The nature and role
of organizational metaphors are that they allow one to better understand
organizations and management. Applying and analyzing the metaphors
to real life workplace situations hones ones ability to skillfully and
intuitively create a broad range of options and possibilities in interpreting
and solving organizational problems.
I will be applying
my knowledge of workplace metaphors to the organization for which I have
worked for the past five years, the Academic Support Center at XYZ Community
College. The support center provides academic services such as free
tutoring to a campus of about 10,000 students of which 73% are female and
about 47% are racial minorities. More specifically, I will be focusing
on the Supplemental Instruction program. Because there is a need
at the college to increase student retention, the school has adopted this
non-remedial academic assistance program. The model had first been
successfully utilized at the University of Missouri - Kansas City.
The program targets classes that are traditionally difficult for students
to pass. As a Supplemental Instruction (SI) leader my role is to
behave as a “model student”. I attend class, read assigned material
and take notes with the students then conduct out - of - class group learning
sessions where I facilitate the group to process the course material.
For the past three years, I have served as an SI leader targeting Sociology
101.
The culture metaphor
defines an organization as at its very existence a cultural phenomenon.
All organizations will develop a culture based on such factors as that
organizations particular stage of development, its body of knowledge and
even its history. Within organizations, subcultures will arise and
patterns of culture will be created through the constructed realities of
the members who share knowledge beliefs, ideas and day-to-day ritual.
One characteristic
that makes up the culture metaphor is that organizations will develop a
distinct type of “corporate culture” in which certain aspects of culture
such as values, norms, beliefs and even language will form into a pattern
of shared meanings in such a way as to give an organization a distinct
personality. One can derive much information about an organization’s
“corporate culture” by observing its day-to-day functioning. The
everyday life experiences of an organization and the people in it are the
very artifacts that help to give an organization its own unique cultural
flavor. An organization’s culture is constructed by the organization itself.
In order to analyze the culture metaphor existing in my workplace, the
Academic Support Center, I will examine its everyday symbolism such as
images, physical impressions, beliefs, values norms, etc. to discover the
culture encoded in the organizational ethos.
When one observes
the physical surroundings of the room in which I work, one can infer that
it is an informal place of learning. The room housing the ASC is
grand in size. Dozens of tables and chairs are dispersed throughout
the room in order to accommodate several tutoring groups at a time. The
walls are adorned with pictures sporting inspirational witticisms and quotes
that are meant to be motivational to students. For example one wall
hanging houses the picture of a long distance runner crossing the finish
line and the quote quips “the race is not always to the swift...but to
those who keep running.” Tables and chairs are in abundance and can
easily be grouped together to accommodate either large or small groups
of students at a moments notice. Chalkboards on wheels can be moved
around to meet specific tutorial needs and mark territorial space. For
example, tutors’ often use the chalkboards themselves to define their domain
by positioning them partition-like between their group of students and
the other groups next to them, thus creating a private, intimate and informal
area in which to conduct a tutorial session. This helps in keeping
with the belief that the Supplemental Instruction sessions should be casual
and informal.
Large windows covered
with adjustable blinds allows for the proper amount of light to filter
through and wall to wall carpet gives warmth and reduces and absorbs noise.
Overall, the physical surroundings lend an inviting, comfortable and cozy
atmosphere that would be conducive to student learning. The informality
of the big room is different from the more rigid, structured classroom
atmosphere thus keeping with the organizations cultural belief that out
-of - class learning, facilitated by a “peer leader” is less intimidating
and more conducive to student learning.
One popular belief
or value of the organization is that student attendance is vital to the
continuation of the program. Being able to populate the sessions
with students shows the department heads of the school that students are
participating and therefore helps to ensure our department that funds will
be provided to further the Supplemental Instruction program. Therefore,
attendance sheets - papers that participating students sign - document
the time of each SI leaders’ session and how many attended. It is
stressed that we are to fill these out each and every time. The value
of student attendance is evidenced at the meetings that are periodically
held, in which statistical data regarding student participation for each
SI leader is reviewed. SI leaders with low attendance are asked to
discuss what problems might perhaps be contributing to their poor student
participation. SI leaders with good attendance are asked to dispense
tips, tactics and advice to boost other SI leaders’ numbers. SI leaders
with attendance of 40% or above have their names, in big, bold type, put
on the door as a kind of reward system and in recognition of their ability
to rally up students. All of these situations are evidence of the
cultural importance of student participation.
Some of the language
of the organization exists in buzzwords or catch phrases that are consistently
used. Slogans with the words “SI - Just Do It” and “SI - It
Works” are peppered all over the walls, again emphasizing student success
and promoting attendance. As was earlier evidenced in the physical
impressions, the language emphasizes the informality of the program as
well. In our introductions to the students we are instructed to espouse
the informal, casual and non - intimidating learning atmosphere, mentioning
that they can eat or bring their lunch to the center in the hopes that
students will feel comfortable and more likely to participate.
