Information To The Engineering Department example essay topic

Introduction The Power Case Study has dealing with changes that can shift the power base from one department to the other. By introducing a new total quality philosophy changes in group dynamics have taken place. This had led to a loss of dependency to the engineering group and consequently to a loss of their power. Question 1 Explain your understanding of power. Identify the sources of power available to participants in this case.

Power is the capacity of a person, a team, or organization to influence others. It is not the act of changing others' attitude or behaviour; it is only the potential to do so. Mostly people even do not know that they have power, or they know and do not use it. The most basic prerequisite of power is that one party believes he or she is dependent on the other for something of value. Within an organization you might have power over others by controlling a desired job assignment, useful information, important resources, or even the privilege of being associated with you. The fact that power is ultimately a perception, makes the matter more complex.

That is the reason why people might gain power simply by convincing others that they have something of value. Hence, power exists when others believe that you control resources that they want. Although power requires dependence, it is really more accurate to say that the parties are interdependent. One party may be more dependent than the other, but the relationship exists only when both parties have something of value to the other. The above shown exhibit demonstrates the weaker party's power (person B) over the dominant participant (person A). This counter power is strong enough to maintain person A's participation in the exchange relationship.

In this case study for example, the engineering executive (technical director) has power over subordinates (five technical managers) by controlling their job security and promotional opportunities. At the same time, employees for example have counter power by controlling the ability to work productively and thereby creating a positive impression of the supervisor to his or her boss. They are expected to work harmoniously and not to create strikes and lockouts. Counter power usually motivates executives to apply their power judiciously, so that the relationship is not broken. Reflecting these situations in an organisational association in general the division of labour and hierarchy lead to vertical and horizontal dependency. Dependency means that one element is dependent on another for resources, for example goods, services, finance and expertise.

This makes it possible for one element to influence another. Power in organisations involves more than just dependence. It involves both power sources and contingencies. In this case study for example we have got a power shift from the engineering department to the manufacturing and purchasing departments.

In the past the company was less dependent on its overseas counterparts and so the engineering department was the driving force of all operations. This indicates that power is derived from formal and informal sources. The formal sources of power are: Legitimate, reward, coercive and information. The informal sources of power are: Expert, referent and connection. In general these sources yield power only under certain conditions. Legitimate, reward, coercive and information are power bases which derived from the power holders' position; that means that the person receives power because of the specific authority or role he or she is assigned in the organisation.

The latter sources of power (expert, referent and connection) originate from the power holders' own characteristics; the person brings these sources of power to the organization. Not all sources of power are relevant to this case study. The following sources of power have been identified. The sources of power: Legitimate power Legitimate power is an agreement among organizational members that people in certain roles can request certain behaviours of others.

This perceived right comes from job descriptions as well as informal rules of conduct. People in high power distance cultures are more likely to comply with legitimate power than are people in low power distance cultures. In general, employees are becoming less tolerant of legitimate power. Increasingly, they expect to be involved in decisions rather than be told what to do.

In context to this case study engineering used to have this power to direct the organisational resources. The manufacturing and purchasing departments have inherited much of the responsibility for the companies's access. And also the technical director has legitimate power which he uses for his personal gain. Reward power The capacity to influence others by controlling the allocation of rewards valued by them and removing negative sanctions.

Managers have formal authority that gives them power over the distribution of organizational rewards such as payment, time off and vacation schedules. In context with this case study the technical director of the engineering department has reward power in terms of giving promotions to his team but does not exert it. Coercive power Coercive power means the ability to apply punishment. Managers have coercive power through their authority to reprimand, demote and fire employees.

The technical director in this case study has the opportunity to use coercive power but it is not mentioned. Expert power Expert power originates from within a person. It is an individuals' or work units' capacity to influence others by possessing knowledge or skills that others want. This power was held by the engineering department in the past.

This power now has been transferred to the manufacturing and purchasing department who use ex-engineering staff to solve issues and problems. As part of the companies push towards "total quality" the quality control group is now increasing their expert power. Referent power People have referent power when others identify with them, like them, or otherwise respect them. It is the capacity to influence others based on the identification and respect they have for the power holder. The technical director does have the referent power because of his knowledge and his long-service with the company, which he uses outside of the company to bring prestige to himself and the company. Information power Also Information is power.

Information power derives from either the legitimate or expert sources of power described above and exists in two forms: 1. Control over the flow and information given to others. 2. The perceived ability to cope with organizational uncertainties. Information coming into and out of the company is intercepted at the directorate level and is routed by delegates.

The technical director does not pass much information to the engineering department. This is in direct contrast to most other departments. Control over information flow is also mentioned as invisible power. Invisible power enables: Control of agendas and the way propositions are formulated and presented. Non-decision making in the sense of not allowing debate on alternative perspectives to emerge. Enlisting widely held beliefs and values to support a particular point of view.

Utilising organisational procedures, rules and systems for ones' own advantage. Latent intimidation. Structuring work relationships so as to prevent, avoid or divide significant opposition. The engineering department was dispersed on to various sites which led to the lack of departmental cohesion. Capitalizing on "institutional biases" whereby some actors benefit more from existing organisational arrangements than others. As mentioned in this case study organizations operate in changing environments, so they require information to reduce the uncertainty of future events.

The more the organisation can cope with the uncertainty of future events, the more easily it can achieve its goal. There are three general strategies to help this organisation to cope with uncertainty. These coping strategies are arranged in a hierarchy of importance, with the first being the most powerful. Prevention- The most effective strategy is to prevent environmental changes from occurring. For example, financial experts acquire power by preventing the organisation from experiencing a cash shortage or defaulting on loans Forecasting- The next best strategy is to predict environmental changes or variations. In this respect, marketing specialists gain power by predicting changes in consumer preferences.

