Discussion Topic #2 Prompts

​

Prompt #1:  What did you learn about organizations, and/or the behavior of individuals within an organization?  How do the ideas presented in Part Two (the Structural Frame) of the B&D textbook enrich your understanding of the ways in which organizations and the people working in them function?

​

In learning about the ideas of the structural frame, I realized that there were elements of organizational operations that I had not specifically focused on before. I was primarily interested in the fact that there are so many different ways to structure teams and organizational operations. Having always worked in a corporate style environment, the structure is typically very similar from one job to the next - everything is organized with a hierarchy of power. Each job within that hierarchy has its own roles and responsibilities. This has even translated into my personal life with regard to the roles and responsibilities my wife and I share in managing our family. “Even in a group as small and intimate as a family, it is important to settle issues concerning who dos what, when the “what” gets done, and how individual efforts mesh to ensure harmony.” (Bolman and Deal, pg. 51) The use of differentiation of work and integration of efforts seems universal in this way. However, the way in which that work is structured can vary widely depending on the context of the situation. From vertical to lateral integration and blends of the two, there is clearly no one way to best approach every situation. Being aware of this element of change enables teams and team leaders to more effectively solve problems and reach goals. 

​

Prompt #2:  How can you apply the concepts that you have learned about in the readings to your personal or organizational life?  Be specific.

​

With a focus on the necessity of changing structures, this week’s topic applies very closely to both my personal and professional life. Having been raised with the motto “A job worth doing is worth doing well,” I find that I sometimes struggle with a desire to achieve perfection in all of my endeavors. I long for systems of structure and organization – whether that be in the systems that dictate my processes or in the roles and responsibilities of the people with whom I interact. At home, my wife and I have clear responsibilities. My responsibilities include maintaining the exterior of our home, repairing anything that needs it (or coordinating the hiring of a professional), and establishing systems of physical organization – go figure. My wife, on the other hand maintains the interior of our home, manages our household budget (she’s an accountant by trade), and coordinates family events and appointments. While this clear differentiation of work seems to be fairly effective in our lateral structure, there is frequently a need for us to become more integrated in our approach to getting things done. We often share responsibilities such as caring for our child, responding to family needs, and planning for our future. Our approach, while relatively stable, must also be flexible to change.

​

In a professional setting, the idea of shifting structure is also important for me. Working as a manager in a retail environment means being the link between the goals of our organization and the efforts produced at our smaller store level. The process of operations varies significantly between the two levels and, as such, my approach to structured leadership varies depending on the situation and the audience. Learning more about the various structural imperatives that drive my choices will allow me to respond more appropriately to the demands of circumstance.

​

Prompt #3: What are the “structural imperatives” identified by Bolman and Deal?  In other words, what is the universal set of internal and external parameters that organizations need to respond to when choosing its structure?  How does structure influence what happens in the workplace?

​

In our text, the various structural imperatives are defined as “size, age, core process, environment, strategy and goals, information technology, and workforce characteristics.” (Bolman and Deal, pg. 62) These imperatives create an incredibly dynamic process of choice when organizations try to identify their structure. Knowing about the organizational goals, team culture, and typical company processes will help narrow down the appropriate choice. For an organization like Starbucks, clear identification of core process ensures that the quality of our products remains consistent regardless of the individual employee who prepares it. In fact, there is even a series of “repeatable routines” established for just this purpose. However, there is also a need for individual ability to be factored into the customer experience. The nature of the workforce allows for roles such as “Coffee Masters” who receive additional knowledge and training. Those employees can then deliver a higher level of service and make recommendations based upon their own discretion. But, in contrast, there are industries that don’t allow for such variation. Automobile manufacturers, for example, cannot specifically allow for variation in process. While design teams may develop different concepts for new car models, they must follow a rigid structure that accounts for safety requirements and manufacturing constraints.

​

Prompt #4:  In Chapter Four, Bolman and Deal describe eight basic structural tensions that organizations face when searching for an appropriate structure.   Consider an organization in your life (perhaps your family, or any other organization with which you are familiar).  Make some connections / discuss this organization in light of at least a few of these structural tensions.

