Public Disservice ReportBUS 176

Meredith Rose

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

ContentsContents......................................................................................................................................2

1.0 Executive Summary..............................................................................................................1

2.0 Introduction...........................................................................................................................22.1 Report Topic.................................................................................................................................22.2 Limitations....................................................................................................................................22.3 Sources of Data.............................................................................................................................22.4 Organisation of Report .................................................................................................................2

3.0 Poor Leadership and Team Development ............................................................................33.1 Leadership Relations and Team Development .............................................................................3

3.1.1 Leadership Style.......................................................................................................................................................3

4.0 Lack of Training and Development .....................................................................................44.1 Development Opportunities .........................................................................................................4

4.1.1 Employee Skill Sets.................................................................................................................................................4

5.0 Poor Job Design....................................................................................................................55.1 Job Enlargement ..........................................................................................................................5

5.1.1 Job Enrichment .......................................................................................................................................................5

6.0 Poor Reward Design ............................................................................................................66.1 Growth as Reward........................................................................................................................6

6.1.1 Job Satisfaction through Recognition.......................................................................................................................6

7.0 Recommendations.................................................................................................................7

8.0 Conclusions...........................................................................................................................8

9.0 References.............................................................................................................................9

10.0 Appendices........................................................................................................................1310.1 Appendix 1: SWOT Analysis...................................................................................................1310.2 Appendix 2: Primary Problems ...............................................................................................14

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

1.0 Executive SummaryThis report is being provided because of low staff retention rates, undesirable performance outcomes,

and poor staff morale. It is hoped that by amending the causes of these issues, the department’s

organisational structure will be improved. Without immediate change to rectify the issues seen in the

department, the effects seen will not improve and continue to decline. As our analysis shows, the most

suitable way to address these issues is to refocus the organizational structure.

This report finds four main primary problems. These problems include poor leadership and team

development, lack of investment in team training and development, poor job design, and a poor

rewards system. Analysis has found that it is both poor employee and manager motivation, which

contributes to the significance of these primary problems. We have reported ten recommendations that

we believe if fulfilled, will work towards amending the secondary problems experienced by the

department.

Our findings suggest that by focusing efforts toward developing more effective leaders, employee

motivation will improve. This conclusion has been established by applying Fiedler’s Contingency

Theory, Lewin’s Change Model, Alderfer’s ERG Theory, Vroom’s Expectancy Theory, and Social

Learning Theory to the department within the case study. In addition to this, by applying our

recommendations, it is presumed that a reduction in the impact of poor leadership and team

development, lack of investment in training and development, poor job design and poor rewards

system will occur. It is of particular importance for the department, with the upcoming of senior staff

retirement, that significant action be implemented in the knowledge transfer and training of current

staff members thus ensuring employees possess the necessary skills to perform the job effectively.

1

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

2.0 Introduction

2.1 Report TopicThe purpose of this report is to explore possible causes that result in the department’s inability to

perform at a desirable level. It is of particular significance to recognise such problems so possible

solutions and recommendations can be implemented by the Human Resource Department. By doing

this, the negative influences of the primary and secondary problems can thus be reduced.

2.2 LimitationsOur findings may be limited by the investigator's lack of experience and a comparably small scope of

research data relevant to the significant issues that the department faces. Given the sources of data

used, some information may be subject to interpretation that may further limit the findings.

2.3 Sources of DataThe data analysed to construct this report is of a secondary source nature. However, effort has been

made to ensure the data included has received an appropriate level of peer review.

2.4 Organisation of Report The report will be organised as follows. Firstly, exploration will be conducted into the primary

problems surrounding the department’s productivity. Recommendations will then be provided as to

how the department could positively work to rectify the issues and negative outcomes that we have

identified. A conclusion will then be drawn.

2

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

3.0 Poor Leadership and Team Development Leadership is essential in reforming the department’s organisational structures and improving

employee effectiveness and efficiency. Leadership style is often forced to change when a significant

transformation in teamwork structure occurs.

