Evolution of Formal Organization 1
Evolution of Formal Organization
[Your Name Here]
[University Name Here]
Evolution of Formal Organization
The evolution of formal organization has it own story. Different groups were known to exist since the early period of existence and most of them turned as form of different organizations. As the world and the humans went on evolution, the way how the organizations functioned also underwent on different phases of changes. With improvement in living conditions and changes in the laws and policies of living, formal organizations also implemented and adapted new theories. Improvements in many aspects of formal organizations took place which caused significant changes which caused great impacts on human life.
We know that there are different kinds of groups. A large secondary group organized to attain certain goals efficiently, operating in a deliberate way not to meet personal needs but to accomplish complex jobs is what is known as formal organization. Business corporations and government agencies are examples of formal organization. Tracing back from the early years, the characteristics of organizations has completely changed in many ways. The hardships experienced with the hierarchy and rigidity of the bureaucratic organizations, formal organization was born. It went over hardship and challenges to gain from its evolutionary changes.
As a great social and political challenge, the race and gender issuebecame great challenges faced by formal organization. Females and members of minority groups were excluded from large formal organizations. Females and other minorities were considered as weak, less effective and less competent members of the organization thus more advantages were grasped by the male gender. O the early years, Japanese organization was known to exist which reflectedthe nation’s collective spirit and that posed as another great in the development of formal organizations. The United States organizations’ hiring and advancement strategies involved promotion and raises in salaries as rewards to be achieved by winning in individual competitions. Meanwhile, the Japanese organizations strategies involved hiring of new school graduates together who were given the same salary and responsibilities. There was also a big difference in the employee’s lifetime security. It was common for a U.S. employee to move from one company to another for career advancement and layoffs during economic set back were a usual event. For the Japanese organizations, workers are usually hired for a lifetime, fostering a mutual loyalty between the workers and the company who usually have holistic involvement to the worker’s life providing them home mortgages, sponsor recreational activities, and schedule social events. For U.S. organizations, the workers home and workplace are viewed as separate entity. U.S workers were obtained highly specialized training specific on a certain thing while the Japanese workers had broad-based training in all phases of the operation. The aspect of decision making was also in big difference as U.S. organizations mainly relied on their executives while the Japanese gave roles to the workers to participate in dealing with issues. The challenges in work activities were significant in the evolution of the formal organizations. The nature of many jobs currently is far different from a century ago. For instance, the simple works of artists would now demand creativity and imagination. The methods of doing works differ in various ways as compared to past centuries. The development of competitive work teams enhanced every member’s creative contribution and lessened the alienation often found in conventional organizations.
Formal organizations also went through evolutionary change in its structural shape. The pyramid shape of conventional bureaucracy gradually turned into a flatter organizational form having fewer levels in the chain of command. The modern organizations greatly increased its flexibility. The typical industrial age organization has a rigid structure guided from the top. The information age model is a highly flexible organizationgenerating new ideas adapting quickly in a rapidly changing global marketplace. This model represents most of the current formal organizations that has adopted evolutionary changes.
Communication and feedback mechanisms within the various parts of the organization also took part on the evolution. Formal checks and balances of power and authority kept the organizational structure strong and effective. The formal organizations evolved in much the same manner as the other social groups. Statuses and roles become more specialized and differentiated as they got larger and as so with environment changes, the organizational needs and demands do change as well.
Technological advancement is now the current trends associated to formal organizations. With the advent of computer and information technologies, members of formal organizations are facing a tremendous decline in social relations and interaction giving more room to computers and online deals. More organizational tasks are now highly relying on computers and high technologies. Adaptation of new learning models is implemented.“The amount and frequency of work driven by tacit knowledge - complex interactions which require that people handle ambiguity and solve problems based on experience - are on the rise.”(Suave, E., Communities of Practice) This trend enlarges the training and development strategy of organizations with the evolution of youngest internet generation of knowledge workers known as ‘millennials’. It is challenge to organizations to eliminate hierarchy and corporate bottlenecks, open up internal communications, and provide ongoing training and development opportunities to draw the interest of these younger group. The technological advancements also changed the communication preferences and expectations of all generations of workers. The constant changes of technology have strong impacts on the different aspects of organization obliging the community to remain upgraded to cope up with the new trends and techniques.
The differences between the small and formal organization closely resemble the differences presented by the challenges met since the early evolution of the formal organization.
Based on the given scenario, Micah’s organization is still enslaved with bureaucratic principles. It has to go through different changes to become more open and flexible. The specific roles and powers of authorities and all the members in her organization need to be redefined. Without which, the higher authorities opportunities to establish their own positions will continue without providing a room to make some changes in the pyramidal model structure of authority. There is a need to establish a clear line of communication with timely feedback and active participation of members.
All the members must take responsibility and must be aware that responsibility is not solely for authorities and administrators but for the entire organization members to partake. By then, the organization will open the door to be more effective. There is also a need for Micah’s company to appoint staff based on their competence. Considering provision of highly specialized training will enhance their capabilities in performing specific tasks. There is also a need to set specific rules and regulations with more focus on the task carried out by the members rather than giving emphasis on the personality of a member. These changes will hopefully make Micah’s organization move forward faster.
Designing and establishing a succession planning system is believed to assist in identifying and developing the top talent within the organization that ensures a continuous pipeline or bench strength into key positions and demonstrates that the organization has the right people with the right skills moving into the right position within the right timeframe. (SHRM Case Study, 2005)
Foresightful organization is described as an organization that has sharpened its ability to see, to observe, to perceive what is going on both externally and internally, and to respond accordingly with members who spontaneously forge connections between past, present, and future. (Tsoukas Shepherd, 2004)
Those trends surely take place and will take popularity not in the future. Some organizations in fact havealready adapted them and are now taking part in the formal organizations.
This research paper providesidea formal organizations such as that of Micah’s has great chances of evolving from a bureaucratic organization into a better structure. How the company will change will depend largely on how the company will implement changes. Organizational evolution and progress do not take place through mere coincidence. For changes to happen, and for the success of formal organization, entire members from the top officials down to the lowest constituents need to move and act. The success of the organization will be determined by their actions and inactions.
References
Hansen, M. Social groups, the evolution of formal organizations, and integrity.
Integrity (Spring Semester 2003) Vol.5. No. 2. Retrieved September 08, 2008 from http://web.sau.edu/aaup/Complete%205-2.pdf
Suave, E. Communities of practice: Addressing workforce trends through new
learning models. Relearn Magazine. Retrieved September 08, 2008 from case study: establishing a successful plan (November 2005). Society for
Human Resource Management. Retrieved September 08, 2008 from H. and Shepherd J. Managing the future. (March 22, 2004). Retrieved September 08, 2008 from ple_chapter/1405116145/Tsoukas_sample%20chapter_Managing%20the%20f uture.pdf