​

Looking again at my professional experience with Starbucks, I have certainly experienced times where these tensions or dilemmas. In years past, the struggle between differentiation and integration was a very valid concern for day to day store operations. Each member of the team was expected to operate with a shared goal mentality. That is to say, every team member had an equal level of expectation to meet customer needs. However, the differentiation of work was poorly defined. There was very little consistency in how customers were help from day to day, store to store, or person to person. In the past two years, the company has worked to address this dilemma by developing a system referred to as “playbook”. This system clearly dictates the differentiation of work between employees with consideration for changes in staffing levels. This resolves the element of situational inconsistency and helps to deliver on organizational goals.

In another example of how Starbucks manages the potential for structural tensions, I am drawn to the idea of underuse versus overload. Because most Starbucks stores operate across several different day parts, there is potential for inequity in labor division. Most customers visit Starbucks in the morning hours – looking to begin their day with an energizing cup of coffee. Afternoons and evenings, though, can be comparatively slow as many people prefer to avoid caffeinated beverages late in the day. Rather than simply accepting that afternoon employees would have an easier shift (resulting from fewer customers), Starbucks developed a system of labor earning that keeps things balanced. In general, the more transactions you do at any given time will equate to a company defined level of staffing. More customers (more work) means more staff earned to support the business. Less customers (less work) means fewer employees staffed in order to keep workload balanced across situations.

 

Prompt #5:  Throughout your progression in the Organizational Leadership program, you have had a number of courses that include content that could be viewed through the structural frame.  Please highlight what you would consider to be two of the most important things (ideas, concepts, theories, models, processes, skills, etc.) that you have learned in previous coursework that you can relate to the structural frame.  Briefly discuss each key learning, the course where you learned it, and its connection with the structural frame.

​

Many of the courses I have taken in organizational leadership have been focused on the dynamic relationships that exist between leaders and their followers. As part of that element, there has been a significant focus on the necessity of flexibility based on situation – much like the need we see demonstrated as organizations choose their leadership structures. In OGL 355, we focused on the various approaches to strategic management as it related to organizations of all sizes. More specifically it identified the steps necessary to match individuals to appropriate organizations based on aspects of communication and decision making.

​

In BIS 357, we focused on the process of assessing organizations. Those assessments reviewed not only the ability of organizations to deliver value to their shareholders, but also the processes by which they distinguished themselves from their competitors. There was close consideration for concepts such as the differentiation and integration of work, cultural relevance, employee performance as a result of motivational strategy, and strategic advantage created by the differentiation of process across industries.

​

 

Prompt #6:  How has structure impacted the culture and outcomes (for customers, employees, stockholders, surrounding community and/or any other stake-holders) in an organization with which you are affiliated?  Describe enough of the situation concretely to provide context and use concepts from the readings in your response. If you don’t think structure has any influence, think again more carefully and perhaps revisit the readings / Learning Module content to broaden your definition and understanding.

 

Once again, I look to the example of Starbucks Coffee Company to answer this question. Living in the Pacific Northwest (Oregon) there is no shortage of options when it comes to the purchase of coffee and related products. In fact, most neighborhoods that feature a Starbucks are also likely to support one or two competing coffee shops within a quarter mile radius. Starbucks, however, has grown to be a globally recognized brand while many of these other shops will never hit that mark. The key difference relates to Starbucks’ ability to match organizational structure with the needs of various situations. The company works to manage down tensions through constant evaluation of core processes, environment, information technology, and workforce characteristics. The process by which we do our work is constantly refined to reflect the needs of our customers. Feedback channels including a customer support phone number and dedicated feedback website (www.mystarbucksidea.com) allow for up to date understanding of customer needs. Each store is developed with consideration for its surrounding environment and the expectations thereof. Technology is constantly innovated through updated equipment, and workplace labor concerns are balanced for employee needs.