3.1 Leadership Relations and Team Development The evident lack of leadership within the department has contributed to poor team development and

coordination resulting in a lack of project quality and timeliness. In particular, poor group coordination

has adversely affected motivation, as the resources required to achieve organisational goals have

proved inaccessible. According to Vroom’s Expectancy Theory, instrumentality contributes heavily to

workplace motivation levels (Lee 2007). As instrumentality is undermined by the lack of resources

and employees’ perception of tasks, the staff exhibits poor motivation (P-O) as they do not believe the

goals are obtainable. This has a ripple effect within the department; strength and coordination of teams

in and outside the department is not met (Shaw 2011). This indicates that instrumentality and aid in the

achievement of a desired valence should increase for success (Renko, Kroeck, and Bullough 2011).

The resultant increase in motivation afforded through leadership relations and team building will lead

to further increase performance, goal fulfilment, and job satisfaction in the department.

3.1.1 Leadership StyleLeadership is the most influential and critical position in any organisation, holding a level of

significance that has been overlooked by the senior management within the department. The

management team fails to demonstrate successful leadership, which in turn has jeopardised the morale,

productivity, and quality of individuals resulting in resignations and declining productivity (Hoffman

and Satish 1999). According to Fiedler’s Contingency Theory (Appendix 4), the department’s current

situational characteristics represent the need for a task-orientated leader. Following a situational

characteristic change to a team focus, a relationship-oriented leader is recommended. However, this

highlights a fundamental limitation to Fiedler’s Theory; that a leader’s style is an “enduring

characteristic” and cannot change. Houses Path Goal Theory, on the contrary, recognises that leader

style must change with the situation while outlining actions leaders can take such as clarifying the path

to goals through the removal of obstacles (Waddell, Jones, and George 2013). Through leading by

example, leaders can demonstrate how to complete tasks, counteracting the disorganisation that often

follows the shift to teamwork and thereby, increases performance (Schermerhorn 2011; Knight,

Shteynberg, and Hanges 2011). Additionally, the disambiguation of departmental objectives will

lower the frustration stemming from the misalignment of goals between the minister and employees

(Knight, Shteynberg, and Hanges 2011). As performance improves, leaders can take on both a

participative and supportive style, utilising employee’s inputs, while adhering to their personal needs.

3

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

Such changes can increase enjoyment and manager-subordinate relations in the workplace, creating an

atmosphere that is conducive to further improvements in performance (Schermerhorn 2011).

4.0 Lack of Training and Development The present and future success of an organisation depends greatly on the training and development of

their employees. The lack of investment seen by this department indicates a compromised system

prone to diminishing skills and knowledge (Dornan 2012).

4.1 Development Opportunities Human Resource Management has failed to prioritise staff development within the department,

undermining their ability to develop valuable employees (Olaniya and Ojo 2008). Staff development

aims to prepare employees for future opportunities through the acquisition of new knowledge, skills,

and attitudes (Dornan 2012). Currently, the “critical knowledge and experience” of senior staff is at

risk of being lost as these experienced employees approach retirement. Additionally, junior staff have

reported concerns regarding the lack of promotional and developmental opportunities, a factor leading

to poor motivation and low staff retention. When applying this element of the case study to Alderfer’s

ERG Theory (Appendix 5), it is apparent that motivation/retention problems stem from a lack of

opportunities to satisfy the growth needs of employees. A clear opportunity exists for some of these

needs to be fulfilled through the implementation of staff development programs aimed at transferring

the knowledge from senior staff to lower level employees. This works to ensure knowledge retention

as well as staff retention, while equipping employees with the skills necessary to achieve outcomes

and develop alongside the organisation.

4.1.1 Employee Skill SetsEmployee's performance, development, and adaption to change can be evaluated through the use of an

effective monitoring program (Parker et al. 2013). This can be augmented with 360 degree feedback

to provide management with a bottom up evaluation of the effectiveness of their leadership style while

alerting them towards the evolving needs of subordinates (Salvendy 2012). This may assist in better

matching individual skills to within group tasks to increase the efficiency and performance of teams.

