The Culture Of The Organisation

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

My name is Ksenija Ajvazi and I work for the United Nations, for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna for the department of Nuclear Science and Applications as a Team Assistant. In my role I liaise between departments and I disseminate as I have to collect and transmit information. Further, I allocate resources such as budget for projects, payments for consultants and equipment for projects (B628 Managing and Managing people, p. 18-19, The roles of a Manager).

1.1 This is what we do

Shortly summarized, this is what we do:

The Soil and Water Management and Crop Nutrition (SWMCN) Subprogram assists Member States in the use of nuclear techniques to develop improved and integrated soil-nutrient-water management practices for sustainable intensification of agricultural production systems as well as conservation of natural resources. My Division has 190 employees, my section consists of 10 Staff Members. For detailed information on our department please go to http://www-naweb.iaea.org/nafa/index.html and http://www-naweb.iaea.org/nafa/swmn/index.html.

1.2. Describing the problem and how I want to implement change

Change means for me creating a new status quo and responding to a situation where current processes are not any more effective or efficient and they need to be improved or replaced.

In my specific case I am examining a change that has to happen in the near future and our approach to it.

Recently we were informed that we have to cut down on personnel costs for staff in the general category, which are in our case Team Assistants like me and any other supportive staff for professionals (managers), by 20%. That means that the vacant position for a team assistant in my section won’t be filled.

It was decided that I will be the change implementer. That means, I was given the responsibility to implement the change. The main goal of the change is to respond to the new situation that means increasing efficiency using time management tools and new technologies while not sacrificing on quality. I am the change recipient at the same time. The biggest challenge for the implementation is going to be to reduce the restraining forces I examined in the Analysis in the force field study (reference 353).

The change will not only affect me but also my supervisor and all members of my section as we will all have to find a new approach to get the work done.

I understand that the need to cut down on costs is coming from our most important stakeholder who is in the near environment, our Member States who are mainly our funding provider and have high power, legitimacy and urgency (reference 328 and stakeholder Analysis in Appendix 1). After receiving several evaluation reports from past projects it was decided that the implementation could have been done more efficiently.

I have chosen this problem because it's a situation I can influence and have control over. For the same reason I am limiting the scope of this EMA to my section and I am not fully examining the impact on my organization as this would be out of the scope of this EMA.

___________________________________________________________________________

2. Analysis

2.1. Force field-analysis

How feasible is the change?

To consider if the change is feasible I am analysing it in the force field-study developed by Kurt Lewin (1951) which is given below (B628, Managing and Managing people, p. 353).

Driving forces

Restraining forces

Member States who think that we could work more efficiently

Loss of control – the situation was imposed on us

Member States

More work – training is time consuming

The organisation is a learning ornganisation

Personal uncertainty - staff is not convinced if change will be effective

Organisational climate – staff agrees that we are not working efficiently

Lack of commitment – not everybody is equally committed

Process, task and role culture – change is happening here slowly

(Source: based on Lewin, 1951)

Equilibrium

Figure 1 Force-field analysis

As the situation is not welcome and was imposed on us it will naturally have more restraining than driving forces which might give the impression that the change is not feasible. However the most powerful driving force, our Member States, have to be taken into consideration.

2.2. Driving forces

2.2.1 Member States

To analyze how much power our Member States have I’m using Mitchell et al. (1997) approach who distinguishes seven different categories of stakeholders prioritized to the extent of having power, legitimacy and urgency (B628, Managing and Managing people, p. 328). A full stakeholder analysis (Week 17 Activity 1) can be found in Appendix 1 to gain perspective

Table 1 Stakeholder Analysis

1 Key stakeholders

2 Their power, legitimacy and urgency (high, medium, low)

3 Stakeholder category

4 justification

Member States

Power: high

Legitimacy: high

Urgency: high

Definitive

Directing the organization’s goals.

Main funder and budget provider

2.2.2 Driving force – a learning organization

Being a learning organization……’means that organisations are best placed to react quickly to changing situations.’ (B628, Managing and Managing people, p. 269)

Pendler et al. (1991) identified following Key components which identifies the learning organisation (B628 Managing and Managing People, p. 271)

Table 2 Key components of an learning organisation

Key components

Analysis – does it apply to our organization?

a climate in which individual members are encouraged to learn and develop their full potential

We have a full range of training. I have evidence in my Activity 14.1 which can be found in Appendix 2

a learning culture which is extended to include customers, suppliers and other stakeholders .

