:

For every project that needs to be carried out is an appointed project/team leader

Role culture:

Individuals have roles to play and communication tends to be formalised into systems and procedures: Every staff member has a role, mine for example is the one of a Team Assistant. Communication has to follow rules and procedures for example: change of meeting plans has to be communicated through an internal office memorandum, which needs to be signed by the section head, the director, conference services and the deputy director general. Most of our communication has such a formal process.

Certainty, predictability, continuity and stability are highly-regarded in such a culture and professionalism and reliability are valued above independence and initiative-taking.: This is insured through our administrative manual and other manuals about rules and procedure in which is described how things need to be done. Initiative taking is only allowed within boundaries of the job description. Overstepping these boundaries is considered as not respecting authority.

Training and development are important: We have a range of computer and language courses to choose from and staff is encouraged to attend.

Summary (about 50 words): The culture is shaped by the policies, rules and regulations we have. Above the norm factors are: systematic agency wide approach and systems for quality, safety and security of information. My values mostly correspond with those of the IAEA. Advantage: Implemented mechanisms which control performance, outcome and quality guarantee certainty and reflect on corrective steps. Disadvantage: High beaurocracy results in high costs to maintain these systems.

References

Control

List: Innovation and flexibility takes a lot of time and effort to take place. Our response to outside change is very slow, due to the high beaurocracy and the emphasis on how things get done. Consequently, Formalization and Tradition got high marks. Formalizing processes are ensuring that things are done in a certain way, that doesn’t mean that they are done in the most efficient way.

List: It’s very positive that the organization looks after their staff members. That is reflected in high scores ins Training and welfare. Also it’s positive that staff members are clear about the organizational goals.

In essence, the organization takes good care of their staff members and provides stability and continuity. Stability and continuity has its price. The downside is that internal processes are heavily controlled and is in no balance to the flexibility and external focus it should have in order to adapt and respond to change..

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 17 Activity 1

1 Member States internal who are building the board of governors

Power: high

Legitimacy: high

Urgency: high

Definitive

Having a say when it comes to directing the organization’s goals. Interest in research to be done in the appliance of nuclear techniques for peaceful use. Carrying out projects which will improve issues the member state has and can be solved with the appliance of nuclear techniques. Having a say when it comes to the handling of nuclear energy. Training you scientists of their country through knowledge sharing.

2 Member States external

Power: high

Legitimacy: high

Urgency: high

Definitive

Interest in research to be done in the appliance of nuclear techniques for peaceful use. Carrying out projects which will improve issues the member state has and can be solved with the appliance of nuclear techniques. Having a say when it comes to the handling of nuclear energy. Training you scientists of their country through knowledge sharing.

3 Scientific Visitors and Fellowships

Power: low

Legitimacy: high

Urgency: low

Latent

Receiving training through knowledge sharing.

4 Suppliers

Power: low

Legitimacy: medium

Urgency: low

Latent

Having a monopoly on the goods to be delivered. Receiving their payments on time.

5 local authorities

Power: medium

Legitimacy: high

Urgency: medium

expectant

Respecting the rules and regulations of the country.

6 Embassies

Power: medium

Legitimacy: medium

Urgency: medium

Expectant

Building partnerships and receiving information relevant to their country. Attending conferences which might be of concern to their country.

7 The Office of the Director General

Power: high

Legitimacy: high

Urgency: medium

expectant

Answering all his requests. Preparing and briefing him for meetings with member states or other politicians.

8 environmental regulating bodies

Power: medium

Legitimacy: medium

Urgency: medium

expectant

Answering requests and concerns they might have in terms of the usage of nuclear energy in an ethical environmental acceptable way.

9 the general public

Power: low

Legitimacy: medium

Urgency: low

Latent

Answering questions on the usage of Nuclear Energy and what we do in terms of protecting the environment and how do we ensure that our Member States use Nuclear Energy only on a peaceful basis.

The highest and lowest priority stakeholders, based on Mitchell et al. (1997) are:

Highest Priority: Member States, because they direct the goals of our organization and partly they form our organization. They provide the budget and justify our existence.

The general public: They don’t have an influence on our programme; however, if there are pressing issues we are doing our best to answer them, although we don’t have to.

The following stakeholders should be given priority on ethical grounds (identify stakeholders and justify why they should be given priority):

Normally, countries who contribute the highest budget will be given highest priority as they have the money to carry out big and numerous projects. However; 3rd world countries who don’t have much money to contribute should be given priority as they have pressing issues such as improving the livelihoods of farmers or cancer therapy through the appliance of nuclear techniques.

Conflict and convergence of interests between different stakeholders and between stakeholders and organisation are:

Conflict between member states and the general public as information on the nuclear programme of a country cannot be disclosed to the general public.

The stakeholders’ interest that can be satisfied at the same time are:

Member States, Embassies and environmental regulating bodies can be provided can benefit from the results on research at the same time.