Absorption- People and work units also gain power by absorbing or neutralizing the impact of environmental shifts as they occur. An example is the ability of maintenance crews to come to rescue when machines break down and the production process stops Question 2 Identify the symptoms of power loss in Engineering Department. With reference to Hickson and Hinings's trategic contingency view of intraorganisational power, examine how this erosion of power might have occurred. In the engineering department we identified the symptoms of power loss as follows: Centrality Centrality means that employees and departments have more power as their centrality increases. Centrality is the degree and nature of interdependence between the power holder and others. Specifically, centrality increases with a) The number of people affected by your actions (in this case study we have got 200 engineers in the engineering department). b) The speed in which other people are affected by your actions In this case study: The engineering roles are diluted to other department within the company.

Company dispersed the engineers across the company sites caused engineering department lack of the departmental cohesion. Roles conflicts between the engineering group and manufacturing, purchasing and quality control. Engineering group is no longer the driving force for the company operations. Uncertainty In this case study the uncertainty appears as follows: No career path for engineers to grow within the company. Engineering group lack of interdepartmental communication consequently this makes them unable and unwilling to communicate with the other department within the company.

Resulted no career path for engineers to grow within the company. The narrow minded and introspective attitude of the engineering department wherein they did not interact with other departments freely. Non-Substitutability As we mentioned before power is strongest when someone has a monopoly valued resource. Conversely power decreases as the number of alternative sources of the critical resource increases. So how do people and work units increase their power through non-substitutability? These are examples to increase the power through non-substitutability: Controlling tasks: Professions have legislation preventing outsiders from performing certain tasks within their domain.

With reference to this case the marketing department is closely knit on a single floor and has electronic key access preventing ingress of outsiders. Controlling knowledge: The engineering department used to perform these tasks in the past. Controlling labour: This function is now performed by the manufacturing and purchasing department. Differentiation: Differentiation occurs when an individual or work unit claims to have a unique resource-such as raw materials or knowledge-that the organisation would want. As an example the manufacturing and purchasing department used cost reductions and more efficient manufacturing techniques rather than design. As follows we have identified the most important symptoms of power loss in this case study: Engineering related tasks were solved by other department using ex-engineering background instead of using the engineer from the engineering department.

Engineering department no longer the driving force for the company operations Responsibilities were given to other departments. Less involvement of Engineering group and reduction in number of original engineering design projects have been a large concern. This has caused powerless for the engineering group. The shift in the company policy to give importance to quality control and not much importance to the engineering aspect. As previously indicated, where one is located in the structure of the organisation greatly influences ones access to people (connection power) resources (instrumental power) and information (information power). In this case study also the importance of location is demonstrated.

Location in the organisation is also a factor determining the power of sub-units within the organisation. Hickson and Hinings in the Strategic Contingency Theory of Intraorganisational Power argue that power of organisational sub-units, groups or departments is dependent on three factors that we have mentioned and defined above: Centrality, Uncertainty and Non-substitutability. What this three factors together mean, is that sub-units that are more central to the flow of information or key processes, are better able to reduce uncertainty for the organisation as a whole and perform functions that can not easily be replicated, will be more powerful. The engineering department described in the case study were unable to maintain any of these factors which led to the erosion of the power they once had. This means that the engineers were no longer central to the work process and had little or no control over projects. Their futures within the department and their future work prospects were uncertain and because many engineering staff had transferred to other departments, they were not always consulted on problems.

Problems were solved by ex-engineers. Question 3 What changes can you suggest that will increase the Department's power? Refer in your answer to Kanters' ideas about powerlessness. In Kanters' observations of large organisations she identified that three commodities were necessary for productive power: Information, Resources and Support. Acquiring power can be most time consuming. Suggestions to solve the engineering department problems would involve these three commodities.

Information The first area to start with would be the supply of useful information on the operations of the company being given to the department by the Technical Director. When this was occuring the engineers could again become involved in operations and would be able to contribute to the overall input and necessary design modifications. Resources Currently the engineering department is dispersed across many sites, which means their knowledge resource is fragmented. This could be resolved by bringing them back together into a cohesive unit, equipping them with up to date equipment and with the Technical Director enforcing the use of the engineers as a knowledge resource. Support Initially they would need the support of the Technical Director for information supply. After this and with the other suggestions the engineers would find that as a unit they would become less narrow minded and introspective.

If they also enlisted the support of the quality control group who currently have good connection power with the executive and oversee manufacturing quality control, this would assist them in re-integrating into the mainstream operations. As they became more productive and were supplying more and useful information of a higher quality, they would start to gain support from other departments over time. Additionally we make the following suggestions to improve the manufacturing company's situation: The company should sell its ten buildings and should buy / rent a new one, which has enough room to cover all departments. Each department should have its own floor. Executive Meeting rooms & Lunch room / Cafeteria for everyone Finance Marketing Engineers Sales area & Storage rooms Everyone should have access to each department.

The quality control group should be shut down. The 200 engineers should be divided up into 15 teams. Every team / department should be responsible for themselves. Each team should be specialised and responsible for one of the 15 products. A bonus / reward system should be installed. To enhance team work, motivation, new challenges and new ideas job and product rotation should be practiced every 3-5 years.

Each team has one team leader who is responsible to the Engineering Director. Regular Meetings should take place: 1. Weekly meetings: Responsibilities of each department, the Engineering Director and team leaders should come together to exchange information concerning actual financial situation, current customers needs or new won contracts. 2. Quarterly meetings: All employees get together.

Each department gives a short overview / review about its actual situation, problems and success. Communication should be clear and open so that the relationship between co-workers and supervisors and the flow of information can be enhanced. Especially if these meetings take place in a relaxed atmosphere (e.g. BBQ).