Course: Organizational Change
Week 1 DiscussionReply to the main question and two replies.
Week 1 Discussion: (the main question )
Use the “Comprehensive Model for Diagnosing Organization Systems.” Note that there are three levels of organizational analysis: Individual, Group, and Organization. Also note the five Design Components at the Individual Level. Ensure that your analysis addresses all three levels and five design components.
1.Consider a current job or former job. For each of the five components:
a.Using a scale of 0-5, with 0 = very low degree of satisfaction and 5 = very high degree of satisfaction, rate the degree of your satisfaction with this design component.
b.Explain your rating. Include details about the nature of the work you perform(ed).
2.Now select a component with the lowest rating (choose one if you have tie). Make recommendations for a job design change or any other action that would improve your level of satisfaction with this component of your job.
Reply 1:
Good morning, Professor and Class,
Understanding the complex dynamics that control an organization’s functionality requires engaging in the process of organizational analysis. The levels of this analysis are individual, group, and organizational (Walter, 2021). Five crucial design elements operate at the individual level, influencing the entire working environment. These elements include task design, structure design, reward systems, employee skills and abilities, and motivation (Diamond & Adam, 2023). On a scale of 0 to 5, where 0 denotes little to no satisfaction and 5 denotes a high level of satisfaction, I would assess each of these aspects of former employment. These ratings offer a thorough analysis of job design, giving a sophisticated comprehension of the organizational structure.
Task Design would receive a 4 in my former position as a marketing coordinator. I was given a wide range of tasks, from planning marketing strategies to examining market trends, which presented me with intellectual challenges that kept me interested and inspired. My job satisfaction increased due to this intricacy. The structure design is a three out of five. Although the hierarchical structure made reporting lines clear, there were occasionally communication stumbling blocks between teams. These obstacles occasionally slowed down the quick implementation of campaigns and decision-making procedures.
The rating for reward systems would also be 3. Although the basic salary was competitive, I felt less motivated to give my best effort because I did not receive timely acknowledgment for reaching goals and milestones. The rating for an employee’s skills and abilities would be 5. The company actively supported my professional development through workshops and training sessions, which helped me develop my abilities and contribute successfully to the team (Newman & Ford 2021). Employee Motives would receive a score of 2. Although the organization’s objective matched my ideals, I was cut off from the wider picture because there were no opportunities for me to contribute creative ideas. Employee Motives scored the lowest rating out of all the components. The company might enhance this feature by holding frequent brainstorming sessions or suggestion boxes, promoting an environment where staff members’ original ideas are valued and included in the business’s strategies (Baer et al., 2021). Employees would feel more ownership and purpose as a result of this adjustment.
Ultimately, the organizational analysis model, which includes three levels and five Design Components, offers a comprehensive understanding of job satisfaction. The strengths and areas for growth of these components are revealed by evaluating them in the context of a personal work experience. Organizations can foster a culture that improves employee motivation, engagement, and overall effectiveness by focusing on the component with the lowest rating.
References:
Baer, M. D., Sessions, H., Welsh, D. T., & Matta, F. K. (2022). Motivated to “roll the dice” on trust: The relationships between employees’ daily motives, risk propensity, and trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(9), 1561. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000959
Diamond, R. M., & Adam, B. E. (Eds.). (2023). The disciplines speak I: Rewarding the scholarly, professional, and creative work of faculty. Taylor & Francis. https://books.google.co.ke/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Iy3PEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA1953&dq=Five+crucial+design+elements+operate+at+the+individual+level,+influencing+the+entire+working+environment.&ots=5d083TXIHQ&sig=kPNyXu6rwPTQkf-VFgcJuhCeGto&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
Newman, S. A., & Ford, R. C. (2021). Five steps to leading your team in the virtual COVID-19 workplace. Organizational Dynamics, 50(1), 100802. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2020.100802
Walter, A. T. (2021). Organizational agility: ill-defined and somewhat confusing? A systematic literature review and conceptualization. Management Review Quarterly, 71, 343-391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-020-00186-6
Reply 2:
Hello Professor and Class,
I recently had the opportunity to reflect on the design of my job as an HR recruiter. I used the Job Characteristics Model (Hackman & Oldham, 1976) to assess my job satisfaction with five key dimensions:
- Task variety: 3/5. My job required me to perform various tasks, including sourcing candidates, conducting interviews, and making hiring decisions. However, some of the tasks were repetitive, such as screening resumes.
- Task identity: 2/5. My job did not always involve completing a whole and identifiable work. Sometimes, I would work on small pieces of a larger project, such as screening resumes or scheduling interviews.
- Task significance: 4/5. I felt that my job had a significant impact on the organization. My work helped the company find the best candidates for its open positions, which ultimately contributed to its success.
- Autonomy: 3/5. I had some autonomy in how I performed my job, but there were also a lot of rules and regulations that I had to follow. For example, I had to follow the company’s hiring process and adhere to its policies on discrimination and harassment.
- Feedback: 4/5. I received regular feedback on my performance, both from my manager and from my peers. This feedback helped me identify areas where I could improve.
The design component with the lowest rating is task identity. I would have liked to have had more opportunities to complete whole and identifiable pieces of work. This would have given me a greater sense of accomplishment and satisfaction.
Make recommendations for a job design change or any other action that would improve my satisfaction with this component of my job.
One way to improve the task identity of my job would be to give me more responsibility for managing a full hiring process from start to finish. This would allow me to see the impact of my work on the organization and to feel more like I was making a difference.
Another way to improve task identity would be to give me more opportunities to work on cross-functional teams. This would expose me to different perspectives and help me learn new skills.
Finally, I would also like to have more opportunities to give feedback to my manager and my peers. This would help me feel more involved in the decision-making process and ensure my work was aligned with the organization’s goals.
References:
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational behavior and human performance, 16(2), 250-279.
Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (2002). The conceptual foundations of job design: Employee characteristics, the nature of work, and work outcomes. Research in personnel and human resources management, 21, 327-389.
Back up all opinions with the readings and outside research in academic journals at the KU online library.
- 250 word minimum for initial post
- Include at least two references
- Respond to at least two other learner’s initial post
KU online library: https://keiseruniversity.libguides.com/home/home?preview=afb5d66ab3b853fa361847ea7dfda322 and Google Scholar