Source: based on Mitchell et al. (1997).

____________________________________________________________________________________

Welcome change - Using MS Publisher instead of Word for publications and other promotional material

Unwelcome change - The introduction of the new operating Agency wide information system for programme support across the Agency

I was the initiator and user. Since I believe that publications and other print material can be done more efficiently and professional through MS Publisher I requested training on it.

The change was imposed on all staff of the organization. I didn’t initiate it.

As I was the initiator I also had great influence in implementing the change. I was also the only one who had knowledge in MS Publisher. My supervisor didn’t interfere.

I had very limited influence. feedback on the usage was collected to improve processes

Not in the beginning, but it was discussed then in a meeting and then the change was clear to everybody

Yes

It was not clear to my supervisor and not to other technical staff who are not responsible for formatting and creating publications because they were only interested in the result and the result until then was satisfactory. However they didn't know that there is a way to improve this process.

Yes, the new system should unify processes and make them more efficient and let managers work more transparent. It should make other old programs obsolete and let everybody work with only one programme. It should allow member states to have faster, more accurate and up to date information on programme implementation and budget.

Yes, that was clear. Training and time.

No, only later we were informed that there will be mandatory training. Also, I didn't think that it will take a lot of time to learn the system.

In the beginning my team was skeptic but after they saw the result they were very positively surprised

Yes, as many processes were not synchronized and updating data and banking information created a backlog which delayed our work.

Yes, the publications looked much better and were created in less time. I got very positive feedback. I knew that it will have the expected results as I saw my colleague from another section working with MS Publisher on publications.

The change is not finished yet. There is still stage three which needs to be implemented. However, partly the change was successful as mentioned goals in the terms of reference were achieved, like a more transparent approach to programme implmentation, finance and budget.

Yes, I had to invest time in training and perform my daily tasks.

Yes, some processes take now more steps to be completed than before.

No

No, as I quite easily adapt to change and I am keen on acquiring new knowledge which enhances my career prospects.

We gained efficiency and time.

We gained a one house approach in handling procurement, budget and finance and data base systems. We don’t need to learn anymore different systems and know that all data can be find in one system

This was a change over which I had control and therefore it was welcome and easier to implement for me. However for somebody who is not clear about why change is happening it is understandable that resistance might occur.

Initially this change was not welcome as it was imposed on us and we didn’t have control over it and couldn’t see through why this change was happening. Resistance grew as some processes involved more work and were not working or only less efficient than before what only confirmed the unwelcome change. However, in a long run the system is very efficient for upper management for creating reports and interpreting data.

B628 Table 18.2 Types and characteristics of the changes

____________________________________________________________________________________

Week 18 Activity 2

Welcome change

Unwelcome change

Developmental

Developmental

Transitional

Transformational

It was planned and focussed on the development of skills

It was planned and implemented into 3 stages/plateaus

Focus on the change automatzation and improvement on processes

Continuty - change requires long term learning

High

Meduim

Medium

Low

Peripheral - incremental

Radical - core

The implementation of this change was not very turbulent as it was planned agreed and highly predictable.

To implement this change was difficult as it was unwelcome to most staff and a change which touched the core processes and the culture of the organization. It had to be planned in detail and a lot of resources were used to make this change happen. However, I think it was done qite well as a whole team of change manager s were employed and staff issues were adressed and resolved quite quickly.

____________________________________________________________________________

B628 Figure 18.1 Force-field analysis for welcome change - introducing MS Publisher to work on publications and other promotional material for our work group

Driving forces

Restraining forces

Equilibrium

Managers who have to work with limited resources because their staff is on training

Driving forces

Restraining forces

Equilibrium

Member States who want to have in time

reports about budget and implementation of their projects

Staff who have to be trained and therefore cannot perform their work in time

Managers who have to work with

limited resources because their staff is on training

Managers who have to use the system and are under pressure to deliver the work on time

Technological - the need to automize processes

and work more economical in order to gain effeciency

External consultants whose payment got delayed because of the functionality of the system

The need to have a one house approach which will

eliminate other software in use and safe time on training

Suppliers whose payment got delayed because of the functionality of the system

Gain transperancy over working processes for better

decision making and evaluation

(Source: based on Lewin, 1951)

____________________________________________________________________________

Change 1

As this change was incremental and peripheral that means only affected our workgroup it was easier to find agreement and minimize restraining forces. The restraining forces came from team members who didn't see the necessity of the change and it didn't affect them, so they were not very persistent in fighting the change. However if the change which was initiated by me would have failed to achieve the expected outcome it would have a bad implication on my status.

Change 2

This change was imposed on us staff member, it was radical and changed the core on how we are handling processes and the way we are working. It therefore caused great disturbance. To a certain agree I understand why this change had to be implemented without seeking our consent. How do you get 4000 people to agree on such a drastic change? However, imposing this change caused strong restraining forces, but the authority which are the member states and have the greatest power were simply the stronger driving force.