That is given as we train our stakeholders, Scientific visitors and Fellowships in the appliance of Nuclear techniques

a human resource development strategy which is central to business policy.

Training and development is part of the human resource strategy

(Source: based on Pedler et al., 1991)

Part of our organization’s culture is being a learning organizations which supports implementing change where training is part of it. Knowing this is important when it comes to the technical part of implementation where staff is used to ‘it is part of their culture’ to be trained. They will less restrain it.

2.2.3 Driving force – the organisational climate

Flexibility

The Human Relations Model

Scale Score 1 2 3

Autonomy 2.2

Integration 3.12

Involvement 3.35

Supervisory 2.58

support

Training 3.6

Welfare 3.4

Overall average

score: 3.04

The Open Systems model

Scale Score 1 2 3

Innovation 1.8

and flexibility

Outward focus 3.26

Reflexivity 2.4

Overall average

score: 2.47

The Internal Process Model

Scale Score 1 2 3

Formalization 4

Tradition 3.2

Overall average

score: 3.6

The Rational Goal model

Scale Score 1 2 3

Clarity of

organisational goals: 3.6

Efficiency 1.1

Effort 2.6

Performance feedback 2.5

Pressure to produce 2.9

Quality 3.6

Overall average

score: 2.72

Control

The results of the organizational climate are based on the scores given by team members of our section that means people who will affect the change. How I got to these results can be looked up in Appendix 3

It is to be noted that training got high marks what reflects that learning and personal development is supported and this corresponds as well with the fact that our organization is a learning one. That corresponds with the evidence that I have from Activity 14.1 and can be found in Appendix 2

Furthermore, I want to point out that efficiency got the lowest mark of all. The mark is bad for the organization but good for me as change implementer because I can use it in the planning stage when using John Kotter’s eight step process of change (B628, Managing and Managing people, p. 360) when I have to establish a sense of urgency, create a powerful guiding coalition, develop a vision and strategy and communicate the vision.

2.3 Restraining forces

2.3.1 Restraining force -The culture of the organisation

When implementing change the type of culture has to be taken into consideration to be able to choose a strategy which fits the culture of the organisation. I assessed our culture using Deal and Kennedy’s two dimensions of culture (B628, Managing and Managing People, p. 303) and Handy/Hardason culture types

Speed of Feedback

Work/hard play hard

Tough-guy macho

Process

Bet your company

Degree of Risk

Figure 2

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

We have a systematic approach for ensuring that we achieve our goals

In terms of Handy/Harrison culture types, my section has a strong role and task culture. I have evidence for that in my Activity 16.1 which can be found in Appendix 4 of this report.

2.3.2 Other Restraining force

It is important to address resistance through the various stages of planning to secure the successful implementation. Reasons that I could identify from Kanter, citation Lorenz (1985) (B628, Managing and managing people, p.369)

Restraining force

Explanation

Loss of control

The situation was imposed on us

Personal uncertainty

Staff members of the section are not sure if the change will increase efficiency. Staff members are not clear about what is expected from them.

More work

Staff members will have to invest time in training. During that time the will be away work, but after the training will still have to perform their daily tasks.

2.3.3 Lack of commitment

To analyze the level of commitment of each key player is relevant to the change as it shows who is opposed to the change and might pose a threat to the successful implementation of the change as this person might convince others that the change is not needed. It’s also essential in identifying whose commitment is needed to implement the change. I am using the commitment plan from B628, Managing and Managing people, p. 365. O is the current level of commitment, X the level of commitment needed.

Key players

Not committed/opposed

Let

Help

Make

Supervisor

O X

Team Assistant A (Me)

O X

Team Assistant B

O

Team Assistant C

O

X

Professional A

O

X

Professional B

O

X

Professional C

O

X

Professional D

O

X

Figure 2 Commitment Plan

2.4 The right strategy

It is essential to choose a suitable strategy/ies which is consistent with the demands of the situation and the culture of the organization. To assess that I am using the change strategy continuum from Kotter and Schlesinger (1979) (B628, Managing and managing people, p. 358)

FAST SLOW

Clearly planned

x

Exploratory

x

Little involvement of other people

Much involvement of other people

x

Attempts to overcome resistance

Attempts to minimize resistance

x

Figure 3

The strategy will be rather slow as I need to minimize resistance because the change will mainly affect my co -workers with whom I am working on a daily basis. For the same reason I want their involvement in the change process.

