Thompson’s (1995) four hypothesis can be recalled as (1) bureaucratic efforts for their survival (2) conditionality of donor agencies (3) failure of blue print approach and (4) success of participatory approach adopted by other organisations.
The case study evolved reveals that the hypothesis of organisational change to adopt participatory approach to ensure bureaucracy’s survival is not applicable in GSDA case. The organisation is not facing any threats of cuts in the size of bureaucracy due to any financial crisis in Government. While the first hypothesis is not applicable, others are discussed in detail as they find relevance with the case study.
6.1. Conditionality of Donor Agency
The case study derives that the hypothesis of
…show more content…
6.3. Success Stories of Participatory Approach
Success stories of other organisations found to be influential to bring changes into GSDA to adopt participatory approach. These stories created very positive environment in the State and influenced on policy formation. GSDA learned a lot from National level success stories like Ralegaon Siddhi, Hivare Bazar in its own State. These are National Award winner and model stories in participatory management of natural resources. Its success lies in the constructive and active community participation. The villages have attained positive results in terms of sustainable availability of GW. Learning from these success stories, GSDA proactively introduced Village Level Water Account with community participation, thereby educating and empowering community for management of GW resource. Currently, the organisation is leading towards Village Water Security and Safety Plan with community participation.
After studying Thompson literature following attributed key factors are summarized for organisational change in GSDA.
First, the indiscriminate withdrawal of GW and its increasing status reflected in every GW assessment. It switched over the focus on resource management issue.
Second, policy shifts from GW development to GW management increased community’s accountability over the management and judicious use of natural limited resource. Subsequently, modifying GW Act and making
In his book, Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies do and why they do it, James Q. Wilson’s main objective is to better define the behavior of governmental bureaucracy, believing traditional organizational and economic theory does not adequately explain their actions. Wilson believes that government agencies are doomed to be perceived as inefficient entities by the public. He gives examples of commonly held perceptions of bureaucracies and reveals how these are mostly misconceptions. He points to the environment of bureaucracy, where rules and procedures, dictate goals, along with context, constraints, values, and norms.
Organizational Structure Organization structure is the differentiation; that is the way the organisation is differentiated into tasks, responsibilities, departments and hierarchies and the integration (the way the organisation is coordinated to form a unitary whole). It defines how activities in the organization are directed toward the achievement of organizational aims. The structure provides the foundation on which standard operating procedures and routines rest, determines which individuals get to participate in which decision making processes and thus to what extent their view shape the organization’s actions (Stephen, 1987) United Parcel Services Organization Chart United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS) is the world’s largest package delivery
Firstly, the model should be one that the OD practitioner thoroughly understands and is at ease with
In Bureaucracy, James Wilson examines government agencies in comparison to the private sector. The portion we read is centered around both the individual (operator) and the organization as a whole. The idea that bureaucracies are inefficient based solely on red tape is discredited with this piece. There is no simple solution to improving the bureaucracy. Finally, Wilson demonstrates that a great deal of variables and ideas contribute to bureaucratic inefficiency.
ACAU organization changes are listed as Table 1. Employees’ department are also updated in HCP, please refer Table 2 for department changing staff.
Organizational change encompasses many challenges to both the individual, and the organization. An organization is a living system, as Flower (2002) states “living systems cannot survive without change, challenge, variety, and surprise” (Flower, 2002, p. 16). An organization requires the ability to adapt in to survive as Darwin states in The Origin of Man, “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change” (Read Me First, 2013, p. 1). It must adapt to the changing market, global economic pressures, stakeholder demands, and the diverse needs
The book The Heart of Change shows the practical side of the theories that are taught in the course textbook. It presents stories of successes and failures based in the application of concepts discussed in Organizational Behavior and Management and in class. Although we talked about several different concepts the ones that are evident in the examples in The Heart Of Change are the more progressive and individual centered approaches. The leadership characteristics that are important to successful change in an organization are those that are espoused in the transformational theory of management. It makes sense that ideals in line with the transformational management theory
When discussing adapting to change management the organization must consider implementation of core competencies that are new and innovative. These challenges faced by the organizations require agility and a shift in strategic congruence that strengthens market adaptation. As business strategies transition, capabilities within functional departments must evolve as operational strategies are implemented.
Managing organizational change is the process of planning and implementing change in organizations with maximum effectiveness and minimum circumstances and resistance. Today 's business environment requires companies to undergo changes almost constantly if they are to remain competitive. In this project paper I am going to discuss organizational change in PepsiCo. I will take a closer look on management approach and forces for change. I will introduce the change, make diagnosis and discuss how the change can be implemented.
Introducing organisational change is often hard, the main reasons for that can be variation in perceptions of the employees, fear of disruption or failure and underlining the right approach to apply change. Then even if the change in a specific organisation is projected successfully there is still lot to be done to manage it in an appropriate way (Oakland, 2007).
Change management is relevant as though the research finds that change is taking place at an ever-increasing pace, the evidence suggests that most change initiatives fail. For example, recent CIPD research suggested that less than 60% of re-organisations met their stated objectives which are usually bottom line improvement. This is consistent with other published research.
The Burke-Litwin Model highlights the main elements or source of major transformational change and also the changes that are incremental in nature. The four transformational factors are external environment, mission and strategy, leadership, and organizational culture. The main cause that makes a company to make changes is the external environment. It can force any organization to make changes to its mission, culture, leadership, and operating strategies. Changes in the 12 drivers in The Burke-Litwin Model bring a series of change to the overall structure. Various internal and external organizational factors that influence the changes in the organization are:
Many companies emphasize a culture of continuous improvement. While never being satisfied with the status quo can drive
A need for growth in any organization to stay a viable entity must occur. Organizational change is inevitable. Just like anything in life, markets and cultures change which require constant attention and preparation. In order to be successful in any market, an organization has to be able transform itself to the needs for the market. CrysTel is no stranger to change. CrysTel is a telecommunication company with over 2500 employees and a gross income of approximately $200 million a year. Products included in there list of services include data cables, wireless solutions, and network development. The product profile is data cables, wireless solutions and network development. Because of the nature of
However, Tom Peters (1989) said that “‘I beg each and every one of you to develop a passionate and public hatred of bureaucracy”. This statement urges us to examine whether the bureaucracy is replaced or not. Consequently, this report strives to examine the strengths, weaknesses of the bureaucracy organization as well as changes impacting to this model in order to answer the question whether the bureaucracy is altered or not.