Mr. Charles has been the departmental manager for seven years having risen through the ranks to be one of the most reliable and respected employees. Prior to the current position, he held various posts in the organization domestically and regionally and is best known for meeting strict targets and deadlines. His immediate boss is a woman who happens to be the organization’s deputy managing director, but this has never interfered with the performance of Charles since he believes in continuous development.Let our writers help you! They will create your custom paper for $12.01 $10.21/page 322 academic experts online
The manager values communication whereby he always insists on feedback because it facilitates free flow of information from one office to the other. The organization has one of the best cultures that encourage its members to accept change, which means application of new technologies and systems is appreciated. Currently, the manager enjoys a good working relationship with all members of staff since he values communication and peaceful resolution of conflicts.
For instance, he instructs all employees in the department to focus on performance instead of following some of the rules that might interfere with goal attainment (Silverman, Pogson, & Cober, 2005). From a personal perspective, the manager is the best because he ensures an individual realizes both organizational and personal dreams. While the organization has always supported change, the manager seems reluctant to allow new ideas to flow freely and this is the only challenge that has to be addressed in case the department is to realize the highest results.
Appreciation and acceptance of change paves way for innovation and development of new ideas, but the manager has been slow in appreciating this reality noting that new ways of doing things would destabilize the already established structures. In other words, Mr. Charles supports status quo meaning employees have no option other than following company rules and regulations as stipulated in the employee manual.
Rating of the Manager
|Sense of necessity||x|
|Willingness for feedback||x|
The scores of the manager show that he is moderately aware of the areas that should be addressed to improve the performance of the department since he has a score of three out of five. In this case, the departmental head should be included in the program that aims at equipping employees with adequate skills to facilitate change (Schraeder, & Jordan, 2011). The manager understands that conflicts have the potential of bringing down the performance of his department even though he does not appreciate the introduction of changes to resolve the issues.
Regarding the sense of necessity, the manager has a score mark of one out of five meaning he does not see any need of introducing change immediately in the organization. In fact, he has been opposing the idea of replacing the existing organizational behavior with the current models. Because of this, the manager has never thought of seconding employees for programs aimed at enhancing their skills. Unlike other departmental managers in the organization, Mr. Charles has never desired change.Order now, and your customized paper without ANY plagiarism will be ready in merely 3 hours!
The official has a score of three out of five on confronting changes just like in the case of awareness because the two precursors go hand in hand. This means he seeks to understand problems facing his department, but he does not have options on how to address them apart from following the established procedures. Charles’s score on willingness for feedback is high (five) implying he is open to other people’s opinions. He is open to criticism in the sense that he does not discriminate those who present opposing views. On development orientation, the employee has a score of five, which is very high meaning he always tries new ways of doing things and seeks learning opportunities.
Computing the Total Score
The employee scored twenty-six meaning that he is an enlightened worker who is ready to follow up on the performance of his line workers by insisting on feedback. In this case, he does not need guidance while carrying out his duties. The IP score for the worker is very high proving that he is a feedback seeker and is focused more on development opportunities.
The organization has a rigid organizational culture that instructs members of staff to follow the set rules and regulations, but the departmental manager is always willing to go outside the box to improve the performance of the organization. Even though he does not believe in the introduction of change programs immediately, his performance is consistent with the features of an enlightened employee since he appreciates the fact that various problems exist in the organization and they must be addressed in case the best results are to be obtained. Since joining the organization, the worker has been in need of new skills to enhance competence (Moss, & Sanchez, 2004).
Organizational Precursor Items
|Organizational feedback environment||x|
|Formal Individual growth||x|
Organizational culture and behavior influence the performance of the employee in several ways. In fact, acceptance and appreciation of change would take place if the organization permits it. If an organization supports feedback, chances are high that change would be initiated leading to better results. On the first precursor, organizational alignment, the score is high (5/5) meaning the management is in a position to match individual missions, values, visions, and expectations to those of each employee.
Based on this, employees have no problem following the laid down rules, as they benefit them as well. Again, the score is high on organizational feedback environment (5/5) implying that clear systems that enable feedback exist. For instance, the organization has a well-developed appraisal system and a performance measurement tool. In this regard, the existing job related systems are supportive of valued behaviors hence facilitating achievement of high results.
The score is still high on formal individual growth opportunities (5/5) because employees are taken for further studies to improve their skills and knowledge (Green, 2000). Learning and training are given a priority in the organization since they contribute to employee development.We'll complete your 1st custom-written order tailored to your instructions with 15% OFF!
However, the organization does not perform well on compensation system because wages and salaries are not tied to performance meaning an employee receives his or her compensation, irrespective of whether the targets are met or not. The results indicate that the score is three out of five meaning few considerations are given when compensating employees. For instance, workers who meet targets are issued with something extra, which might be financial or non-financial, depending on their choice.
Computing the Total Score and assigning a category
Any organization in the developmental stage is expected to have a moderate total OP score. However, this organization is in a different stage because it encourages its employees to explore the best options and apply them in their respective departments. In this case, it belongs to the learning-oriented category given its record of developing employees.
In the ever-competitive business environment, many organizations are focused on equipping their employees with the best skills and knowledge to gain a competitive advantage (Brocato, 2003). The organization employs an open and sincere communication hence encouraging employees to share any form of information with their bosses. In other organizations, employees would rarely speak truth instead engaging in insincerity mainly to please managers, something that might lead to underperformance.
Performance Improvement Action
The departmental manager is known to follow the set rules strictly instead of exploring some of the options that would improve organizational performance. In this regard, introduction of a training program, particularly the one on change, would suit the situation. The manager, together with other organizational employees holding the same view, should be taken through a change program to enable them appreciate its effects on the performance of the organization.
Apart from the training program, other developmental actions should be implemented in the organization, as they would help in strengthening various departments (Allan, 2009). For instance, improving the working conditions of workers by recognizing the most industrious ones would be one of the strategies that will easily enhance growth. In the department, introduction of performance-related pay would be the best in facilitating development since employees would be focused on meeting the targets and deadlines.
The actions taken, particularly to improve feedback and face challenges that change present, would perhaps offer a solution to the performance deficiencies witnessed in the department. The current system does not appreciate the efforts of hard working employees meaning it interferes with performance. Individual precursors should be improved to strengthen the performance of employees since they have the potential of enhancing the performance of the organization meaning they are closely related.Just $12.01 $10.21/page, and you will get your custom-written original paper by our team
Allan, L. (2009). Training needs or training wants analysis? Training and Development in Australia, 36(2), 25-27.
Brocato, R. (2003). Coaching for improvement: An essential role for team leaders and managers. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 26 (1), 17-22.
Green, P. (2000). Training needs analysis. Training Journal, 1(3), 1-36.
Moss, S. E., & Sanchez, J. I. (2004). Are your employees avoiding you? Managerial strategies for closing the feedback gap. Academy Of Management Executive, 18(1), 32-44.
Schraeder, M., & Jordan, M. (2011). Managing performance: A practical perspective on managing employee performance. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 34(2), 4-10.
Silverman, S.B., Pogson, C.E., & Cober, A.B. (2005). When employees at work don’t get it: A model for enhancing individual employee change in response to performance feedback. The Academy of Management Executive (1993-2005), 19(2), 135-147.