Background - ePortfolio



Organizational Planning

David L. Ruffin

LDR 560/Southwestern College

Dr. Sasiadek

April 24, 2013

Introduction

Sergeant Anderson has been a police officer for approximately 25 years. During his tenure with the Anytown Police Department he has served in a variety of different assignments which include patrolman, corporal, detective, and sergeant. Sergeant Harden has also served under different persons who were in the top leadership position. Sergeant Anderson is the most senior supervisor at the Anytown Police Department. His seniority coupled with his varied experience makes him a valuable asset to the organization. As a patrol supervisor, Sergeant Anderson directly supervises one of the patrol shifts, which contains 7 officers.

Sergeant Anderson is scheduled to retire in the near future, which made him the perfect candidate to interview about planning as he is more apt to be honest with his feedback In summarizing this information, I think it is important to note that the organization is currently undergoing change. Because of this it is only natural that some of Sergeant Anderson’s responses draw a comparison between things in the past and how things are currently in the organization.

Process Contributions

In the past, Sergeant Anderson has not made a substantial contribution to the planning process. It’s not that Sergeant Anderson didn’t want to; but Sergeant Anderson felt that he wasn’t really given the opportunity. Sergeant Anderson credits this to an organization that had a closed minded philosophy, where almost all the planning came from top leadership. Sergeant Anderson says that not being involved in something as important as planning made him and the other supervisors feel like they couldn’t be trusted and that their input was unwanted.

Planning as well as decision making should be a collective process whenever possible. Planning, whether it is for the future or to outline process steps for a vision; belongs to the organization as a whole and not just the top leadership. The first level supervisors of the organization have the potential to be change agents or change leaders (Daft, 2008). Their participation is invaluable when it comes to helping persuade others to buy into and support plans. Alexander Hamilton (1775-1804) once said “Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.”

“One of the best well-documented findings from studies of individual and organizational behavior is that organizations and their members resist change” (Robbins & Judge, 2010, p. 246). The supervisors have relationships with their people and if their followers trust and believe in them; they will have a good opportunity to gain support. Essentially if the first level leaders are involved in planning, their followers may be more receptive to following the plans and come away with a better understanding for while the plans are important.

Most recently, Sergeant Anderson believes that he has been encouraged and invited to be more involved in planning. Sergeant Anderson feels that he has something more to contribute to the organization than just providing supervision to a shift of officers.

Sergeant Anderson feels that since the organization is broken down into four main sections; administrative, support, investigations and patrol, he would be more apt to assist with planning from the patrol side while allowing others to contribute from their respective sections. Although, that wouldn’t necessarily preclude him from being involved; if there were a group comprised of a cross-section of organizational members working on a plan together.

Plan Integrations

Sergeant Anderson understands that his plans are only a small piece to the organizational puzzle. Knowing this however, does not alleviate the importance of integrating his plans with others. In organizations that have different units or sections, communication and coordination between elements is important (Beach, 2006). Sergeant Anderson believes that his plans and those of other leaders must align with each other and ultimately be consistent with the vision of the organization. Collaborative planning allows individuals to orient their plans towards each other (Windischer, Grote, Mathier, Martins, and Glardon, 2009).

The Value of Planning

When there is no planning, the organization is at the mercy of every unanticipated event that comes along (Beech, 2006). Planning is closely correlated with vision; those identified steps that are needed for the organization to get where it wants to go, decide when it wants to get there, and finally how it will get there (2006). Planning creates a blueprint for the organization’s future so to speak, and forces them to be disciplined (R.M.D., 1986).

Sergeant Anderson states that if for no other reason, involving others in the organization just makes good sense. It’s like the old adage, two heads are better than one. Or in this case, several people working to create an integral plan is smarter than having just a select person or two making the decisions for the entire organization.

Sergeant Anderson has seen the drawbacks from not involving others in planning. From a morale standpoint, it can be a difficult pill to swallow when top leadership dictates what all of the subunits in the organization should be doing. He believes involving others is a great way to create ownership and a sense of belonging from the rest of the organization.

Conclusion

Good leadership necessarily involves more than just the executives of an organization. Most organizations have a pool of talented resources they can draw from. Besides providing valuable information for planning, these people can also build support which will be important when it is time to put things into action.

During his career, Sergeant Anderson has experienced two different philosophies regarding whether to involve or not involve others in formulating plans. As he prepares to leave the Anytown Police Department and while he regrets not having the opportunity to be involved earlier in his career; he is optimistic about the opportunities for others in the future.

References

Beach, L. R. (2006). Leadership and the art of change:A practical guide to organizational transformation. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications.

Daft, R. L. (2008). The leadership experience (4th ed.). Mason, OH;South-Western.

Gardner, H. (2004). Changing minds:The art and science of changing our own and other people’s minds. Boston, MA:Harvard Business School Press.

Robbins, S. P. & Judge, T. A. (2010). Essentials of organizational behavior (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

R.M.D. (1986). Planning--An end unto itself?. Journal of Academic Librarianship. 12(4), p. 203. Retrieved April 26, 2013 from Academic Search Premier.

Windischer, A., Grote, G., Mathier, F., Martins, S., & Glardon, R. (2009). Characteristics and organizational constraints of collaborative planning. Cognition, Technology & Work, 11(2), 87-101. Retrieved April 25, 2013 from Academic Search Premier, doi:.

[pic][pic][pic]

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download