Things to think about as we begin this week:
Language and wording can be open to perspective so that makes it extra important as a leader to be careful what terminology we use because the English language is very complex and complicated. Written communication can always be read and reviewed but how we present something can often change the perspective or path of an action. Things like employee engagement, regardless of what the situation is, makes engagement critical to making a complex system work! How do these things impact organizational effectiveness and how can it impact goals?
Measuring effectiveness of an organization could be challenging at times. Organizations for the most part have multiple goals that must be met in order to achieve desired goals. Two of the most important goals that seemed to be on top of the list are strategic and operational goals. When organizations are meeting these two goals it usually implies that leadership is addressing issues that might hinder the process of meeting these goals. When goals are not being met it is normally a strong symptom that the structure of the organization is not aligned with the strategy and goals of the organization. According to ORG-812 Lecture 3 (2013) another symptom that departmental and organizational goals are not aligned is excessive conflict within the organization. Leaders must be prepared to address these issues to ensure all goals and strategies are aligned. Reaching every goal is important to all organizations, however, management must prioritize which goals are the most crucial to meet. An organization might be doing very well internally but not meeting external goals. Organizations must always understand that goals could be met but the organization as a whole should always be a work in progress.
Grand Canyon University (2013). ORG-812 Lecture 3
Since there are so many layers within organizations such as management, processes, procedures, internal and external stakeholders, and increased profit margins, considering a hybrid approach might prove to be the most beneficial. Daft (2015) refers to this as the competing values model (integration approach) (p. 75). Through this integrated approach, companies should also consider measure effectiveness by conducting interviews with employees, customers, etc. along with analyzing the actual output.
Ineffective leadership leads to organizational deficits. I would determine structural deficiency by a lack of team collaboration because there are no clear goals and objectives. Additionally, when employee morale is low, there is high turnover, and absenteeism is the norm, these are also signs of deficits. Furthermore, deficits actually start when there are no clear lines of communication from the organizational leader, especially if it is a mechanistic organization.
Daft, R. L. (2015). Organization theory and design (12th ed.) Mason, OH: South-Western, Cengage Learning
According to Daft (2016) organizational effectiveness is the ability of an organization to achieve goals and four approach were proposed by Daft (2016) which organizations can use in measuring their performance or their effectiveness. These are the goal, resource based, internal process and strategic constituent approach
Daft (2016) underscored the point that effectiveness is a social construct and does not exist independently, because it is created and defined by groups or individuals. Because different constituents of organizations have different needs some of which are not congruent with each other, it is rather difficult to find a model to measure organizational effectiveness which one can describe as the one best way. Thus effectiveness is multidimensional construct and so is its measurement.
The goal approach measures effectiveness from the perspective of the identification of the organization’s output and assesses the extent to which the organization is meeting its objectives. The resource based approach measures how well the organization is managing its resources while the internal processes examines organizational stability and health. Finally, the strategic constituent approach measures how well the organization is meeting stakeholder needs.
The question therefore is which of these approaches or models is most useful in measuring organizational effectiveness. Each tool measures organizational effectiveness from a different perspective except for the strategic constituent approach which takes a holistic view by examining effectiveness from a stakeholder perspective. One cannot therefore suggest that this model has the capacity to yield greater value that the first three.
Daft (2016) underscores the point that the strategic constituent approach takes a broad view of organizational effectiveness and also takes environmental factors into consideration. In that sense one can suggest that it provides a more complete picture.
David and Peri (2002) makes the point that organizations should measure effectiveness from as many perspectives that is feasible in order to capture the multidimensional nature of the construct of organizational effectiveness. Because the Strategic constituent approach measures so many facets of an organizational one can suggest that it’s a more useful tool to use.
David P S and Peri T L (2002) Measuring organizational effectiveness and efficiency. Journal of Management Research .09725814 2 (2) 87
Daft, R.L. (2015). Organization theory and design (12th ed.) Mason, OH: South-Western, Cengage