It can also reveal individual employee performance, allowing for more targeted training programs to

ensure individual skill sets are adequate for the completion of tasks (Garavan, Morely, and Flynn

1997). It is important that trust and respect amongst staff is corrected in order to quell any bias that

may hamper the reliability and representativeness of the feedback (Salvendy 2012). The collection of

top-down quantitative data as well as bottom-up qualitative data allows for the inclusion of a variety of

4

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

perspectives on the results of team performance and the satisfaction of individuals within teams

(Salvendy 2012).

5.0 Poor Job DesignCreating a job design in which roles are clearly defined is important in maintaining a healthy work

environment. Activities included in job design may include individual or team tasks and may alter

such tasks through job enlargement and/or job enrichment (Salvendy 2012; Saleem, Shakeela, and

Saleem 2012).

5.1 Job Enlargement As the department focuses on implementing and sustaining high performing teams, job enlargement

will be a key factor in boosting performance and motivation (Maxwell 2008). Job enlargement works

to equip team members with a broader range of skills, allowing them to complete a wider range of

tasks within groups (Cooney 2004). Specifically, junior employees can rotate between lower level

tasks to provide variety and breadth (Salvendy 2012). While this can help to reduce boredom and

increase staff retention, poorly implemented enlargement can increase stress if individual employees

are overloaded (Saleem, Shakeela, and Saleem 2012). This is why it will be important to follow steps

to address these changes. Lewin’s Change Model depicts how enlargement can be gained and

maintained long-term (Appendix 3). As the unfreezing stage is the hardest process, active participation

is needed to best decide solutions within teams (Kritsonis 2005). The second stage, change, will need

to be supplemented with team training activities to reinforce the behavioural movements away from

the status quo (Kritsonis 2005; Waddel, Jones, and George 2013). This may take time as employees

shift their focus to the success of the department. Finally, the refreeze stage will maintain the change

of job enlargement by providing feedback and celebrating new teamwork conditions (Weick and

Quinn 1999).

5.1.1 Job Enrichment The current job design offers little autonomy for individual employees as well as teams. Job

enrichment refers to the giving of tasks that constitute greater responsibility, autonomy, and growth

(Maxwell 2008). Implemented into a team framework, enrichment allows teams to devise strategies to

achieve goals set by management through cooperation, interdependence, social interaction, and

knowledge sharing (Yan, Peng, and Francesco 2011). Enrichment may also allow groups to self-

schedule their workday by deciding which assignments to complete and when to do so (Aswathappa

2005). Rather than replacing management, enrichment allows for a greater managerial focus on

clarifying goals, acquiring necessary resources, and monitoring performance to provide feedback

(Aswathappa 2005; Vybornova 2014). Although opportunities exist within group enrichment for

5

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

teams, it is important that management is privy to individual employee’s desires (Aswathappa 2005).

Job enlargement may be all that is needed if employees are satisfied with their current level of

responsibility, but by implementing both enlargement and enrichment into a team framework, a wide

spectrum of opportunities will exist to motivate all employees towards increased performance.

6.0 Poor Reward Design For many departments, reward design is key to motivating employee performance. In this department,

the reward design needs to change in order to increase staff retention, performance, motivation, and

increase job satisfaction. At the root of these problems, is limited recognition/praise, job satisfaction,

and opportunity for development.

6.1 Growth as RewardGrowth through promotional advancement is an important reward and motivator as it links recognition

for achievement with extrinsic valences such as pay increase (Frank and Lewis 2004). However, the

demand for promotional opportunity far outweighs its supply in the department, leaving lower level

staff unmotivated and compelled to seek employment opportunities elsewhere. This promotional

opportunity deficit risks compromising team building success, as employee focus shifts from cohesion

of teams to competition for individual gain (Salvendy 2012). To lower this deficit, growth needs can

be fulfilled through a reward system, which provides greater autonomy to teams in exchange for

performance, cohesiveness, and higher productivity (Waddell, Jones, and George 2013). This can be

augmented by providing enrichment opportunities to individuals within teams (greater responsibility

or status) who display notably high performance, creativity, and innovation. Performance management

will be important to ensure employees know what actions and standards they must meet as part of a

team and individually that will lead to the desired rewards.

