1.9 Organizational Research Procedures
Because of their large and diffuse nature, organizations invite their own specialized procedures. Five common ones are sociometry, position analysis, communications analysis, discretionary analysis, and comparative analysis.
Sociometry
In All group members are asked to indicate their relationship on a specified dimension with every member of the group., all group members are asked to indicate their relationship on a specified dimension with every member of the group. The task may be, for instance, "List everybody you like," "Name the people you would approach to get something done," or "Next to each name, give the number of messages you sent last month." By combining all the responses, the researcher can diagram the relationships, competence ratings, and communication effectiveness.
Position Analysis
The Comparing the job requirements with the abilities of each job holder. researcher compares the job requirements with the abilities of each job holder. The purpose is to effect an optimal match between abilities and requirements and to uncover any mismatches. When a discrepancy is discovered, the tasks may be altered or employees may be reassigned.
For instance, a sales manager is responsible for responding to the performance of the sales representatives. The reps enter their orders into a new computer system on a daily basis, but the manager is not computer literate and so can respond only to data on the quarterly sales summaries. Following the position analysis, the manager is asked to either turn the feedback function over to someone who can interpret the daily computer data, or learn how to operate the computer system.
Communications Analysis
To perform Tracing the path of a message to reveal at what step it is delayed or blocked, simply passed on, or elaborated or acted upon., the researcher traces the path of a message to reveal at what step it is delayed or blocked, simply passed on, or elaborated or acted upon. The formal communication structures can be contrasted with the "grapevine" (discussed in Chapter 6), and the messages can be analyzed for content.
For example, a firm is troubled by frequent rumors and by complaints of inadequate communication. All employees are asked to participate in a research project to determine the nature and extent of communication lapses. They are furnished with a "communications record" form that lists each hour of the workday for a week. Whenever they receive any kind of message related to the company, they are to note on the form what the message was and the level of the person from whom it was received. The researcher analyzes the hand-ins and makes recommendations; the management evaluates the proposals and decides what changes to make. A copy of the report, along with any changes decided upon, is sent to all the participants.
Discretionary Analysis
One way of evaluating the status of employees is to analyze their freedom to work unsupervised; this technique is termed Analyzing employee's freedom to work unsupervised. because it measures how much discretion the employees have. They may be asked, "For what length of time do you perform your assigned tasks using your own judgment, without the direct review of your superiors?" Generally, the less the direct control, the higher the worker's competence, responsibility, and pay expectations.
Comparative Analysis
The study of one organization can be facilitated by performing a Comparing one organization or variable to another organization or variable. of other organizations. For instance, college students complain that they have too little input into administrative decisions that affect them. The student leaders ask the administration for a response and also survey their counterparts at other schools. They may find that whereas their institution has the best record with respect to student representation on committees and student services, in terms of dispute-resolution programs other schools serve their students better. Armed with the comparative analysis survey results, the leaders publicize the role of students on committees, write an article in the student newspaper commending the excellence of student services, and prevail upon their administration to appoint an "ombudsperson" to mediate student complaints.
These individuals represent a mix of academics, consultants and business leaders, were identified in a study initially published in May 2002 by Accenture (the international firm of consultants). Accenture defined them as business intellectuals but they are probably better known as management gurus or business experts. They are thought leaders, providing the latest and best business thinking. Each enjoys "guru" status.
-
Michael E. Porter
-
Tom Peters
-
Robert Reich
-
Peter Drucker
-
Peter Senge
-
Gary S. Becker
-
Gary Hamel
-
Alvin Toffler
-
Hal Varian
-
Daniel Goleman
-
Rosabeth Moss Kanter
-
Ronald Coase
-
Lester Thurow
-
Charles Handy
-
Henry Mintzberg
-
Michael Hammer
-
Stephen Covey
-
Warren Bennis
-
Bill Gates
-
Jeffrey Pfeffer
-
Philip Kotler
-
Robert C. Merton
-
C. K. Prahalad
-
Thomas H. Davenport
-
Don Tapscott
-
John Seely Brown
-
George Gilder
-
Kevin Kelly
-
Chris Argyris
-
Robert Kaplan
-
Esther Dyson
-
Edward de Bono
-
Jack Welch
-
John Kotter
-
Ken Blanchard
-
Edward Tufte
-
Kenichi Ohmae
-
Alfred Chandler
-
James MacGregor Burns
-
Sumantra Ghoshal
-
Edgar Schein
-
Myron S. Scholes
-
James March
-
Richard Branson
-
Anthony Robbins
-
Clay(ton) Christensen
-
Michael Dell
-
John Naisbitt
-
David Teece
-
Don Peppers
For more information on each of these gurus, you may follow the links at http://derekstockley.com.au/guru.html.