College Of Administrative And Financial Sciences Assi 485785

College Of Administrative And Financial Sciencesassignment 2deadline

The assignment involves analyzing a case study titled “Top Management Team at Ortiv Glass Corporation” from the textbook “Organization Development & Change” 9th edition by Cummings and Worley. Students are required to answer four questions pertaining to the strategic diagnosis in organizational development, congruence between group and organization design, team components, and the impact of group design on individual level diagnosis. The responses should incorporate at least two scholarly, peer-reviewed references per answer, demonstrate comprehension of key course concepts, and adhere to formal academic writing standards. The assignment is to be submitted in Word format via Blackboard, following the specified formatting guidelines (Times New Roman, size 12, double-spaced), without plagiarism, and with all questions clearly numbered.

Paper For Above instruction

The case study on the “Top Management Team at Ortiv Glass Corporation” provides a rich context for exploring fundamental concepts in organizational development (OD), especially regarding strategic diagnosis, structural congruence, and team dynamics. This analysis aims to elucidate key OD principles through critical evaluation of the case, integrating scholarly perspectives to underpin insights.

1. The Critical Role of Strategic Orientation in OD Diagnosis

Strategic orientation is paramount in OD diagnosis because it ensures that interventions align with the organization’s long-term goals, competitive environment, and internal capabilities. It serves as the guiding framework that shapes the diagnostic focus, helping identify areas needing change to foster organizational effectiveness. In the case of Ortiv Glass Corporation, the strategic orientation influences how the top management team perceives their roles and challenges. For example, if Ortiv’s strategic goal emphasizes innovation, the diagnosis would focus on the team’s ability to foster a culture of innovation, including examining risk-taking behaviors and openness to change. Conversely, if cost leadership is prioritized, the diagnosis might focus on operational efficiencies and team coordination levels. Supporting this view, Nadler (1994) emphasizes that strategic alignment is critical for diagnosis validity because it ensures that the OD efforts contribute to organizational success rather than superficial fixes.

Furthermore, strategic orientation aids in pinpointing specific team behaviors and structural attributes that support or hinder strategic objectives. For instance, in the case, if Ortiv’s management team exhibits a lack of adaptability, it directly threatens the organization’s strategic agility, requiring targeted interventions. A second example from the case might involve a misalignment between team roles and strategic priorities, indicating areas for restructuring or role clarification, which are essential components of diagnosis. Strategic focus thus provides the lens through which OD practitioners assess both the symptoms and root causes of organizational issues (Cummings & Worley, 2015).

2. Congruence Between Group Design and Larger Organizational Design

Understanding the importance of congruence between group design and organizational design is fundamental because it ensures coherence, efficiency, and strategic alignment across organizational levels. When a group, such as a top management team, is designed congruently with the larger organization, it supports effective communication, decision-making, and implementation of strategies. In the Ortiv case, for example, if the organizational structure is hierarchical with clear lines of authority, then the team’s design should mirror this hierarchy to facilitate control and accountability. Discordance, such as a flat team structure in a traditionally hierarchical organization, could lead to confusion, conflict, or delayed decision-making, thereby impeding organizational effectiveness (Bolman & Deal, 2017).

This congruence also enhances employees’ clarity about roles and expectations, fosters alignment of goals, and simplifies change initiatives. For instance, if Ortiv’s organization is undergoing a strategic shift towards innovation, the team’s design should support this by encouraging cross-functional collaboration and empowerment, aligning with the broader organizational strategy and structure. If the case illustrates a mismatch, such as a top management team that is overly centralized despite a decentralized organizational structure, the resulting dissonance could hinder effective response to environmental demands. Hence, congruence ensures that team dynamics reinforce the larger organizational architecture, facilitating smoother change processes and strategic coherence (Burke, 2017).

3. Analysis of Ortiv’s Team Design Components

3.1 Goal Clarity

Clear goals are essential for guiding team efforts and measuring success. In the case of Ortiv, if the management team exhibits well-defined, shared objectives aligned with organizational strategy, it enhances coordination and motivation (Cummings & Worley, 2015). Conversely, ambiguous goals can lead to confusion, reduced accountability, and ineffective task execution, impairing organizational performance.

3.2 Task Structure

Task structure pertains to how work is divided, coordinated, and scheduled within the team. An effective task structure at Ortiv would probably involve clear roles, responsibilities, and procedures supporting both efficiency and flexibility. An overly rigid or poorly defined task structure can hinder innovation and responsiveness, which are critical in a manufacturing setting like Ortiv’s.

3.3 Team Functioning

Team functioning encompasses communication, problem-solving, conflict resolution, and decision-making processes. In Ortiv’s context, high-functioning teams demonstrate open communication and cohesive working relationships, fostering a climate for innovation and continuous improvement. Challenges such as conflict or poor communication can disrupt team effectiveness and decision quality.

3.4 Group Composition

The composition of the team involves skills, diversity, and individual roles. For Ortiv, diverse expertise related to manufacturing, engineering, and management enhances problem-solving capabilities. However, mismatched skills or personality conflicts could compromise team harmony and effectiveness, highlighting the importance of strategic personnel selection.

3.5 Group Norms

Norms shape the anticipated behaviors within a team. Positive norms—such as accountability, respect, and openness—support performance. Conversely, negative norms like resistance to change or conflict avoidance can impede innovation and adaptation, especially critical in a competitive industry like glass manufacturing.

4. Impact of Group Design on Individual Diagnosis

The design of Ortiv’s group system exerts significant influence on the perception and assessment of individual performance and behavior. A well-structured team with clear goals and norms fosters accountability and provides clear benchmarks for individual contributions. For example, if an individual consistently underperforms, a congruent group design with well-defined task roles and norms would facilitate more accurate diagnosis, anchoring individual faults to specific structural or process deficiencies (Smith & Lewis, 2011).

Conversely, a dysfunctional group design—characterized by unclear goals, poor communication, or conflicting norms—can distort individual performance appraisal. It may mask underlying individual issues or lead to unfair attribution of faults, thereby complicating diagnosis and intervention. Negative group dynamics might also promote social loafing or conformity, suppressing honest feedback and accurate assessments of individual capabilities (Hackman, 2012). Therefore, the group design directly influences the accuracy, fairness, and effectiveness of diagnosing individual-level issues, which are vital for targeted development initiatives and performance improvement.

References

• Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. John Wiley & Sons.
• Burke, W. W. (2017). Organization development: A model for change. People and Organizational Development Press.
• Cummings, T., & Worley, C. (2015). Organization Development & Change. Cengage Learning.
• Hackman, J. R. (2012). Collaborative intelligence: Using teams to solve hard problems. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
• Nadler, D. A. (1994). Diagnosing organizational problems; Making effective interventions. Organizational Dynamics, 22(4), 24-39.
• Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of managing organizational tension. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381-403.