Major Problems And Solutions In Tim

Major problems of communication and trust within Tim's organisation

Questions:

1.Identify whether the problems in the organisation are primarily cultural, technological or structural (or some blend of these factors). Please justify your analysis with reference to the case?

2.Identified and explain how organisational development could improve efficiency and effectiveness in the organisation?

Employees are the working force of any organisations. The reputation, productivity and profit of an organisation depend on employment relationship. Often it has been seen that an organisation faces various kinds of troubles due to lack of communication between the employees and managers. An organisation generally comprises of three categories of employees, firstly the people who develop plans, next the people who execute the plans and finally the people who investigate the effects of the plans. Communication between each level of employees and sharing the problems and feedbacks with the authorities help an organisation to maintain the stability in employment relations.

The following case study contains various problems in Tim’s organisation, which have been developed majorly due to lack of communication between the employees categorized on their roles. Many employees have suppressed many issues only due to the fear of losing job (Anderson, 2017).

The purpose of the discussion is to find out and analyse the major problems in Tim’s organisation from expert’s view point and to verify the justification of the solutions that are provided within the case study.

The major problem in Tim’s organisation is ‘communication between various departments. Working departments of Tim’s organisation can be classified into three groups like assessors, crew and inspectors respectively. There are many issues lie within the organisation that elevates the difference among the teams. Departments only communicate with each other when they have severe issues or major complaints again the other departments (Bansal, 2015). An incident had occurred within the organisation when a crew leader had a loud conversation with an assessor telling him that he or she was not doing the job appropriately.  Problems are highlighted that crew is not trusted to take circumstantial or emergency decisions during the work (Anderson, 2017). Another general problem is that any decision that has been taken by the authority does not contain the proper follow-through by the authority and each of the departments. Main factors those are associated with the problems of the crew are appreciation, respect and trust. Crew members felt that they have not been treated with appropriate respect within the organisation and their works have not been appreciated, rather benefits of the company are noticed by the managers primarily (Raoufi, Fayek & Gellatly, 2016). Crew is feeling that their voice is expandable within the organisation and they cannot relate themselves as an irreplaceable part of the organisation.

SWOT analysis for Tim's organisation

S.W.O.T. analysis can be performed on Tim’s organisation through which the problems within the organisation can be analysed and pathway for solutions can be achieved.

Main strength of the organisation is Tim’s resilience to solve the problems at any cost. Tim has identified the problems within the organisation before it becomes too late. In order to solve the problems Tim has requested for expert advices and to obtain solutions for the problems and specifically has taken care that firing an employee does not become a primary solution (Kersley et al., 2013).

Weaknesses of the organisation are the issues that have developed within the employees especially within crew members. Lack of communication, hiding issues from management and constant development of war-like situation within the organisation are the weaknesses of Tim’s organisation (Kacmar et al., 2013).

Opportunity is the arrival of experts’ opinion in order to solve the various issues. Intervention of outside party has provided Tim with a support system to plan the intervention. The suggestion has been given to form a three staged intervention plan that contains the sessions where an employee can identify their worst experiences, can describe the effects of those experiences and can tell about the communication and authority involvement to compensate those experiences (Noon, Blyton & Morrell, 2013).

Threats are visible before and after the intervention session in the organisation. Major threat is collapse of the organisation due to the conflicts between different groups of employees and the authority (Schultz et al., 2017). During the intervention plan most of the employees remain non-communicative as they have the fear that their feedback will cost them their job. It explains that crew members does not possess any trust in the  management and that can be potential reason for resignation.

1. Tim’s question is pretty much fundamental in this case. After the intervention plan it is very necessary to get the feedback of the intervention plan developer.  The intervention has been majorly focused on the problems of crew members (Poell & Van Der Krogt, 2017). After the completion of the intervention process a list of issues have been developed which is appreciated by the crew members. Following the responses, Tim’s question can be answered appropriately. The crew members have finally found their voices and have raised every issue that they are facing either from a long time or from a short time (Aikens et al., 2014). I would tell that management needs to be more focused about the psychological conditions of the employees. Firing cannot be a solution of these problems. All the crew members of this organisation were working for long time like Bob, Tom and others. Due to several hurt feelings and bad experiences the crew members have bonded together in such a way that their trust is captivated inside that group. Management need to ease the situation by talking to each group of crew members and find the roots of their problems and solve it (Unsworth, Dmitrieva & Adriasola, 2013). I will tell Tim that crew members will now respond to the management because the intervention program has impacted them well enough as they let out their bad feelings (Parumasur, 2012). It will be good to follow up the success of the intervention program step by step for the structural balance of the organisation.

Expert opinions and solutions to overcome the problems

Tim’s total concern is based on the welfare of his organisation. The philosophical and behavioural dispute among the employees are causing structural dispute inside the organisation and hampering its productivity (Dixon & Dixon, 2017). Tim will respond positively to the prior solution. The intervention program is a success as he finally came to know about the real problems among the crew members. He will tell that firing cannot be a primary prospect in solving those solutions as these employees are responsible for the productivity of the company till today. However, loosing respect among one of the employee group will affect my reputation. Therefore, there will be a solid requirement to stretch this intervention program among the assessors as it will also give a clear description about their issues and it will help them understand the decisions and planning those have been made in case of the crew members (Hodges, 2017).