6.1.1 Job Satisfaction through RecognitionAs a recent pay increase didn’t curtail staff retention issues and currently there is limited

recognition/praise for teams, the department needs to focus the reward design on job satisfaction.

Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory suggests that meeting workers needs can both prevent dissatisfaction

and promote satisfaction (Dinibutun 2012). Hygiene needs such as salary, work conditions, and

interpersonal relationships with managers prevent dissatisfaction, while motivator needs such as

achievement, recognition, responsibility, and advancement promote satisfaction (Dinibutun 2012). As

no satisfaction needs have been sufficiently met, Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory suggest that emphasis

needs to be placed on the needs that management are in a position to fulfil. Pay should be a secondary

consideration, while emphasis should be placed on improving work conditions and interpersonal

6

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

relationships (Long 2010). Additionally, limited advancement opportunities exist, so achievement,

recognition, and increased responsibility should be emphasised to promote satisfaction (Long 2010).

Increasing recognition can provide multiple consecutive gains by instilling a sense of achievement in

employees whilst improving interpersonal relationships and work conditions (Hernandez, Long, and

Sitkin 2014).

7.0 Recommendations

• Change the structure of the department from individual work to a teamwork focus

• Facilitate access to resources, including specialist skills from other departments

o This will allow for teams to perform and achieve outcomes, increasing department

performance and motivate employees

• Leadership must establish clear goals for team projects and ensure the path towards such goals

are obstacle free

o This will reduce employee stress while increasing performance and goal attainment

• Implement a directive leader to demonstrate methods for task completion in a team context

o This will assist in ensuring teams are functioning to attain goals through the fulfilment

of tasks

• Implement staff development programs aimed at transferring knowledge and skills of senior

employees

o This will ensure knowledge retention within the department

• Monitor performance using a mixture of 360 feedback

o This will allow the department to view employee skills to better place teams and

increase performance

• Provide training to increase skill sets and facilitate job rotation

o Therefore enlarging and enriching job design increasing motivation and satisfaction

• Increase the autonomy of teams as a reward for good performance by allowing them to devise

strategies for goal attainment through co-operation, interdependence, social interaction and

knowledge sharing

• Change to a relationship-oriented leader following the successful functioning of autonomous

working teams

o This will aid in fulfilling relatedness and growth needs of individual employees

• Meet commendable performance with recognition/praise

o Leaders must both encourage and recognise staff performance

7

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

8.0 ConclusionsBy no means is changing organisational structure any easy task when dealing with a public sector

department. Change will be a difficult and long process, however, if new forms of leadership, training

and development, job design, and reward design are not transformed, the department will continue to

follow a rapid downward spiral. The first plan of action must be to integrate a team based framework

into the department. If overlooked, there will be little hope of maintaining a healthy work

environment. It is believed that by following the recommendations provided that the department will

see drastic improvement in the effects of primary problems.

Following the implementation of teams, a number of steps are required to facilitate the elimination of

departmental issues. Motivating employees to increase performance can be accomplished by

addressing leadership relations of newly developed teams. With newfound motivation, it will be easier

to implement training and development programs in which knowledge is transferred between senior

and lower-level employees. This knowledge and identification of skills will allow the department to

increase performance by adequately aiming goals through leadership styles. If this is not

accomplished, the future of the department is bleak as senior members are soon to retire. However, the

increased performance will not be effective or efficient if job design is not changed to recognise

enlargement and enrichment as being essential to teamwork. As job design is changed, the reward

design will need to address the new autonomy, breadth, and variety of work. Employees will be more

satisfied with their position within the company only if they feel they are being rewarded on the team

and individual level. It will be known quickly if employees do not feel as they are being rewarded

properly as there will be a decrease in motivation, performance, and satisfaction.

The Human Resource Department will need to enforce and maintain these changes, as it is a difficult

process to change employee mindsets so quickly. Although, as the department sees an increase in staff

retention, higher performance, and employee morale, the new organisational structure will be easier to

maintain.

