Org 727 – Diagnosing Riordan Manufacturing Intervention Matrix
Essay Preview: Org 727 – Diagnosing Riordan Manufacturing Intervention Matrix
Report this essay
Diagnosing Riordan Manufacturing Intervention Matrix
Dick Bridy
University of Phoenix
ORG/727 Organizational Diagnosis and Intervention
Richard DeParis, DPA
Diagnosing Riordan Manufacturing Intervention Matrix
The following presentation is built on the foundation of Weeks Four and Five ORG/727 Organizational Diagnosis and Intervention papers. The organization is the Riordan Manufacturing (Riordan) case (Apollo Group, Inc., 2009). The analysis will be completed in phases using an Intervention Matrix as provided in Table 1. The first phase will be the written problem and purpose statements, based on the issues affecting employee behavior. The second phase will be the performance analysis in terms of at least two causes and supported by relevant organizational development (OD) theories. The third phase will detail two interventions for each cause, and the advantages, and disadvantages of each intervention. The submission will conclude with the rationale for the choice of interventions based on supporting literature.
Organizational development (OD) defined
“OD is a long range effort to improve an organizations problem solving and renewal processes, particularly through more effective and collaborative management of organizational culture” (Brown, 2011, p. 129). Warren Bennis (Burke, Lake, & Paine, 2008) adds OD is a multifaceted strategy calculated to transform the attitudes, values, beliefs, and organizational structure to facilitate new technologies. Brown (2011) adds that “the process is accomplished with the assistance of a catalyst, an internal or external change agent and technology of applied behavioral science” (p. 129).
Problem Statement
Riordan Manufacturing has identified problems affecting employee behavior that can directly affect the organizations mission effectiveness.
The root causes
The most important clients of any company are the employees. The Riordan employees lack adequate compensation, motivation, and morale, thus the company risks losing talent. The key issues affecting Riordan center on employee compensation, motivation, and the human resource development (HRD) process. Motivational issues are driven by a lack of leadership within the organization and a deficient human resource management system. In addition to these shortcomings, upper management tends to focus on personal agendas and the importance of one department in the organization rather than systems and subsystems that interact in a synchronous fashion toward a unified vision (Moseley & Dessinger, 2010).
The effect
The human resource development issues left alone will amplify these serious problems within the organization and impede the actualization of the Riordan mission. As stated in the mission, “the employees are entitled to an innovative and team-oriented working environment. The employees are to be informed and properly supported. Riordan pledges to provide a climate focused on the long term viability of the company” (Apollo Group, Inc., 2009). Viability in a scientific model is the ability to function as an autonomous system (Viability, 2011). Viability in the Riordan context is a function of the relationship of processes to organizational input (resources) and outputs (objectives) by effectively using inputs/resources (personnel, materials, money, and time). To maintain viability, it is incumbent on the organization to align internal activities with the mission. The future of Riordan is founded on the principle that all systems “must be focused in achieving and maintaining reasonable profitability and to ensure that the financial and human capital is available for sustained growth” (Apollo Group, Inc., 2009).
One solution
Riordan Manufacturing must effectively increase employee retention rates and build affinity for employment at Riordan. One human resource development (HRD) strategy and policy modification is called for by tendering value-added human resources benefits including coaching, career growth opportunities, constructive feedback, and reward system that are based on a pay-performance that reflects the Riordan vision.
Purpose Statement
The purpose of the intervention is to increase employee job satisfaction and individual productivity by initiating the human resource means to improve job satisfaction, overall performance, compensation alternatives, and to position the organization for future growth.
Performance Analysis
The Riordan employees have numerous personal interests. However, there is evidence that there are two primary causes for issues affecting employee behavior. The first is financial; the second is cultural (Apollo Group, Inc., 2009).
Cause one
The employees believe that Riordan fails to provide proper financial compensation and recognition (Apollo Group, Inc., 2009).
OD theory
The force field analysis model examines organizational behavior as “a dynamic equilibrium of forces working in opposite directions” (Change factors -Lewin, 2011, para. 1; Schein, 1995). Organizations experience forces that push for change and forces that inhibit change. The stability forces are called restraining forces. The opposite forces are labeled driving forces. Driving forces mandate change. When forces and against change are equal, the result is equilibrium (Brown, 2011). In the current environment of employee unrest, the organization is unstable. The employees are demanding a change in the compensation and recognition programs, management resists.
Cause two
The employees believe that they are not a part of Riordans corporate culture. For example, the personnel are delegated to lose knit teams and receive little direction from superiors. The Riordan systems and subsystems fail to interact in a synchronous fashion toward the desired mission, sustained competitive advantage. To that end, the Riordan hierarchy fails to implement a sense of processes with the environment. The lower-level personnel perceive a disconnect between the leaderships view at the top and the employee processes at the bottom. The environment is changing, but the organization is failing to modify the vision and mission