QUESTION
Assignment Instructions:
Be sure to use at least two scholarly, peer-reviewed references in support of each answer and also incorporate the key concepts from the course.
Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Discuss why ‘strategic orientation’ is fundamentalto diagnosis in OD. Support your answer using two examples from this case study. (1.5 marks) (Lo 2.9) Q.2Explain why it is important for a group design to be congruent with the larger organization design. Support your answer using an example from this case study (1.5 marks) (Lo 1.5 & 3.1)
Just from $13/Page
Assignment Workload:
This Assignment comprise of a Case study.
Assignment is to be submitted by each student individually.
Assignment Question(s):
Q.1 Discuss why ‘strategic orientation’ is fundamentalto diagnosis in OD. Support your answer using two examples from this case study. (1.5 marks) (Lo 2.9)
Q.2Explain why it is important for a group design to be congruent with the larger organization design. Support your answer using an example from this case study (1.5 marks) (Lo 1.5 & 3.1)
Q.3Based on your understanding of the group-level diagnostic model, describe and evaluate each of the Ortiv’s teamdesign components:
– Goal clarity (1 mark)(Lo 2.5)
– Task structure (1 mark)(Lo 2.5)
– Team functioning (1 mark)(Lo 2.5)
– Group composition (1 mark)(Lo 2.5)
– Group norms (1 mark)(Lo 2.5)
Q.4Discuss how the group design of Ortiv’s Glass Corporation could positively or negatively impacts on the diagnosis of design components at the individual level.(2 Marks) (Lo 2.9)
ANSWER
Q.1 Discuss why ‘strategic orientation’ is fundamental to diagnosis in OD. Support your answer using two examples from this case study. (1.5 marks) (Lo 2.9)
Strategic orientation is crucial in the diagnosis phase of Organizational Development (OD) because it aligns the organization’s actions and interventions with its overall strategic direction. It helps in identifying the gaps between the current state and the desired future state of the organization. Two examples from the case study that illustrate the importance of strategic orientation in diagnosis are as follows:
Example 1
In the case study, Ortiv’s Glass Corporation aims to transition from a traditional manufacturing company to a technology-driven organization. The strategic orientation of the company is focused on innovation, efficiency, and staying ahead of the competition. During the diagnosis phase, understanding the organization’s strategic orientation becomes vital to identify the areas where the current design and functioning may hinder the desired transformation. By considering the strategic orientation, OD practitioners can diagnose the gaps in technology adoption, skill requirements, and organizational culture that may hinder the company’s strategic goals.
Example 2
Another aspect of strategic orientation in the case study is the company’s emphasis on sustainability and environmental responsibility. Ortiv’s Glass Corporation is committed to reducing its ecological footprint and promoting sustainable practices. When conducting the diagnosis, the strategic orientation towards sustainability becomes a key factor in assessing the organization’s design and functioning. OD practitioners need to evaluate how the group and individual design components align with the company’s commitment to sustainability. This could involve assessing the team’s awareness of environmental impact, their ability to integrate sustainability practices into their tasks, and the composition of the group to ensure diversity and expertise related to sustainability.
In both examples, strategic orientation acts as a guiding principle that helps OD practitioners focus their diagnosis efforts on specific areas that are aligned with the organization’s strategic goals. It ensures that the diagnosis is targeted and relevant to the desired outcomes, allowing for more effective interventions during the subsequent stages of the OD process.
Q.2 Explain why it is important for a group design to be congruent with the larger organization design. Support your answer using an example from this case study (1.5 marks) (Lo 1.5 & 3.1)
It is essential for a group design to be congruent with the larger organization design to ensure alignment, coordination, and efficient functioning of the organization as a whole. When the group design aligns with the organization design, it promotes synergy, collaboration, and effective communication. An example from the case study highlights the significance of congruence between group design and organization design:
Example: Ortiv’s Glass Corporation is structured into multiple cross-functional teams responsible for different product lines. Each team has its own goals, tasks, and composition. However, the overall organization design is based on a matrix structure, where functional departments such as R&D, manufacturing, and marketing have a significant influence on the teams’ activities.
If the group design of the cross-functional teams is not congruent with the larger organization design, it can lead to several challenges. For instance, if the teams operate in isolation without considering the broader organizational goals and objectives, there can be a lack of coordination and integration. The teams may develop their own norms, processes, and objectives that might not align with the overall organizational strategy. This can result in silos, conflicts, and suboptimal decision-making.
On the other hand, when the group design is congruent with the larger organization design, it facilitates seamless collaboration, shared understanding, and mutual support. The cross-functional teams can effectively communicate and align their efforts with the broader organizational goals. They can leverage the expertise and resources available in different functional departments to achieve better outcomes. The congruence between group and organization design promotes a sense of shared responsibility and accountability, enabling
the organization to respond more effectively to internal and external challenges.
In summary, congruence between group design and organization design ensures the alignment of goals, roles, and processes, fostering collaboration and coordination within the organization. It allows for the efficient utilization of resources, facilitates information sharing, and enhances overall organizational effectiveness.