8

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

9.0 ReferencesArnolds, C.A. and Christo Boshoff. "Compensation, esteem valence and job performance: an

empirical assessment of Alderfer's ERG theory." The International Journal of Human Resource Management 13, no. 4 (February 2002): 697-719. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585190210125868.

Aswathappa, K. Human Resource And Personnel Management. 4th ed. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill, 2005.

Ayman, Roya., Martin M. Chemers, and Fred Fiedler. “The contingency model of leadership effectiveness: Its levels of analysis.” The Leadership Quarterly 6, no. 2 (1995): 147-167. http://0-ac.els-cdn.com.prospero.murdoch.edu.au/1048984395900322/1-s2.0-1048984395900322-main.pdf?_tid=ee4c03c8-f540-11e4-b6a6-00000aacb360&acdnat=1431062175_b5e1926453d117f29c40f30fea1139b6.

Bracken, David W., Carol W. Timmreck, John W. Fleenor, and Lynn Summers. “360 degree feedback from another angle.” Human Resources Management 40, no. 1 (2001): 3-20.

Burgher, Karl E., Michael B. Snyder, and Kyle Schroeder. “Creating a Healthy Workplace.” College and University 88, no. 3 (2013): 35-42. http://0-search.proquest.com.prospero.murdoch.edu.au/docview/1398484464?pq-origsite=summon&accountid=12629&selectids=10000039,1006985,10000155.

Dornan, Tim. "Workplace Learning." Education 1, no. 1 (2012): 15-23.

Camilleri, Emanuel., Beatrice I.J.M. Van der Heijden. “Organizational Commitment, Public Service Motivation, and Performance within the Public Sector.” Public Performance & Management Review 31, no. 2 (December 2007): 241-274. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20447673.

Caulton, Jane R. "The Development and Use of the Theory of ERG: A Literature Review." Emerging Leadership Journeys 5, no. 1 (2012): 2-8.

Chang, Wei-Lun and Soe-Tsyr Yuan. "A Synthesised Model of Markov Chain and ERG Theory for Behaviour Forecast in Collaborative Prototyping." Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA) 9, no. 2 (July 2008): 5. http://mail.tku.edu.tw/wlchang/JITTA-2008.pdf.

Cooney, Richard. "Empowered self management and the design of work teams." Personnel Review 33, no. 6 (2012): 677-92.

Dinibutun, S. “Work Motivation: Theoretical Framework.” Journal of GSTF Business Review 1, no. 4 (2012): 133–140.

Frank, Sue A. and Gregory B. Lewis. “Government Employees: Working Hard or Hardly Working?” The American Review of Public Administration 34, no. 1 (2004): 36–51.

Garavan, Thomas N., Michael Morley, and Mary Flynn. “360 degree feedback: its role in employee development.” The Journal of Management Development 16, no. 2 (1997): 134-147.

Hernandez, Morela, Chris Long, and Sim Sitkin. "Cultivating Followers Trust: Are All Leaders Behaviours Equally Influential." Organizational Studies 35, no. 12 (2014): 1867-92.

9

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

Hoffman, Joyce M., Satish Mehra. “Management leadership and productivity improvement programs.” International Journal of Applied Quality Management 2, no. 2 (1999): 221-232. http://0-ac.els-cdn.com.prospero.murdoch.edu.au/S1096473899800918/1-s2.0-S1096473899800918-main.pdf?_tid=a8606300-f53a-11e4-99bc-00000aacb360&acdnat=1431059481_e1424f7a12474f700ac39d457b322b79.

Jain, Mitushi. “Organizational Success through Stategic Human Resource Management.” Journal of Social Welfare and Management 6, no. 1 (2014): 5-9. http://0-search.proquest.com.prospero.murdoch.edu.au/docview/1543471445?pq-origsite=summon&accountid=12629&selectids=10000039,1006985,10000155.

Klein, Howard J. “Secrets to Success in Industry Careers: Essential Skills for Science and Business.” Human Resource Development Quarterly 12, (2008): 57-65.

Knight, Andrew P., Gary Shteynberg, and Paul J. Hanges. "Path-Goal Analysis." SAGE Publications (2011).