Chuck’s response will be a different one. From the starting he was looking to solve these problems by firing the crew members who were the roots of these disputes. The intervention process has achieved its success but Chuck thinks that it is a failure because ultimately Tim will lose his respect among the assessors (Tziner, & Chernyak-Hai, 2012). He will tell management does not need to be restructured as the problem resides among the thoughts of crew members. Therefore, looking at their issues individually is nothing more than a loss of the time of the organisation. The organisation can replace those employees by hiring new ones those can strictly follow the orders of management and do not raise any issue.

From the study it has been clearly seen that the assessors and the crew members are the internal enemy of each others. The main reasons behind these issues are absence of a well defined goal and clear knowledge of external enemy (Dorssemont, Lörcher & Schömann, 2013). Crew concerns do not matter for the assessors, as from their viewpoint there are no reason for the crew members to misbehave with them. They will respond that the decision making of the management is perfect. The abusive behaviour of crew members are intolerable and the whole group should be fired.

Relation between inspectors and crew members has not worsened as much as it did for the assessors. The inspectors will respond in a way that crew members should be given a chance to rectify their behaviours. Management should hear their concerns for once and decide the relevance of the issues mentioned by the crew.

Tim's question and feedback

In the meeting of next Monday, Tim will try to resolve the issues between crew members and assessors. The issue of lack of trust can be solved by explaining the decision making process to the crew and associating them with a few ones those are necessary. He will propose a face to face meeting between the crew members and the assessors to build a well defined goal.

On Monday, Chuck will press the issue that management needs to sort out the crew members those are expendables and fire them immediately in order to save the time and money of the organisation. He will respond that Tim should focus more on his reputation among the assessors than the crew members. He will say that bit is not necessary to hold a meeting among the employees of the organisation.

Conclusion:

Therefore, concluding the report, it can be said that an organisation can only be run properly when it contains a stable employment relationship among the employees. If there is dispute among various groups of employees then ultimately the productivity of the organisation hampers. In this case of Tim’s organisation, both the assessors and crew members are important for the success of the organisation. Firing any group of employees will not be a good prospect for the organisation. The intervention program for crew members however has become a success. Therefore Tim along with other experts is looking to continue this program in order to solve the issues among the employees of the organisation.

References:

Aikens, K. A., Astin, J., Pelletier, K. R., Levanovich, K., Baase, C. M., Park, Y. Y., & Bodnar, C. M. (2014). Mindfulness goes to work: Impact of an online workplace intervention. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 56(7), 721-731.

Anderson, D. L. (Ed.). (2017). Cases and Exercises in Organization Development & Change. Sage Publications.

Bansal, A. (2015). Understanding the integration mechanisms practiced during organizational change: evidence from five M & A transactions. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(6), 929-947.

Dixon, N., & Dixon, N. (2017). Learning together and working apart: routines for organizational learning in virtual teams. The Learning Organization, 24(3), 138-149.

Dorssemont, F., Lörcher, K., & Schömann, I. (Eds.). (2013). The European Convention on Human Rights and the employment relation. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Hodges, J. (2017). Consultancy, Organizational Development and Change: A Practical Guide to Delivering Value. Kogan Page Publishers.

Kacmar, K. M., Andrews, M. C., Harris, K. J., & Tepper, B. J. (2013). Ethical leadership and subordinate outcomes: The mediating role of organizational politics and the moderating role of political skill. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(1), 33-44.

Kersley, B., Alpin, C., Forth, J., Bryson, A., Bewley, H., Dix, G., & Oxenbridge, S. (2013). Inside the workplace: findings from the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey. Routledge.

Noon, M., Blyton, P., & Morrell, K. (2013). The realities of work: Experiencing work and employment in contemporary society. Palgrave Macmillan.

Parumasur, S. B. (2012). The effect of organisational context on organisational development (OD) interventions. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 38(1), 1-12.

Poell, R. F., & Van Der Krogt, F. (2017). Why is organizing human resource development so problematic? Perspectives from the learning-network theory (Part I). The Learning Organization, 24(3).

Raoufi, M., Fayek, A. R., & Gellatly, I. R. (2016). A Fuzzy Aggregation Method for Measuring Construction Crew Motivation. In Construction Research Congress 2016 (pp. 1782-1792).

Schultz, J. S., Schultz, J. S., Sjøvold, E., Sjøvold, E., Andre, B., & Andre, B. (2017). Can group climate explain innovative readiness for change?. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 30(3), 440-452.

Tziner, A., & Chernyak-Hai, L. (2012). Perspectives on groups and work teams in the workplace. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 28(1).

Unsworth, K. L., Dmitrieva, A., & Adriasola, E. (2013). Changing behaviour: Increasing the effectiveness of workplace interventions in creating pro?environmental behaviour change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(2), 211-229.