2.5 Conclusion to the Analysis

The Analysis highlights positive and negative aspects which have to be considered for planning and implementing the change.

When planning the change the right strategy has to fit the culture of the organization and respond to the demands of the situation. According to the results in my Analysis, I will have to choose a strategy which slowly responds change for which I found evidence in the change strategy continuum where I have an exploratory approach, much involvement of other people and I am trying to minimize resistance. The commitment plan shows that I need the involvement of most of the people of the section which corresponds with the findings in the change strategy continuum that the change should be implemented slowly. This might become a major issue when we need to respond quickly to change because of the urgency of the situation. What might be helpful here is that I identified that staff members agree with the Member States that we need to improve on efficiency, which will the key element to support me in the planning stage when I need to communicate the urgency and the vision of the change and convince opponents that change is needed. Moreover, I can conclude from the Analysis that we are a learning organization which main feature it is to respond quickly to learning needs that will be helpful when it comes to implementing the change. I conclude that although a slow strategy for change is needed we might respond fast to the urgency of the situation because of the mutual view that efficiency needs to be improved and because our organization responds fast to learning needs. I identified restraining forces which will have to be addressed throughout the various stages of planning the change. That the organization has a strong process, role and task culture is only a minor issue as the scope of this EMA is limited to the Section and the successful implementation of the change depends on the people, not so much on the system.

___________________________________________________________________________

3. Recommendations, advantages, disadvantages, implications

3.1 Recommendation

I recommend to improve efficiency on how we get our work done through training the Section in Time Management. The content of this training is the same as in B628, Managing and managing people, Managing your time, p. 31) and providing training in how to use MS Outlook in terms of creating tasks, delegating and setting deadlines. The possibilities should not be only limited to training. Any suggestions from team members will be taken into consideration. Fortunately, both trainings are provided from the organization. The training should change how we approach work and respond effectively to a high workload with limited resources.

The change itself should be systematically planned within the next two weeks and implemented within the next month

3.2. Action Plan

To achieve this I am planning the change using the eight-step process of change, adapted from Kotter (1995) (B628, Managing and managing people, p. 360)

Establish a sense of urgency

Staff is recognizing that efficiency needs to be improved

At this stage I will deal with restraining forces and opposition (B628, Managing and Managing people, p. 369-370)

Involve actively those who may oppose the change

Communicate ideas about change early, maintain an open communication climate (B628, Managing and managing people, p. 37) be descriptive, solution oriented and empathetic

Be supportive when uncertainty is expressed

Create a powerful guiding coalition

As the scope of the change is limited to the section, my responsibilities as a change implementer will be to get the desired commitment from the key players as outlined in the commitment plan in my Analysis

Develop a vision and strategy

A common understanding of the problem will help to picture a desirable situation and communicate it.

At this stage I will decide on the appropriate strategy using the strategies developed by Thurley and Wirdenius (1973) B628, Managing and managing people p. 356-358.

As I need high commitment and involvement from almost all my team members the strategy will be negotiated with the team members of the section. This strategy is, however, time consuming. Considering the culture of the organization this strategy is suitable.

The process of change can be taken for educative purposes as people will develop new skills. This strategy will reduce restraining forces and commit people to change.

To reduce restraining forces and commit people to change we will use participative approach where team members can participate in decisions which concerns the change process.

Short term wins

Implement the change in stages so that success is visible so that people involved don’t lose momentum or even resist the change.

Staff will be able to reduce overtime

The ability to adapt to change will be reflected positively in the performance review report

Empower others to act on your vision

The participative approach is the best basis for this. Consider opponents who might convince others that the change is not necessary

Communicate the vision

A common understanding of the problem will help to picture a desirable situation and communicate it.