The SI leaders are
understood to be key people of the organization and in much of the literature,
training and organizational discourse, we have been labeled as “model students”.
Because of this, some of the cultural norms or “do’s and don’ts”
would support this belief system as well. As SI leaders we must model
excellent student behavior. We are instructed to be on time, sit
in the front of the class and take notes. We are required to take
tests along with the students. This serves to ensure the instructors’
confidence in our academic abilities, shows the students our competence
of the material with our good grades, and allows students to view us as
more “peer-like” rather than as an instructor.
Several reward systems
are in place that is enveloped in the organizational culture. A trophy
is bestowed upon the SI leader who has had the best attendance for the
semester. A dinner is given in recognition and honor of this achievement
in which all SI leaders laud and regale the guest of honor.
Again, as previously shown before, the message that these activities send
is that attendance is of paramount importance. No award is given
to leaders whose students have a high percentage of “C” or better grades.
Although many of the
cultural aspects of the organization support positive student academic
success and achievement, I believe that too much emphasis is placed on
attendance or in persuading students to come to an SI session rather than
on the actual students’ success itself such as would be evidenced by grades.
This unduly puts pressure on the SI leaders who through no fault of their
own, just random selection, are in a class with either students who are
not highly motivated or who have other classes or schedules that prohibit
them from attending SI sessions. The negative result of attendance
emphasis is that one leader was caught misrepresenting his numbers.
He unscrupulously signed the attendance sheet with names of students who
never even attended in order to pad his numbers.
While student head
counts are important to establish the legitimacy of funding a program like
Supplemental Instruction, I would recommend that more emphasis be put on
student achievements such as grades. All the cultural aspects of
the organization such as values, rituals and rewards could emphasize this.
For instance, trophies and honorable mentions could include those leaders
who have the highest percentage of students with grades of a “C” or better.
This would help to promote and emphasize the reason the Academic Support
Center exists in the first place - to foster students’ scholastic success.
The primary perspective
of the organization as organism metaphor is that it understands the importance
of the organization and its relationship to the environment. In other
words, the metaphor understands that organizations are open systems, which
are fluid and constantly undergoing change in relationship to its surroundings.
This can occur externally and internally. The metaphor is relevant and
can be evidenced where I work. For instance, the community college
has taken into consideration the demographics and needs of the population
to which it provides an education. On a larger level, the college
has taken the external nature of the environment into its organizing consideration.
Proof of this is its expansion of the nursing program. The college
is providing training and education in a field that is expanding and growing
as the general population ages. More health care professionals will be
in demand to care for the aging baby boomers. On a more internal level,
the college recognizes that many of its students, in order to be accepted
into such programs as nursing, must first complete courses which are typically
difficult or “high - risk” such as college algebra, chemistry and
anatomy and physiology. In utilizing the SI program, the college
is employing a new, innovative strategy, which transforms the usual way
students are taught and learn. The program targets high - risk courses
rather than high - risk students. The SI program targets those classes
in which 40% of the students fail, thus fulfilling a need to help the students
pass the class and to learn valuable study habits and skills that will
keep them motivated and focused and able to continue their studies. This
in turn increases student enrollment and tuition dollars. The school
recognizes that the SI program positively influences not only individual
student health and well being, but college - wide organizational development
as well. This continuous exchange with the environment is what allows
the college to be defined as an “open system” in which the relationship
between the environment and the internal functioning of the system is recognized
as being symbiotic. There is a state of interaction and mutual dependence
in a situation where the college needs student bodies and tuition dollars
in order to succeed and be fiscally viable and the students need to be
successful in their academic endeavors in order to compete in today’s job
market. The SI program helps the college maintain a “good fit” between
the organization and the environment.
Contingency theory
is part of the organism metaphor, which places an emphasis on an organizations
ability to achieve a “good fit” with its environment. In attempting to
achieve this “good fit”, our supervisor makes a concerted effort to employ
appropriate people who will fit into the culture of the organization, i.e.
people with interpersonal skills who can initiate a relationship with students
and sustain a healthy rapport with the instructors and people who are committed
to engaging students in the learning process. For instance when hiring
potential SI leaders, someone with excellent academic credentials but with
poor interpersonal skills would be avoided. Since the dominant ethos
of the organization is that SI leaders are key people who must relate to
students on their level in a non - intimidating manner, our supervisor
would avoid seeking someone who didn’t establish that fit or balance.
For instance one individual that she hired was highly knowledgeable in
the field that he was leading but because he insisted on wearing formal
attire (dressing more like a teacher rather than student) and because he
acknowledged to the students the fact that he held post-graduate degrees,
they stayed away and he had virtually no participation, presumably because
students felt intimidated. He did not achieve a “good fit” because
he did not fit the SI leader model, which is that SI should be peer facilitated.
