Allocating Work Rles

On digestion of this outline, you should be able to:

analyse the work structure allocate rles effectively build successful teams http://userwebs.cth.com.au/~gcutts/Management/4workrole s.html

Definition of terms An organisation is a group of people working together in concerted or coordinated effortto attain objectives. Delegation assignment of responsibility & authority Responsibility duty to perform a task or duty; can be delegated Accountability moral obligation to perform a task or duty: cannot be delegated Authority Functional authority the right to give orders and expect to be followed; the right to perform tasks without superior permission temporary, whilst working outside one's normal area eg, as a member of a project team

Job description a written statement -what is done, why and how Job specification Line relationship Staff relationship Span of control Unity of command minimum acceptable personal qualities & qualifications of an incumbent chain of command - who orders whom and who obeys whom advice and consultancy - no power to order changes number of subordinates who can be controlled effieciently & efectively one boss per person

The Organising Function

Chief executives are responsible for the overall activities of an organisation, but each manager or supervisor is responsible for the organisation of his/her own department.

Traditional Allocation of Work Rles

By seniority and experiences Originally, oldest and longest serving got best jobs Changing emphasis on young and vital - but age is still a discriminator. By gender Characteristically different jobs - varies in different cultures As with above, changing emphasis - Equal Employment Opportunity and Affirmative Action imply gender is still a major issue. By Race and Class Trades and skills passed on - often protected from outsiders. Influence of education and background maintained status quo. By Qualification Educational, trade or skill Required documentation Changed nature of eligibility v suitability eg medical students now being selected by aptitude Public Service insists on selection of most eligible candidate by qualification and experience- what does or can this mean and lead to? By Individual Contribution Qualifications and experience, suitability and eligibility
o

Technically ideal does not necessarily mean well-suited for the demands of the job and vice versa. Whenever senior positions become available, internal market may be bigger than realised possible savings on selection procedures. [In most cases, people are selected who are technically eligible but not suited: Peter Principle?]

Normal selection criteria look at

o o o o

qualifications experience references acceptability at interview

whereas person description [job specification] for job looks at

o o o o

aptitude versatility assessments rle fit with the existing team.

Surprise fits are often found by accident and are few in number; tend to stay because they are surprised, and are ineligible for like jobs outside their present employment. [I cannot remember when I first used this diagram - but suspect I now have the positions for Surprise Fits and Poor Fits reversed - what do you think?] Eligibility can always be improved through training. The most eligible are often over-rated whereas the most suitable are seldom recognised. Qualities of improvers [new appointees] were seen by supervisors as

versatility takes initiative pride in job good personal relations listens to instructions wide viewpoint

seeks work when slack quality conscious good timekeeper asks questions methodical and neat reports faults remedies the problems.

Non-improvers were seen as

doesn't follow instructions bad timekeeper dislikes supervision careless about quality can't concentrate chats, gazes around personal problems bad personal relations overconfident for ability doesn't pull weight doesn't like change doesn't report faults no loyalty to company

Factors were not equal in frequency. Those who get on tend to be those who self-manage and who are aware of their rle relationships - not the technically able. Successful teams and individuals are aware of their strengths, avoid areas where they cannot compete, and adopt compensating strategies.

Individually, this could mean performing a secondary team rle if the occasion demands it - but cannot last - the primary rle must be dominant in the long term.

Contracting out is another possibility o o o

building a balanced team where sacrifice is not necessary; delegating in the areas of one's weakness; or announcing there is a lack in one area and seeking competition and volunteers to fill it.

Do not be forced into maintaining a rle which is not yours. Changing nature of job market - jobs not so well defined, job descriptions change regularly, managers are more volatile Nature of legal changes - employers cannot afford to make selection mistakes. Growing emphasis on behaviour - personality fit.

Organisational Structure Unity of command implies one boss per person. Authority should run in a chain, or line from the chief executive downwards.

Functions and responsibilities of each level must be dissected in each subordinate position and worked out in more detail; ie, all general responsibilities of CEO must be covered somewhere by someone, and no one can have a task which is not a dissection of someone further up the chain [see Outline 14] The CEO can delegate her responsibilities, but not her accountability [to Board, shareholders, whatever] - as can every manager below her. If a particular task is broken down and constantly delegated until it ends up with the floorsweeper, she/he is ultimately responsible for seeing that the task is carried out - but each delegator remains accountable to the higher level for seeing that it is done - ie, if the CEO finds the floor dirty, she should ask her deputy to account for it - she in turn will ask the next level manager and so on. The CEO should not directly abuse the floorsweeper, nor should the various managers try to wipe their hands of it by saying - I passed it on to manager xyz.