Consolidate improvement and produce still more change

Monitor

Evaluate progress

Evaluation Plan

In my evaluation plan I want to evaluate the effectiveness

Therefore I have chosen following types of evaluation

Impact: measuring if the change is effective

Are we achieving our goals of cutting down on personnel costs while maintaining same quality of our outcomes?

Performance: measuring if the change is efficient. Do we us the minimum of resources needed to implement the change?

To prepare for the evaluation I would design a formal evaluation plan:

Define project aims:

Cut down on overtime

Maintain the same quality of work

Define purpose of evaluation:

Measure Impact, performance

Focus and audience

The Focus should be effectiveness and efficiency to be measured for the office of the Director and our most important Stakeholders, our Member States

Internal Evaluator because:

Cheaper

Has knowledge about internal processes

Time Scale:

6 Months

Embed new behavior

The new behavior should be adapted and become part of the culture to do this I will show how new behavior improved efficiency

3.3 Advantages, Disadvantages, Implications

Advantages

The change is not cost intensive because training is offered in house

Chosen Strategies are involving everybody what is beneficial when dealing with restraining forces

Implementation of change will teach new skills

Disadvantages

The chosen strategies are time consuming

Opponents might convince others that the change is not needed

Implications

Upon successful implementation, the process could be also used in other parts of the organization.

Word count: 2.278

References

The Open University (2012) B628/BZX628. Managing 1: Organizations and people, Module Activities, Milton Keynes, The Open University.

The Open University (2011) B628/BZX628. Managing 1: Organizations and people, Module Textbook, Milton Keynes, The Open University

Appendices

Appendix 1

B628 Table 17.1 Stakeholders’ analysis

1 Key stakeholders

2 Their power, legitimacy and urgency (high, medium, low)

3 Stakeholder category

4 Stakeholder interests

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.

Appendix 2

B628 Table 14.1 Learning and development opportunities and support

Sector, purpose, size and types of work that the part you are responsible for does, or that your work group is engaged in

I work in an non governmontal organization with more than 4000 employees not counting the consultants nd interns. Our purpose is to apply nuclear techniques for peace, to improve health and wealth in countries which are our member states. My section consists of 30 staff members and we ate applying nuclear techniqes in soil and water management to improve crop productivity.

Learning opportunities available in the organisation you work for, or your part of it, or those opportunities that are available to your work group, whether formal or informal (categories and examples)

Our learning opportunities are available organization wide. They are categorized in

computer courses for example: working with long word documents, adobe, excel, access, publisher, visio, ECDL, working with AIPS, AWmS, ATLAS and other internal systems

management courses: prince2, these are only resevered for managers

Other courses available for everybody: emotional intelligence, how to prepare for an interview

language courses: tought are the official United Nations languages until proficiency level: chinese, Russian, French, English, Spanish and German ( although not a UN language)

The ways in which these are supported

By you (categories and examples)

By work-group members (categories and examples)

By me and work group: it is unwritten law that staff and managers should attend learning opportunities. Every attended course is registered in the personal files. Even in the performabce review there is a section for staff development for the next 12 months. Times away from work because of training is accepted.

Barriers to learning and development (categories and examples)

Training has to be approved by supervisor, although thatbrarely happens a supervisor could reject the approval of training if he has a justification. Times away from work had to be made up as the work still needs to be done.

Conclusion

We are very lucky to have such a developed learning system which encourages your petsonal development. You can register electronicalky for it, so access to it is also very easy. attended courses are automatically recorded when you attend them and you benefit from it as well when you apply inernally for other positions. It also ensures a minimum standard of knowledge as some courses are mandatory. The down side is that not everybody might be so found of our training system and they are in some way forced to attend it.

Appendix 3

Scoring and interpreting the Organizational Climate Measure (OMC)

The Organizational Climate Measure (OCM) consists of 17 scales, each having particular questions associated with them. The scales are shown in Table 1.1 together with what each scale means.

The question numbers on the questionnaire are shown in the first column of Table 1.1, followed by the wording of the question. The questions are grouped under the scale with which they are associated.

Turn to the questionnaire you completed and those you asked your work group members to complete. Label columns 3-7 with letters or numbers that identify those who completed the questionnaires (for example A, B, C or Person 1, Person 2, Person 3). Then write the score each person gave for each question in the appropriate column. Some rows are shown in grey. FOR THESE QUESTIONS REVERSE THE SCORE.