Kogler-Hill, Susan E., and George Gant. "Mentoring By Minorities For Minorities: The Organizational Communication Support Program." Review of Business 21, no. 1 (March 2000): 53-57. http://sr4lp2wr3c.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=artic.

Kritsonis, Alicia. "Comparison of Change Theories." International Journal of Scholarly Academic Intellectual Diversity 8, no. 1 (2005): 1-7. http://commonweb.unifr.ch/artsdean/pub/gestens/f/as/files/4655/31876_103146.pdf.

Kulkarni, Pallavi P. "A Literature Review on Training & Development and Quality of Work Life." Journal of Arts, Science & Comerce 4, no. 2 (April 2013): 136-43. http://www.researchersworld.com/vol4/issue2/Paper_20.pdf.

Levasseur, Robert E. "People Skills: Change Management Tools— Lewin’s Change Model." Interfaces 31, no. 4 (2001): 71-73. http://mindfirepress.com/uploads/Lewin_s_change_model_INTERFACES_2001.pdf.

Long, Linda. “An Intergenerational Study of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivators, as Perceived by Human Resource Professionals.” University of La Verne (2010).

Loop, Floyd D. “Mentoring.” The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 119, no. 4 (2000): 45-48.

Matthews, Jason. "Visual Display of Fiedler's Contingency Model." Hub Pages (2013). http://jasonmatthews.hubpages.com/hub/Leadership-Theories-Three-Types-of-Contingency-and-Situational-Theories.

Maxwell, James R. “Work system design to improve the economic performance of the firm.” Business Process Management Journal 14, no. 3: 432-446. DOI 10.1108/14637150810876715.

Morgeson, Frederick P., and Stephen E. Humphrey. "Job and team design: Toward a more integrative conceptualization of work design." Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management 27 (2008): 39-91. http://sr4lp2wr3c.search.serialssolutions.com/?

10

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

genre=article&spage=39&SS_issnh=0742-7301&SS_sid=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&issn=07427301&SS_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fmurdoch.summon.serialssol.

Olaniyan, D A., and Lucas B. Ojo. "Staff Training and Development: A Vital Tool for Organisational Effectiveness." European Journal of Scientific Research 24, no. 3 (2008): 326-31. http://lms.powercam.cc/sysdata/user/42/irisli/blog/doc/6aaf13ba58c720ef/attach/161.pdf.

Parker, D.A., Verlinden R. Nussey, M. Ford, and R.D. Pathak. "Critical Evaluation of Project Based Performance Management." International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 62, no. 4 (2013): 407-19.

Phillips, Kevin. “Leading by Example.” Accountancy SA (2013): 18. http://0-search.proquest.com.prospero.murdoch.edu.au/docview/1374513019?accountid=12629.

Rao, M S. "Smart leadership blends hard and soft skills." Human Resource Management International Digest 21, no. 4 (2013): 38-40. http://0-search.proquest.com.prospero.murdoch.edu.au/docview/1365844173?accountid=12629.

Renko, Maija K., Galen Kroeck, and Amanda Bullough. “Expectancy Theory and Nascent Entrepreneurship.” Small Business Economics 39, no. 3 (2011): 667-684.

Saleem, Shakeela, Wasim A. Shaheen, and Rashada Saleem. "The impact of job enrichment and job enlargement on employee satisfaction: A correlation study from Pakistan." Kuwait Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review 1, no. 9 (2012): 145-65.

Salvendy, Gavriel. 2012 Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics. 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Schermerhorn, John R. 2011. Exploring Management. 3rd Ed. Hoboken, New Jersey, USA: John Wiley & Sons.

Shaw, Wade H. "Teamwork." IEEE Engineering Management Review 39, no. 1 (March 2011): 2. http://0ieeexplore.ieee.org.prospero.murdoch.edu.au/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5729966&tag=1.

Vassileva, Julita. "Motivating Participation in Social Computing Applications: A User Modeling Perspective." User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 22, no. 1-2 (2012): 177-201. Springer Link (1573-1391). http://julita.usask.ca/Texte/UMUAI2012.pdf.

