Metaphors of Organizations

A) the process of making known or sharing the existence of an aspect of reality.

Businesses are facing a dichotomy between wanting to chalk out an all-time structure and strategy for their organization, and recognizing that their world is in a constant state of flux [3]. For most of the 20th century they were largely focused on the static elements of this dichotomy. However, in the last decade changes have become more frequent and more dramatic, so much so that a whole branch of management is now devoted to the subject of change itself.

I will be clarifying how reading "Theory X, Y, Z" and watched the media piece, "Theory," affected my definition of theory. I will be explaining the reasons why it might be useful to make a connection between actual management situations and theory. I will also explain how theory can inform the actual practice of management. I will provide an example of my own supported observation to maintain my statements. In Conclusion, I will explain which of management theories presented in Day 4 Readings seem to be the most useful and why (Walden, 2014).

The ways in which the aims of this mission are going to be achieved will be specifically outlined in the vision statement provided. The importance of hitting our mark is paramount, for our children are our future, and making sure that they are successful, competitive citizens should be our highest concern.  Sometimes this process can be more challenging when put into practice.

The social construct of reality is the historical process by which our experiences become categories and treated as things (Roy 5). Historical process is the process itself in which an idea becomes reified over time thus becoming accepted and used normally (Roy 19). Defining the social construction of reality as a historical process is the formation of accepted categories over a period of time; in other words, the “facts” that were once just ideas, “take on a reality of their own” (Roy 19) thus being the process of how things become a reality.

Lee G. Bolman’s and Terrence E. Deal’s book, Reframing Organizations, is based on a four-frame model that gives the reader different viewpoints that managers can employ to successfully run any organization. The four major frames are Structural, Human Resources, Political and Symbolic. Bolman and Deal maintain the idea that the goal of the four-frame model was not to discover a single best frame or way for managing organizations, but rather to encourage a comprehensive approach that involves different aspects of each of the four frames that work for improving the functionality of organizations. According to the authors “…learning to apply all four (frames) deepens your appreciation and understanding of organizations” (Bowman & Deal, page 18). This paper discusses the State University of New York Downstate Medical Center (SUNY Downstate Medical Center), a leading urban medical center in the heart of Brooklyn, New York. First, we will give an organizational overview of SUNY Downstate Medical Center. Next, we will apply the four major frames of Bolman and Deal to the organization, and finally we will conclude by offering recommendations that the organization can use

     Bolman and Deal organize their book around the idea of framing, and they give many metaphors, examples, and comparisons in defining this approach. It is compared to a paradigm or a map, a mind-set or a general approach to problem solving. Managers work best, they claim, when they use a holistic approach, reframing problems in four different categories: structural, human resource, political, and symbolic. Leading a complex organization requires artistry to combine these approaches as well as an embrace of uncertainty. The best management needs a commitment not only to excellence but also to flexibility, dialogue, and open-mindedness. In this paper, I shall examine the general

collective reality that can be studied in it's own right. Various cultures develop their own cultural

Reality is not an objective thing that is imposed upon us, but is created by us. Reality does not exist externally but internally, as each individual or group interprets it, and is always changing. Due to these concepts sociologists often speak about the “social construction of reality” which is essential to understand when attempting to explain human social behavior. Since realty is the basis of people’s actions, W. I. Thomas states, “If people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences”. The “social construction of reality”, human social behavior and W. I. Thomas’s statement are three concepts that fit hand in hand and are important when trying to explain one another.

Martha S. Feldman a theorist discusses organisational change in her paper. She sees emergent approach as the right way to perceive organisational change. Furthermore according to her the organisational internal dynamics i.e. routines and norms of its employees, managers and other workers is the area that should be targeted for change (Feldman, 2000). She elaborated that every organisation has capacity to change itself for betterment but what is crucial is it should be taken naturally and slowly. She emphasized that organisation should be focusing on micro level internal

Power and Politics organization theory was derived from the “modern” structural organization in the 1970’s to its present today. In the “modern” structural, organizational economics, and systems/environment theories of organization, organizations are assumed to be rational institutions with its primary purpose is to accomplish established goals. People in formal authority set goals. The question is how best is it to design and manage organizations in achieving its purpose effectively and efficiently? Politics plays an increasing role as individuals merge into the work force. Power, politics and influence are essential and permanent fact of organizational life (Shafritz, Ott, & Jang, 2011).

Burke (2014) stated that organizations change from day to day. The changes that take place in organizations can be intentional or unintentional. Generally, the changes that occur is accidental. It is important to have a broader and deeper knowledge of understanding organization change. Understanding what is currently happening as well as trends in which the organization is functioning can provide such awareness.

The view and metaphorical analogy of an organization as a machine was the result of the only frame of reference available at

* Political science in explaining how power struggles between groups within organisations can stem from variances in performance and agendas.

The metaphor of an organism is seeking to portray the system where organizations adapt and survive in a changing environment. Morgan shows an important perspective on organizations that flow with change. Making the resemblance to an organic body, where systems are clusters of interconnected cells, in business, those cells are people connected to deliver on overall needs. With essentially four types or “species” in the organic