Reverse score:

4 = Definitely false

3 = Mostly false

2 = Mostly true

1 = Definitely true.

When you have done this, calculate the average score for each question. If you need to, look up how to calculate averages (the arithmetic mean) in The Manager’s Good Study Guide. Then calculate the average score for the whole scale, using the same method.

Further steps in scoring the questionnaire continue below Table 1.1.

Table 1.1 Scoring table

Question

Autonomy

A

B

C

Average

32

Management let people make their own decisions much of the time

2

2

3

2.3

46

Management trust people to take work-related decisions without getting permission first

2

2

3

2.3

71

People at the top tightly control the work of those below them

2

2

3

2.3

52

Management keep too tight a rein on the way things are done around here

2

2

3

2.3

59

It’s important to check things first with the boss before taking a decision

2

2

2

2

Average score for autonomy scale

2.2

Question

Integration

Average

17

People are suspicious of other departments

2

3

3

2.7

67

There is very little conflict between departments here

2

2

3

2.3

76

People in different departments are prepared to share information

3

3

4

3.3

80

Collaboration between departments is very effective

3

3

4

3.3

44

There is very little respect between some of the departments here

4

4

4

4

Average score for integration scale

3.12

Question

Involvement

Average

57

Management involve people when decisions are made that affect them

4

4

3

3.7

4

Changes are made without talking to the people involved in them

3

3

3

3

6

People don’t have any say in decisions which affect their work

4

4

3

3.7

63

People feel decisions are frequently made over their heads

3

2

3

2.7

72

Information is widely shared

4

4

4

4

43

There are often breakdowns in communication here

3

3

3

3

Average score for involvement scale

3.35

Question

Supervisory support

Average

51

Supervisors here are really good at understanding people’s problems

4

4

2

3.3

11

Supervisors show that they have confidence in those they manage

4

4

2

3.3

26

Supervisors here are friendly and easy to approach

3

2

1

2

30

Supervisors can be relied upon to give good guidance to people

3

2

1

2

12

Supervisors show an understanding of the people who work for them

3

2

2

2.3

Average score for supervisory support scale

2.58

Question

Training

Average

37

People are not properly trained when there is a new machine or bit of equipment

4

4

3

3.7

50

People receive enough training when it comes to using new equipment

4

3

3

3.3

16

The company only gives people the minimum amount of training they need to do their job

4

4

3

3.7

74

People are strongly encouraged to develop their skills

4

4

3

3.7

Average score for training scale

3.6

Question

Welfare

Average

56

This company pays little attention to the interests of employees

4

4

2

3.3

19

This company tries to look after its employees

4

4

2

3.3

45

This company cares about its employees

4

4

2

3.3

21

This company tries to be fair in its actions towards employees

4

4

3

3.7

Average score for welfare scale

3.4

Question

Formalisation

Average

2

It is considered extremely important here to follow the rules

4

4

4

4

25

People can ignore formal procedures and rules if it helps get the job done

4

4

4

4

27

Everything has to be done by the book

4

4

4

4

18

Its not necessary to follow procedures to the letter around here

4

4

4

4

41

Nobody gets too upset if people break the rules around here

4

4

4

4

Average score for formalisation scale

4

Question

Tradition

Average

10

Senior management like to keep to established, traditional ways of doing things

3

3

3

3

62

The way this organisation does things has never changed very much

3

3

3

3

23

Management are not interested in trying out new ideas

3

2

3

2.7

29

Changes in the way things are done here happen very slowly

4

4

4

4

Average score for tradition scale

3.2

Question

Innovation and flexibility

Average

14

New ideas are readily accepted here

2

2

2

2

31

This company is quick to respond when changes need to be made

1

1

2

1.3

64

Management here are quick to spot the need to do things differently

2

2

2

2

40

This organisation is very flexible; it can quickly change procedures to meet new conditions and solve problems as they arise

1

2

2

1.7

78

Assistance in developing new ideas is readily available

2

2

1

51.7

34

People in this organisation are always searching for new ways of looking at problems

3

3

1

2.3

Average score for innovation and flexibility scale

1.8

Question

Outward focus

Average

36

This organisation is quite inward looking; it does not concern itself with what is happening in the market place

