EMMANUEL ALOIS TURUKA
WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY
When people work together in a structured situation to achieve a
common objective, they form an organization, and the aim of
any organization is to produce a product or service. Therefore
organization is the means by which people get thing done. In order to combine
the effort of people in the organization the process of management is required.
Why management is so important, a simple answer is that if management were absent
in large, more organization objectives would not be reached and organization
can end up in chaos. Every organization should have a well planned and
effective management structure with defined roles and responsibility with
respect to decision making. There is no one right organizational structured.
Every organization is different, leadership can design an organizational
structured which fits with the environment of the place and time. It is from
this background Helgeson came up with the notion of “Web Inclusion
Helgesen in her study of successful women discovered that the
workplace they led tended to be web’s of inclusion. According to her she saw
communities were modeled more like a web than a hierarchy and that sharing
information was key to their effectiveness. This is a model for helping us
redesign the institutions that frame our lives. It's based upon the notion of
dynamic connectedness. The web demonstrates the universe in operation. (Page
187, Kobrak) To her not each constituent part locks into its own immutable
slot, but rather as a pulse of energy that continually evolve and assume
various elements interact.
In this analysis the web is viewed as an organic in nature and in
a continual state of adoption. Web of inclusion like any organization should be
apt to be driven by clearly articulated values, culture and norms these can act
as the glue that holds the organization missions and strategies and the
structure together. Why I tend to agree with her, because, The web provides a
way of relating individual parts to a great whole. Because the web is built
from the center the development is never ending process. If the web works a
spider does, a simultaneous activity like spinning new tendrils of connection,
while also continually strengthening those that already exist.
All parts of the fabric of
the web matter, all participants share directly in the responsibilities and
rewards. Web of inclusion is explained as much by the process as by purpose the
means to achieve their ends distinguish them from the other organization model.
The web process is more than a team approach although a web of
inclusion often has a specific mission yet it plays a more lasting role because
its emphasis process as well as structure establishes new ways of approaching
the problem at thinking of connecting people by giving them information and
motivating them. In this way transformation of the organization is achieved. As
Kobrak puts it “the circle is inclusive, but it allows for flow and movement as
a circular process” (pg. 186)
Web inclusion is not a
standard hierarchical led from top to bottom but more circular is structured
and is led from the center. On this model participation is available from grass
roots structure and as such give power rather than vesting it in positional
leaders. Decentralization of power and diffuse power through networks offer
fulfillment of individual hence this is an incentive which positive service
(encouragement). The web provides free flow of information across all levels
team makes their own decision and task is more important position.
The challenge which always
will be there is that to grasp the central concept of this model it is
necessary only to visualize a spider works flexible constantly changing
interdependent between its center and periphery. The question which goes with
this notion is that can we work as a spider does? And if not what type of
forces that affect the performance of modern organization to cope with change?
While traditional hierarchy
is usually depicted as pyramid it is a common structure in organizations this
is because they reflect natural and common techniques for human beings to deal
with complexity. Hierarchical relationships are perceived as instrumental in
the coordination of efforts and as determinants of power and status in social
relationships. A system with too many layers of hierarchy and where nothing can
be decided unless we go through these layers of decision this makes a typical
pyramid hierarchy. In this system those at lower layers will not take any
decision unless approved by the one above, hence resulting in inordinate and
unwanted delay. This delay will definitely cut into the usefulness and
productive time period because there too many managers hence this brings the
notion of confusion and the ultimate chaos that may happen in this case will be
due to the point of wondering who will take the decision hence decision has to
go through many managers.
When one compares the two approaches in handling political power
and formal authority one way of looking at it is through making analysis of the
difference between traditional hierarchy and web inclusion;
As Kobrak argues “the top
of hierarchy becomes the edge of the web and as the center of the network of
connection becomes the middle of hierarchical progression. Hierarchy
emphasizing appropriate channel and the chain of command discourages diffuse or
random communication; information is filtered, gathered and sorted as it makes
its way to the top. The web facilitates direct communication free flowing and loosely
structured, by providing points of contract which to connect (page 189)
In regard to decision
making the manager operating from the center of the web can use this direct
access to information not only to wide input but to test reception to decide in
advance. In the web construction the figurehead is the heart rather than a head
authority comes from connection to the people around rather than distance from
those below, this helps to foster team approach (191), while it is easy looking
but when you come to implementation it is hard. Hierarchical structure with its
pyramid shape limited direct access the top information limited to those who
need to know and positional of power in the form of new certain people in the
organization is non obsolete.
As a dissemination of
information the leader who operates from the center of the web has the same
advantages as when in an information gathering role. Has direct access to
anyone within the organization without having to resort to channels and thus
avoid the attendant risks of dilution and distortion. While hierarchical
relationships as a consequence of the dissemination of information limited
through the span of supervision, necessary for coordination.
Linking with reading “Citizen Governance “ written by Box and
specifically looking at Making Citizen Governance work, when we look at the
principles of the community governance guide such as: Scale; Democracy:
Accountability and Rationality all these enhance web approach in accomplishing
the missions of set upon. This Open communication because freely flowing
information is an essential component of webs as far as for citizen
participation. Information without regard for position and right to know adds a
sense of security and destroys uncertainty thereby building morale. Also from
this reading one note that unlike traditional organizational models webs are
not disbanded at each task. By maintaining the connections across levels the
teams are able to keep and expand those linkages to the benefit of the society.
Another aspect is that of constant reorganization which is equivalent to
accountability, is about new ways of connecting people are needed in order for
an organization to be adaptable to every changing situation and to redefine the
nature of its business continual reorganization is facilitated because webs are
so permeable. And last element is the expansion to the world outside, the web
by its very nature can expand to include collaborative efforts with other
individuals and groups to expand its reach and scope, the ability to try one
approach and then another to discover what works and what does not provide an
effective strategy for operating in a crisis when there is little time to
prepare detailed plans.
All these are crushing with Traditional hierarchical because it is not ready
for change. The operational system is well established and everyone must follow
the steps to arrive to the conclusion no direct way of submission of claim it
must pass through the channels. Like in an army everything is set up you cannot
jump from lower to top.
But in terms of professional aspects and ethical issue traditional hierarchy is
more liable unlike web inclusion because it more free and it can sometimes not
practicing these professionally.
Reference.
Helgesen, S. (1995). The web of inclusion. New
York:
Peter Kobrak. (2002). Political
Environment of Public Management, Pearson.
No comments:
Post a Comment