The organism metaphor
also adopts the philosophy that organizations must meet the needs of the
people who are employed and this often times can be achieved by the organizations
structure and managerial style. Our supervisor has always adopted
a decentralized, autonomous, democratic, employee - centered kind of working
environment. We tutors conduct our work with very little supervision.
We are given full discretion and personal leeway as to how to conduct our
sessions. We are left to our own devices regarding records of our
hours worked. She instills trust by adopting an honor system
whereby employees sign themselves “in” and “out.” Adhering to the
metaphor, she sees that employees are satisfied at many different hierarchical
levels. Despite the job of SI leader being part-time, the salary
is rather good. At 12 dollars an hour, it satisfies physiological
needs. Social needs are met through annual all-expenses-paid trips
where leaders relax, socialize and bond. Ego needs are met through
“employee of the semester” awards and the sense of responsibility we derive
from the job has lent a self-actualizing dimension to our work - that it
is extremely rewarding to lead others in making a positive difference in
their lives.
Despite all of the
above-mentioned benefits of working for an organismic organization, there
are some drawbacks and limitations to the organization as organism metaphor
as applied to my place of employment. Although harmony and selfless
devotion to the students is stressed I would suggest that the program recognize
that dissension and conflict is inevitable and not necessarily unhealthy.
I would like to see the program give more attention to the role of power
a bit more. For instance since high attendance is coveted and recorded,
why not incorporate a little healthy competition into it. Perhaps
the SI leaders for the social sciences could compete with the SI leaders
in mathematics for most student attendance.
Another change that
I would implement would to be to recognize that SI is not the “one best
way” to remedy students’ academic course work needs. As a model,
it is not the one true form as it is sometimes portrayed. One-on-one
tutoring may sometimes better fulfill a students’ needs or perhaps students
would more fully understand an assignment by discussing material with the
instructor. Furthermore, there are other academic resources on campus
such as the writing and math labs or soft ware tutorials that could better
serve students. I would suggest that the ASC promote awareness that
there are other options available.
The organization as
psychic prison metaphor explores the avenues by which people become unconsciously
trapped by particular ways of thinking thus making change difficult.
The metaphor delves into the hidden human psyche of the unconscious mind
in order to understand certain dimensions of organizational life.
One can apply a psychoanalytical, Freudian perspective of analysis to understand
how employees’ personality traits have an effect on the organization.
Another form of the organization
as psychic prison metaphor contends that our anxiety over the dynamics
of a situation causes us to become unfocused and lose sight of the needed
tasks at hand. Sometimes this aspect is revealed in the fight-flight
response in which the group focuses its hidden anxiety onto a real or imagined
enemy of some kind. In much like the above aforementioned incident
in which events can have a detrimental effect on an individual’s psyche,
groups of people can be responsible for this behavior as well. I
remember this response pattern manifesting in my organization when the
employees of the Academic Support Center heard rumors that the college
was reorganizing, that our program was being shut down and that the Math
and Science Learning Center was going to inhabit our space. We members
of the ASC soon projected our fear of job loss on to the members of the
Math and Science Learning Center. We viewed them as competition or
“the enemy out to get us”. As a result, gossip, name calling of a
derogatory nature and hard feelings ensued between the ASC and the M&SLC.
When both factions discovered that our departments would be merged together,
we had wasted so much time and energy in petty wrangling and conflict that
we almost lost our ability to cooperate and cope with the current reality,
which was that we would be working together.
In both of these cases,
trouble could have been deflected if we had acknowledged the unconscious
paranoia that is prevalent in human modes of existence whether in individuals
or group situations. If, rather than judging the secretary’s behavior
as weird and irrational we had recognized that her dysfunctional family
situation had been the basis of her behavior we could have better helped
her. Perhaps her negative energy could have been released in a more
positive form had she been given some time off or if we had expressed our
concern and support. I recommend that she should have been allowed
to have “her space” and behave in the manner that she did, if just for
a time, because to do otherwise would run counter to her very sense of
self at the time and therefore be unhealthy to her psyche.
In the situation with
the Math and Science Learning Center we could have adopted more constructive
ways to deal with fear. Perhaps we could have solicited the M&SLC
for mutual support and understanding rather than affixing them as the enemy.
Rather than seeing them as a perceived danger we could have focused more
on the situation at hand, confronting it with honesty and openness. We
also should not have “jumped to conclusions” about the fate of our department.
The psychic prison metaphor is useful in helping us understand why and
how people are attracted to single-looping. Had we been more lucid
and aware, we should have realized that double-looping would have actually
given us more control and staved off our internal paranoia by allowing
us to detect this behavior and initiate corrective action.