3

3

3

4

7

Ways of improving service to the customer are not given much thought

4

3

3

3.3

24

Customer needs are not considered top priority here

2

4

3

3

38

This company is slow to respond to the needs of the customer

3

3

3

3

61

This organisation is continually looking for new opportunities in the market place

4

2

3

3

Average score for outward focus scale

3.26

Question

Reflexivity

Average

42

In this organisation, the way people work together is readily changed in

order to improve performance

2

2

3

2.3

9

The methods used by this organisation to get the job done are often discussed

2

3

2

2.3

69

There are regular discussions as to whether people in the organisation are working effectively together

2

2

1

1.7

48

In this organisation, objectives are modified in light of changing circumstances

3

3

2

2.7

22

In this organisation, time is taken to review organisational objectives

3

3

3

3

Average score for reflexivity scale

2.4

Question

Clarity of organisational goals

Average

13

People have a good understanding of what the organisation is trying to do

4

4

4

4

33

The future direction of the company is clearly communicated to everyone

4

4

3

3.7

1

People aren’t clear about the aims of the company

3

3

3

3

55

Everyone who works here is well aware of the long-term plans and direction of this company

4

4

3

3.7

75

There is a strong sense of where the company is going

4

4

3

3.7

Average score for organisational scale

3.6

Question

Efficiency

Average

15

Time and money could be saved if work were better organised

1

1

1

1

77

Things could be done much more efficiently, if people stopped to think

2

1

1

1.3

58

Poor scheduling and planning often result in targets not being met

1

1

1

1

35

Productivity could be improved if jobs were organised and planned better

1

1

1

1

Average score for efficiency scale

1.1

Question

Effort

Average

79

People here always want to perform to the best of their ability

2

3

3

2.7

39

People are enthusiastic about their work

2

3

3

2.7

65

People here get by with doing as little as possible

2

3

3

2.7

28

People are prepared to make a special effort to do a good job

2

3

3

2.7

66

People here don’t put more effort into their work than they have to

2

2

3

2.3

Average score for effort scale

2.6

Question

Performance feedback

Average

53

People usually receive feedback on the quality of work they have done

2

3

3

2.7

68

People don’t have any idea how well they are doing their job

3

3

3

2.3

5

In general, it is hard for someone to measure the quality of their performance

3

3

2

2.7

82

People’s performance is measured on a regular basis

1

1

2

1.3

70

The way people do their jobs is rarely assessed

4

4

2

3.3

Average score for performance feedback scale

2.5

Question

Pressure to produce

Average

60

People are expected to do too much in a day

2

3

4

3

47

In general, people’s workloads are not particularly demanding

3

3

3

3

73

Management require people to work extremely hard

2

3

3

2.7

54

People here are under pressure to meet targets

2

3

4

3

43

The pace of work here is pretty relaxed

3

3

3

3

Average score for pressure to produce scale

2.9

Question

Quality

Average

3

This company is always looking to achieve the highest standards of quality

4

4

3

3.7

81

Quality is taken very seriously here

4

4

4

4

8

People believe the company’s success depends on high-quality work

4

4

4

4

20

This company does not have much of a reputation for top-quality products

4

3

4

3.7

Average score for quality scale

3.6

Appendix 4

B628 Table 16.1 Organisational culture

In terms of Deal and Kennedy’s taxonomy of organisational cultures, my organisation/selected parts of the organisation best fit these culture type(s)

Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications (the department I am working with):

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.

In terms of Handy/Harrison culture types, my organisation/selected parts of the organisation best fit these culture type(s)

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

The Open University (2010) B628/BZX628. Managing 1: Organisations and people, Module Activities, Milton Keynes, The Open University.

List any other sources of information you used.

Remember to save your completed table before closing this document.

END OF THE REPORT

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 16 Activity 1

B628 Table 16.1 Organisational culture

In terms of Deal and Kennedy’s taxonomy of organisational cultures, my organisation/selected parts of the organisation best fit these culture type(s)

Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications (the department I am working with):

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.

In terms of Handy/Harrison culture types, my organisation/selected parts of the organisation best fit these culture type(s)

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

The Open University (2010) B628/BZX628. Managing 1: Organisations and people, Module Activities, Milton Keynes, The Open University.