Waddell, Dianne., Gareth R. Jones., and Jennifer M. George. 2013. Contemporary Management. 3rd Ed. North Ryde, N.S.W.: McGraw-Hill Australia.

Walters, Marlon M. “Leadership and Productivity: An examination of a leader-member exchange model.” Capella University (2007): 19. http://murdoch.summon.serialssolutions.com/search?

utf8=✓&s.q=leadership+and+productivity#!/search?ho=t&q=leadership%20and%20productivity&l=en.

Weick, Karl E., and Robert E. Quinn. "Organizational Change and Development." Annual Review of Psychology 50, no. 1 (1999): 361-86.

11

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

http://www.ftms.edu.my/images/Document/MOD001182%20-%20IMPROVING%20ORGANISATIONAL%20PERFORMANCE/change%20Weick%20and%20Quinn.pdf.

Wilcove, Gerry L. “The ERG Model: Expansion and application to Navy personal.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 13, no. 3 (1978): 305-316. http://0-www.sciencedirect.com.prospero.murdoch.edu.au/science/article/pii/000187917890057X

Yan, M., K.Z. Peng, and A. Francesco. “The differential effects of job design on knowledge workers and manual workers: A quasi-experimental field study in China.” Human Resource Management 50, no. 3 (2011): 407-424. doi:10.1002/hrm.

Zwart, Jaap. "Sharepoint and the Soft Systems Model of Change." Microsoft (2011). http://www.sharepointchange.com/blog-sharepoint-and-change/category/hard%20systems%20model%20of%20change.

12

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

10.0 Appendices

10.1Appendix 1: SWOT Analysis

StrengthsGreat work being done in sustainability Focused on promoting changeRecent pay increasesStrong reputation for developing peopleInteresting and challenging project workNew minister with intent to transform the

department HR working with the new minister

WeaknessesPolitical investment *Poor reward system design *Poor job design *Political appointments (not merit based)Falling productivityMorale problemStaff retention issue/growing turnoverLack of coordination between work groupsLack of resources Lack of project timeliness and qualityIncreased resentment among staffLack of appreciation/disinterest in achievementsIncreased pressure on lower and mid-level staffUnpaid overtime/poor work conditionsSmall department

OpportunitiesNewly relaxed skilled immigration rules

ThreatsPrivate sectors and other departments have many

opportunities Budget cuts

13

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

10.2Appendix 2: Primary Problems Primary Problems Secondary Problems

• Lack of leadership from senior

management and teamwork among staff

• Lack of investment in staff training and

development

• Poor job structure/design/organizational

structure

• Poor reward system design

• Political investment by Senior

Management

• New employees are not developing the

important skills held by senior staff

• Lack of coordination and teamwork

between different working groups

• High performing staff are not given

promotional opportunities

• Poor work conditions/unpaid overtime

• Decreasing productivity/project quality

• Some staff are overworked

• Poor job satisfaction

• Low staff retention rates

• Unmotivated staff members

• Poor morale amongst staff and

managers

10.3 Appendix 3: Lewin’s Change Model

14

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

Kurt Lewin developed Lewin’s Change Model in 1951 under the assertion that “you cannot

understand a system until you try to change it” (Weick and Quinn 1999). The model depicts three

stages of change – unfreeze, change, and refreeze (Waddel, Jones, and George 2013). Viewing each

stage as a force, Lewin’s Model illustrates how those forces promote or inhibit change (Kritsonis

2005). The following diagram shows each stage in the model as a series of steps to follow for effective

change (Zwart 2011).

Unfreezing, the first stage of this model, acts on the core issues defining the team job design by

determining what needs to change (Kritsonis 2005). For this department, these issues include lack of

teamwork, respect among staff, resources, and work conditions. As job enlargement is seen as the best

solution, the change stage will implement the new department priorities such as teamwork, training,

and development (Levasseur 2001). This middle stage generally takes time to achieve which is why it

is important for all staff to communicate and be involved in the process (Kritsonis 2005; Levasseur

2001). The third stage in the process intends to make the movement seen by the change stick. Refreeze

is accomplished by providing feedback, gaining leadership support, and celebrating new work

conditions (Weick and Quinn 1999). By following Lewin’s Change Model to implement job

enlargement, the department will be filled with hard working, high performance, and strong morale

based teams who complete projects with effectiveness and efficiency.

