The Dilemmas of Participative Management of a University
November 9, 2010
The Dilemmas of Participative Management of a University The group developed initiatives that differed so much from President Brittle’s expectations because President Brittle did not give them an orientation. Instead she placed a group of departmental professionals together and asked them to “design a series of strategic initiatives for the school that both capitalize on the existing strengths and that are responsive to emerging social trends.” (Organizational Communication, 2010, pg216) In my opinion that was not enough information for the team to work with. She should have spelled out exactly what she wanted placing emphasis on the fact that she wanted to see some new and innovative ideas. President Brittle could have avoided the “groupthink” in the team members by attending the first session and explaining that no idea is right and no idea is wrong and encouraging everyone to share an idea, whether good or bad. This would have given the team a crystal clear idea of what was expected and it would have given the team member that really does not speak up the encouragement to do so. The benefits of encouraging employee participation in decision making would be the fact that the employee will feel that they have a voice and they will be more inclined to follow the guidelines. Why? Because, when the team member and/or participant helps to build guidelines they will follow them and encourage others to do the same. For example, my daughter and I decide to take weekly turns washing dishes in the evenings. We decide that the dishes must be washed every evening or that person has to wash dishes for an additional week. The two of us are going to follow the course of action we discussed and the agreed upon standard because we do not want to deal with the consequences. The challenges of employee participation would be the constant conflict and disagreements, given that, team mates do not always respect the other’s right and/or
The Dilemmas of Participative Management of a University The group developed initiatives that differed so much from President Brittle’s expectations because President Brittle did not give them an orientation. Instead she placed a group of departmental professionals together and asked them to “design a series of strategic initiatives for the school that both capitalize on the existing strengths and that are responsive to emerging social trends.” (Organizational Communication, 2010, pg216) In my opinion that was not enough information for the team to work with. She should have spelled out exactly what she wanted placing emphasis on the fact that she wanted to see some new and innovative ideas. President Brittle could have avoided the “groupthink” in the team members by attending the first session and explaining that no idea is right and no idea is wrong and encouraging everyone to share an idea, whether good or bad. This would have given the team a crystal clear idea of what was expected and it would have given the team member that really does not speak up the encouragement to do so. The benefits of encouraging employee participation in decision making would be the fact that the employee will feel that they have a voice and they will be more inclined to follow the guidelines. Why? Because, when the team member and/or participant helps to build guidelines they will follow them and encourage others to do the same. For example, my daughter and I decide to take weekly turns washing dishes in the evenings. We decide that the dishes must be washed every evening or that person has to wash dishes for an additional week. The two of us are going to follow the course of action we discussed and the agreed upon standard because we do not want to deal with the consequences. The challenges of employee participation would be the constant conflict and disagreements, given that, team mates do not always respect the other’s right and/or
References: Eisenberg, Eric. M., Goodall Jr., H.L., & Trethewey, A. (2010). Organizational Communication: Balancing Creativity and Constraint, 6th Edition; Boston: Bedford/St. Martin 's