List any other sources of information you used.

Remember to save your completed table before closing this document.

___________________________________________________________________________

Week 16 Activity 2

B628 Table 16.2 Organisational climate profile

Flexibility

The Human Relations Model

Scale Score 1 2 3

Autonomy 2.2

Integration 3.12

Involvement 3.35

Supervisory 2.58

support

Training 3.6

Welfare 3.4

Overall average

score: 3.04

The Open Systems model

Scale Score 1 2 3

Innovation 1.8

and flexibility

Outward focus 3.26

Reflexivity 2.4

Overall average

score: 2.47

The Internal Process Model

Scale Score 1 2 3

Formalization 4

Tradition 3.2

Overall average

score: 3.6

The Rational Goal model

Scale Score 1 2 3

Clarity of

organisational goals: 3.6

Efficiency 1.1

Effort 2.6

Performance feedback 2.5

Pressure to produce 2.9

Quality 3.6

Overall average

score: 2.72

Control

The main negative aspects of the climate

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.

The main positive aspects of the climate

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.

My thoughts in 50 words

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..

(Sources: based on Patterson et al., 2005; Quinn, 1988; Quinn et al., 2007).

References

The Open University (2010) B628/BZX628. Managing 1: Organisations and people, Module Activities, Milton Keynes, The Open University.

List any other sources of information you used.

Remember to save your completed table before closing this document.

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 17 Activity 1

B628 Table 17.1 Stakeholders’ analysis

1 Key stakeholders

2 Their power, legitimacy and urgency (high, medium, low)

3 Stakeholder category

4 Stakeholder interests

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).

References

The Open University (2012) B628/BZX628. Managing 1: Organisations and people, Module Activities, Milton Keynes, The Open University.

List any other sources of information you used (you may have use material from your organisation or the internet).

Remember to save your completed table before closing this document.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Week 18 Activity 1

B628 Table 18.1 Welcome and unwelcome change

Question

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

What was your role in the change? Did you help to initiate and plan the change or was it imposed on you?

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.

How far were you able to influence the change as it developed?

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

Was it clear what the change was?

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

Yes

Was it clear why it was happening?

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.

Was it clear what it would involve?

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.

Did the change create conflict and disagreement, or were there positive responses to it?

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.

Did the change have the intended result (and how did you know)?

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.

Did it mean extra work for you?

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.

Was the change personally stressful and threatening?

No

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

What was lost and what was gained in the process of the change?

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

Summary

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.

References

The Open University (2012) B628/BZX628. Managing 1: Organisations and people, Module Activities, Milton Keynes, The Open University.

List any other sources of information you used.

Remember to save your completed table before closing this

B628 Table 18.2 Types and characteristics of the changes

____________________________________________________________________________________

Week 18 Activity 2

Welcome change

Unwelcome change

Of what type was the change?

Developmental

Developmental

Transitional

Transformational

What were the characteristics of the change?

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

What was the level of certainty?

High

Meduim

What was the level of agreement?

Medium

Low

Was the change core, peripheral, radical or incremental?

Peripheral - incremental

Radical - core

Summary

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.

Conclusion after considering the summaries of Activities 1 and 2

I can conclude that a welcome change is easier to implement than an unwelcome change. Also a welcome change has more certainty, higher lever of agreement and leads more likely to the desired change than an imposed and unwelcome change.

References

The Open University (2010) B628/BZX628. Managing 1: Organisations and people, Module Activities, Milton Keynes, The Open University.

List any other sources of information you used.

Remember to save your completed table before closing this document.

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 18 Activity 3 Output 1

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

Guidance on how to customise this diagram are provided

at the end of this document.

Driving forces

Restraining forces

Equilibrium

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

Improve efficiency

improve the image of our Section work

Staff who has to be trained

Staff members who have to work with publications

(Source: based on Lewin, 1951)

Figure 19.1 Force-field analysis

References

The Open University (2010) B628/BZX628. Managing 1: Organisations and people, Module Activities, Milton Keynes, The Open University.

List any other sources of information you used.

Remember to save your completed table before closing this document.

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 18 Activity 3 Output 2

B628 Figure 18.2. Force-field analysis for unwelcome change - introduction of an Agency wide computer system

Driving forces

<