10.4 Appendix 4: Fiedler’s Contingency Model

15

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

Fiedler’s Contingency Model focuses three situational characteristics in determining the type of

situation an organization faces (Waddell, Jones, and George 2013). The theory suggests that when

situational performance is low or of an undesirable standard, the cause of action is focused on the

manager in charge. The following diagram explains Fiedler’s identified eight leadership situations and

how the situational performance is assessed (Matthews 2013).

Currently, within the department, leader to member relations are poor. Leaders lack engagement with

their subordinates and inferior employees suggest that their superior managers and unapproachable

and unhelpful. Whilst task structure is high, the poor training and knowledge held by employees mean

that much of the tasks are unattainable leading to poor motivation. We have identified positional

power within the department to be low due to the lack of responsibility and autonomy held by

individual employees. Thus, according to Fiedler, this department has a type 6 situation, being

relatively unfavourable. In following this theory, to change from a relationship-oriented leader to a

task-motivated leader is only accomplished through the firing and rehiring of a leader.

Following the implementation of our recommendations of a team-based organizational structure, the

situational variables will change. Leader to member relations and position power will be good and

strong. However, task structure will change to low. This is because as the variety and breadth of work

increases, individual task structure will decrease. This changes the leadership situation to type 3,

recommending a task-oriented leader. A task-oriented leader would aid in team structure where there

is a broad job description and need of a strict guidance.

As Fiedler’s Contingency model states that leadership style is an inherent characteristic of the leader

(and therefore unable to change), an integration of House’s Path Goal theory is required to better

16

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

conceptualise this transition to an increasingly favourable situational characteristic. Additionally, the

integration of the two theories offers a greater amount of leadership styles to choose from to facilitate

a smoother transition. For Example, following the advent of teamwork, a directive and task oriented

style can be adopted to address the disorganisation of newly formed teams. As the situation improves

and the autonomy of teams is increased (see job design and reward system sections), leaders can adopt

a supportive and participative style. Consistent with this integration, leaders may need to retain a task-

orientated style for sometime after change to address new teams or teams exhibiting low performance.

10.5 Appendix 5: Alderfer’s ERG Theory

17

BUS176 Management and Governance (2015)

Alderfer’s ERG Theory focuses on the idea that individual motivation is a result of the fulfillment of

three main needs these being existence, relatedness, and growth needs (Law 2009). It suggest that

needs can be met at multiple levels however, if a higher need is not met, a frustration regression will

occur making lower-level needs more important to meet and motivation breaks down (Caulton 2012).

With reference to the department, an unsatisfactory fulfillment of growth and relatedness needs is a

contributor to the low levels of motivation evident within the case study. Growth needs represent a

desire for personal development, self-fulfillment, and self-actualization and have a positive effect on

the performance of employees when met (Caulton 2012). It has been noted that efforts by the

department to motivate employees through financial means has been unsuccessful. It could be

assumed that this is a result of employees having already satisfied their existence needs in which case

they are now striving for a higher level of needs. It appears that staff are seeking greater responsibility

and fulfillment within their working environments; a clear demonstration of a desire to fulfill growth

needs. Because the senior management within the department fails to facilitate this desire, low levels

of motivation are thus resulting. Relatedness needs refer to the desire one has to maintain

interpersonal relations (Arnolds and Christo 2011). It has been found that respect and relatedness from

one's supervisor is one of the higher avenues of satisfying one’s relatedness need (Wilcove 1978).

Staff report dissatisfaction that senior management are unapproachable and fail to engage with

inferior employees. It is evident because of this, that the employees are exerting a desire for fulfillment

of their relatedness needs. The senior’s management’s failure to recognise this is resulting in many of

the secondary problems shown within the case study particularly low staff morale, cooperation, and

retention rates. By following Alderfer’s ERG theory, the department will need to adopt new policies

and courses of actions that integrate ways employees can feel both fulfilled.

18