Q.3 Based on your understanding of the group-level diagnostic model, describe and evaluate each of the Ortiv’s team design components:
– Goal clarity (1 mark) (Lo 2.5)
Goal clarity refers to the extent to which team members have a clear understanding of their objectives, targets, and expected outcomes. In Ortiv’s team design, goal clarity plays a crucial role in ensuring that team members are aligned and focused on the same priorities. By setting clear goals, teams can work towards a common purpose, which enhances their motivation and performance (Van Der Hoek et al., 2016). Goal clarity can be evaluated by assessing whether team members can articulate their objectives, whether they understand how their goals contribute to the larger organizational strategy, and whether there is clarity on the desired outcomes and success criteria.
– Task structure (1 mark) (Lo 2.5)
Task structure refers to the degree of clarity and specificity in defining the tasks and activities to be performed by the team. In Ortiv’s team design, task structure influences the team’s effectiveness in executing their responsibilities. A well-structured task provides clear guidelines, defines roles and responsibilities, and outlines the sequence of activities. It helps team members understand how their work fits into the larger process and enhances coordination. Task structure can be evaluated by assessing the presence of clear task descriptions, defined workflows, and a shared understanding of the interdependencies among team members.
– Team functioning (1 mark) (Lo 2.5)
Team functioning refers to the effectiveness of the team’s processes, communication, and decision-making. In Ortiv’s team design, team functioning plays a crucial role in determining the team’s ability to collaborate, solve problems, and achieve their goals. Effective team functioning involves open and transparent communication, active participation, constructive conflict resolution, and shared decision-making. Team functioning can be evaluated by observing the team’s dynamics, the quality of interactions, and the presence of supportive and inclusive team norms.
– Group composition (1 mark) (Lo 2.5)
Group composition refers to the characteristics and diversity of individuals within the team. In Ortiv’s team design, group composition influences the team’s ability to leverage diverse perspectives, skills, and expertise (Group and Teams – Term Paper, n.d.). A well-composed team brings together individuals with complementary abilities, experiences, and knowledge, which can lead to better problem-solving and innovation. Group composition can be evaluated by considering factors such as diversity in terms of gender, age, cultural background, functional expertise, and cognitive abilities within the team.
– Group norms (1 mark) (Lo 2.5)
Group norms refer to the shared expectations, values, and standards of behavior that guide the team’s interactions and decision-making. In Ortiv’s team design, group norms shape the team’s culture and influence how members collaborate and communicate. Positive norms encourage trust, respect, and cooperation, while negative norms can hinder effective teamwork. Group norms can be evaluated by observing the team’s behavior, communication patterns, and whether there is alignment between stated values and actual behaviors.
Q.4 Discuss how the group design of Ortiv’s Glass Corporation could positively or negatively impact the diagnosis of design components at the individual level. (2 Marks) (Lo 2.9)
The group design of Ortiv’s Glass Corporation can have both positive and negative impacts on the diagnosis of design components at the individual level. The way the groups are structured, their functioning, and their alignment with the overall organization can shape the diagnostic process. Here are some potential positive and negative impacts:
Positive impact
Collaboration and support: If the group design fosters a collaborative and supportive environment, it can positively impact the diagnosis at the individual level. When individuals feel supported by their team members, they are more likely to openly discuss issues, provide feedback, and share their experiences. This enhances the accuracy and depth of the diagnostic information gathered, as individuals feel comfortable expressing their perspectives and concerns.
Learning and development
A group design that promotes learning and development can positively impact the diagnosis at the individual level. When individuals have opportunities to learn from each other, exchange knowledge, and acquire new skills, they become more aware of their strengths and areas for improvement (Allen et al., 2015). This self-awareness facilitates the diagnostic process by enabling individuals to provide more accurate information about their capabilities and development needs.
Negative impact
Lack of psychological safety: If the group design lacks psychological safety, individuals may hesitate to share their true thoughts and feelings during the diagnosis. They may fear negative consequences or judgment from their team members or leaders. This can lead to incomplete or distorted information, hindering the accuracy and effectiveness of the diagnosis.
Groupthink and conformity: In cases where the group design promotes excessive conformity and groupthink, it can negatively impact the diagnosis at the individual level. Individuals may feel pressured to conform to the dominant group opinion, suppressing their unique perspectives and insights. This can result in biased or limited information, impeding the identification of critical issues and opportunities for improvement.
Overall, the group design of Ortiv’s Glass Corporation should create an environment that supports open communication, psychological safety, and individual development to ensure that the diagnosis captures a comprehensive understanding of the individual-level design components.
References
Allen, L., Kelly, B., Children, Y. B. O., & Families. (2015). Transforming the Workforce for Children Birth Through Age 8. In National Academies Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.17226/19401
Group and Teams – Term Paper. (n.d.). https://www.termpaperwarehouse.com/essay-on/Group-And-Teams/23145
Van Der Hoek, M., Groeneveld, S., & Kuipers, B. (2016). Goal Setting in Teams: Goal Clarity and Team Performance in the Public Sector. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 38(4), 472–493. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371×16682815