Each level of management should be given the authority as well as the responsibility to carry out the delegated task. At the end of the line, the floorsweeper should be allowed to draw necessary stores such as a broom without having to seek superior permission - filling in 15 forms in triplicate? Project teams temporary - finish when project does dual lines of accountability - to project leader and permanent head can be cause of conflict if a member tries to play one boss off against the other [I recall once working for a navy department and being allocated two days a week to the air force for a project. When I asked the latter which two days, they suggested Friday as one day because the base finished work at 1400. Three months later, my navy boss tried to contact me at 1500 and was not very happy that I had been finishing work at 1400 when his department continued till 1700!]

Teams

Belbin's Team Rle Descriptions

Somewhat like a Myers-Briggs test, people can complete questions which reveal the rle for which they would be best suited, and Belbin [see bibliography] argues that we all fit into a dominant and a secondary rle. Table shows rle name, strength of contribution in that rle, & allowable weaknesses. Executives rarely strong in all rles - need to find complementary types to make an effective team. Without doing any tests, you may be able to see yourself or others herein - but don't take it too seriously without further detailed analysis of what Belbin says. Creative, imaginative, unorthodox, solves difficult problems Ignores details, too preoccupied to communicate effectively

Plant Resource Investigator Co-ordinator

Extrovert, enthusiast, Overoptimistic, loses interest communicative, explores quickly opportunities, develops contacts Mature, confident, good chair, Can be seen as manipulative, clarifies goals, promotes delegates personal work. decision-making, delegates

well. Shaper Monitor evaluator Teamworker Challenging, dynamic, thrives Can provoke others, hurt on pressure, has drive and feelings courage to overcome obstacles. Sober, strategic and discerning, Lacks drive and ability to sees all options, judges inspire others, overly critical. accurately. Co-operative, mild, perceptive, Indecisive in crunch situations, diplomatic; listens, builds, can be easily influenced. averts friction, calms. Disciplined, reliable, conservative, efficient, turns ideas into practical actions. Somewhat inflexible, slow to respond to new possibilities

Implementer

Completer

Painstaking, conscientious, Inclined to worry unduly, anxious, searches out errors and reluctant to delegate, can be a omissions, delivers on time nitpicker. Singleminded, self starting, Contributes on only a narrow dedicated, provides knowledge front, dwells on technicalities, and skills in rare supply. overlooks the big picture.

Specialist

Pitfalls & Problems of Team Work Make sure

meaning of team i s precise - not synonymous with sheep, audience, squad, group. players have reciprocal parts, know each other's parts and react dynamically.

Be wary if

functional structures take precedence o people are there in the team by virtue of their positions or
o

by being selected by other people.

the emphasis on teamwork is such that no one wants to rock the boat, and complacency rules - despite the emphasis on communication, newsletters, participation.

Strained relations

Sometimes, members of a team do not get on as well as they should, or you, the manager, have problems with one of the members. Belbin sees 3 groups, symbolised by:

failure to see how relationship can ever be established avoidance after actual experience[s] enjoyment of success in one plane, but not another. [eg, social v working]

Need to look for strengths of each party perhaps by examining weaknesses and assuming in good faith that negatives also have their positive sides. Need to try to find mutual rle recognition - as this may be missing or obscured, for one or both. Need for one to move to a secondary rle which is more manageable but probably only a temporary solution. Introduction of a third party may help - may also disrupt a working relationship.

Steps to Success 1. For a project, use of working parties to present reports to the committee allowing chair to incorporate outsiders. 2. For the organisation, change in selection procedures - not selecting what you already have, restructuring the job - will need an outside consultant to avoid inbuilt processes and culture. 3. Ask the right questions - what is the goal? Find Shapers and Co-ordinators to formulate. 4. Find a good project manager or CEO and let him pick his own team - but may prefer those he is comfortable with, not necessarily the best for the team. 5. Choose a talented specialist and then find a manager who can relate well to her/him. The ensuing team needs to be one without conflicting priorities but functional and seniority considerations tend to intrude.
6.

Once team is chosen for a project, not before, decide on the style to be followed - regular meetings of all, working in small groups or individually?

a. Identify needs - set right targets - shapers and co-ordinators b. Find ideas - how to proceed - plants and resource investigators c. Formulate plans - weigh up options & make sure all resources are made good use of - monitor evaluators and specialists d. Make contacts - persuade doubters that improvement is likely and appease those disturbed - resource investigators and team workers e. Establish the organisation - develop plans, procedures, methods, working paractices - implementers and co-ordinators f. Follow through - make sure that all works well - completers and implementers Casting director needs to put right people in right jobs - often falls to CEO or another senior executive - hence need for them to be well trained. Use of computer-assisted typing of team rles - vastly expensive but worthwhile. In smaller organisations, casting director will need broad vision.