The organization
as a political system metaphor posits that organizations are political
systems in which the relationships between conflict power and interests
within individuals and groups must be understood. Power can be seen as
a method by which conflicts of interest are resolved. It can be viewed
as a resource that determines who gets what, when and how. Power
can sometimes be wielded through ones control of scarce resources.
In the organizational
setting that in which I work, access to funds and money is limited and
scarce especially for allocating something as seemingly frivolous as an
out of town trip. However that is precisely what my supervisor does.
She arranges for herself and all of the SI leaders to sourjourn on an all
expenses paid trip/workshop usually to a very appealing locale like for
instance San Francisco, California, where we are traveling this year.
This is quite a coup considering that we are part-time temporary workers.
There are many part-time employees working at the college in many different
departments and some even working in the same capacity -that of educational
assistant, but no other group enjoys the privilege and benefit of a trip.
How is my boss able to procure this trip? The answer lies in the
understanding and use of organizational sources of power.
First of all, let’s
explore the source of formal power my supervisor possesses. She owns
personality characteristics such as charisma, warmth and grace. She
is thoroughly liked and respected by her peers, associates, workers and
students. She has received several outstanding employee awards from
the institution as well as some community - based service awards.
These qualities seem to legitimize her authority to wield some power in
influencing the “powers that be” that approve these trips.
Her ability to control
resources like the money to finance a trip underpins the power structure
between herself and her employees. In a sense she owns the power
because she has the discretion to apply for the grant for the trip.
We employees realize this so in a sense her power is used to buy loyalty
and commitment from her workers. We employees are instructed to control
the decision process through our own power to control certain elements
regarding the trip application procedure. The built in assumptions
and beliefs are that we employees will fill out the application in such
a manner as to positively influence the outcome of the decision.
For example, one criterion for attending an out of town workshop is that
we testify in writing that we have aspirations to teach. This may
not necessarily be true. We are instructed how to influence the outcome
of the decision by first filling out a sample application. If it
is not deemed persuasive enough we are instructed to “do a better job”
and reminded that this trip is contingent on our ability to effectively
convey valid reasons for wanting this trip.
Another factor in
my supervisor’s adeptness in obtaining the trip is the informal networks
and alliances she has forged. She is a close, personal friend to
one of the persons responsible for approving the trips. She is the
godmother to this person’s child. They lunch together frequently
and perhaps because they are two of only a few black women who work professionally
at the college, they have formed a social bond in which they derive strength,
support and power for one another that is mutually beneficial. And
finally, my supervisor uses symbolic management as a source of power to
secure the trip for her employees. As a type of impression management,
when she meets in front of the board for ultimate approval she dresses
in a “power suit” and carries her black leather briefcase whereas on other
days she does not take such care with her appearance. She dresses
to dramatize and enhance her power to convey the message that she has competence
and authority and thereby deserves to have her demands met. She is
trying to shape the outcome with imagery of power to achieve her goals.
Political systems
are inevitable and endemic to all organizations whether they are openly
discussed or not. Power plays a constructive role in the creation
of social order. It is not necessarily dysfunctional to have a power
structure in an organization. Regarding the metaphor in my workplace,
since I am a direct beneficiary of the power structure and its outcome
is in my best self-interests, I would not necessarily change this policy
because I directly benefit, and in thinking so, this metaphor allows me
to understand how rationality is usually always political. I can
rationalize that this trip is justified because it is a learning experience
or it makes up for not having medical benefits, however it suits my agenda
to say so. The metaphor allows me see myself as a political actor
in the organization. The problem I see is that the organization stresses
teamwork and a “we’re all in this together” ideology yet some employees
are not invited on this trip such as the peer tutors and student office
workers. It would be more egalitarian and harmonious and create more
unity if everyone were invited. However from a pluralist perspective,
this inequality can be used as a tool by my boss to compel the peer tutors
to work hard and get promoted so they too can one day take this trip.
If the ultimate form of power lies in allowing the people involved to define
the way in which politics is played, then policy would contend that the
whole organization should have input as to where, when and who takes these
trips. Although this would solve the somewhat trivial problem of
a trip, it does not solve the overall larger dynamics of power structures
that are systemic in organizations and societies at large.
Applying metaphors
to real workplace situations enables one to effectively analyze and understand
the strengths and limitations of the metaphors from a personal perspective
not just metaphoric discourse. All in all, the organization in which
I am employed is a highly positive and affirming place to work. I
was nearly tempted to exaggerate situations to make them sound more contemptuous
than they really were but refrained because to do so would not allow me
the proper insights into my organizations structure (and besides that would
be cheating and I would never do that). Learning and using organizational
metaphors has helped me to become skilled and adept in recognizing and
reading organizational situations in the workplace and has subsequently
taught me how to apply real solutions to real problems.