Editor’s note: This article is part of a series, Finding the Leader in You, which addresses key concepts in public safety leadership.
In previous articles, we’ve spent a great deal of time focusing on what makes people tick. Attitudes, personality differences and managing conflict are all important factors to consider when dealing with humans, but what about our organizations? Are there complexities associated with life within the walls of our respective agencies? As a leader, it’s not only important to understand people, but also how your agency manages things such as motivation, formal organizational structures, and even facilitation of change.
As the original brainchild behind the Visa brand, Dee Hock is renowned for his understanding of organizational behavior. He notes that “[a]n organization, no matter how well designed, is only as good as the people who live and work in it.” In public safety, we are fortunate to work with dedicated professionals who regularly live outside of their own self-interests. Supporting these dedicated professionals is the fundamental purpose behind the organization itself. This month, we’ll focus on important factors of organizational behavior.
Individuals, groups, and structure all have an impact on behavior within organizations; understanding this impact is critical for improving organizational effectiveness and individual well-being. For leaders, an understanding of organizational behavior is extremely important for achieving employee satisfaction, customer satisfaction, and organizational success. Synergy within an organization doesn’t just happen. It occurs when all resources are synchronized efficiently and effectively. We could spend days discussing the ins and outs to organizational behavior (I’ve spent entire semesters teaching it), but for the purpose of this article, we will focus on three primary aspects—employee motivation, organizational structure, and managing change.
Motivation is the result of an interaction between individuals and a given situation. It’s a process that accounts for an individual’s intensity, direction, and effort toward a specific goal. Leaders typically have a variety of opportunities to motivate employees by virtue of how they treat them. It’s no secret that motivated individuals tend to be better employees. Jobs can be designed in such a manner that makes them interesting to the people who perform them. When it comes to human performance within the organization, consider the following:
Motivation also relies on three key elements. First, there must be some level of intensity, which is concerned with how hard a person expends effort. This is the element most of us focus on when we talk about motivation; however, high levels of intensity are unlikely to lead to favorable job performance outcomes unless the effect is channeled in a direction that benefits the organization. Secondly, employees need direction, which is consistent with the organization’s goals and objectives. This element also focuses on supervisory control and our ability to direct employee focus within the agency. Finally, persistence measures how long a person can maintain effort, remaining on task long enough to achieve desired goals and objectives.
Organizational structure is the framework by which an organization communicates, develops goals, and then works on achieving those goals. Within the framework of organizational structure are the principles by which that structure operates. These principles are how the organization maintains its structure, and the processes it uses to keep the structure efficient. The structure helps define the roles and responsibilities of all employees. Although there are many different types of organizational structures, for the purpose of this discussion we’ll just focus on two—tall and flat.
Public safety agencies are typically aligned under tall or vertical organizational structures. Tall structures are hierarchical in nature and are characterized by few personnel at the top with increasing numbers of people in middle management and lower-level positions. In other words, a few employees make policy and decisions, while many others at the lower levels of the agency carry them out. Government agencies often lean toward this type of structure because it creates very defined job tasks and responsibilities—each person has a clear role to play.
Figure 1 – Tall Organizational Structure
A tall structure can be viewed as the classic bureaucracy, with origins from the military. Although effective in managing large groups of people or when subdividing the diverse levels of service inherent in public safety, the tall organizational structure isn’t without challenges. Rishipal points out how traditional management structures “were devised in an era, characterized by ‘closed equilibrium system’ thinking … when businesses were stable, competitors few, customers loyal, and financial results predictable.”[1] Even though this is more of a reference toward private corporations, it speaks to the sometimes antiquated and archaic structure found in many public service agencies. We’ve all experienced the frustrations inherent in these formalized structures. Typical constraints include:[1]
By comparison, flat organizational structures are set up just as the name implies—they feature one layer of management, with the remainder of the organization accommodating a wider span of control. While unrealistic for large organizations, it is possible to establish a less-bureaucratic structure within subdivisions of a larger agency. Common characteristics of flatter structures include:[1]
Figure 2 – Flat Organizational Structure
Shortly after I assumed command of a new division, we changed our very hierarchical operational structure due the specialized nature of our work and the advanced knowledge, skills, and abilities of our personnel. We ended up with a flatter organizational structure that had immediate results, including better communication and a higher level of empowerment among employees in the division. Even though most public safety agencies require a more formalized structure, there are ways to mitigate the structural adversities inherent in specialized units within the organization.
The dynamic and changing environment that public safety organizations regularly face necessitates adaptation and, depending on the organization, sometimes change is the most difficult struggle faced by leadership. Humans spend a great deal of time and energy pursuing individual needs. Change can often bring about a level of discomfort that employees often try to avoid at all costs. It’s important to understand the many forces for change that are largely out of our control:
Most people abhor change; however, organizational leadership plays a big role in mitigating the frustrations associated with this natural part of life. Education and communication are essential. Don’t let your employees get surprised by some big change that’s coming. Seek their input and answer questions. It’s also important to let your employees be part of the discussion when it comes to seeking solutions or soliciting feedback on changes that impact their work. Build support and gain a commitment from your employees as changes come about. Open communication early in the process is a must. Make sure you implement the changes fairly and ensure certain employees are not adversely affected, which can create division.
Over the years, extensive research has been conducted on managing change. I’m partial to Kotter’s eight-step method and used this process with any large-scale changes our division was involved in, including the development of our agency’s strategic plan. It’s a systematic approach that puts a lot of responsibility on agency leadership; however, it’s important not to skip any of the steps. The eight steps include:[2]
Organizational behavior encompasses the way the agency is structured, how it motivates employees, and how it facilitates changes in the workplace. There are many complexities associated with all these factors; however, most of the responsibilities fall on organizational leadership. Now more than ever, employees look up to leaders to guide them through these challenging times. Staffing challenges, political and social factors, and emerging technologies will consistently tax your resources. It’s important to be conceptual in your planning approach so your agency can continue the level of service and protection the public expects. In the words of Darren Hardy, “the organization will always mirror the behavior, habits, attitude, mindset and pace of the leader.”
[strategem_author]
