You Are The Manager Of A Small Department Within A Lo 819410

You Are The Manager Of Small Department Within a Local Government

You are the manager of a small department within a local government. You want to develop processes for effective decision-making with your newly assembled leadership team, but you want to ensure that you are not acting in an overly authoritative manner. Develop your findings and recommendations in which you discuss the items below. Determine different decision-making tactics that would be more appropriate for improving communication within a small team or group of about four to six mid- to high-level managers. Discuss the different types of power that you could conceivably employ in coming to the most appropriate decision-making processes.

Differentiate between the sources and exercises of power that would be most appropriate for this group in the context of public administration organizational behavior. Provide an example from your own personal experiences of positively engaging in decision-making processes when you have not been the manager or in charge of the decision-making process. Your case study must be at least two pages in length and follow APA guidelines throughout. A minimum of two outside sources, not including the textbook, is required.

Paper For Above instruction

Effective decision-making in a local government setting requires a careful balance between leadership influence and collaborative engagement to foster trust, transparency, and shared responsibility. As the manager of a small department comprising four to six mid- to high-level managers, selecting suitable decision-making tactics and appropriately employing different types of power are crucial for ensuring effective organizational outcomes while maintaining a participatory and inclusive environment.

Decision-Making Tactics for Small Teams

In small teams, participative decision-making tactics are highly effective because they promote open communication, foster a sense of ownership among team members, and leverage collective expertise. Techniques such as consensus decision-making, where the group discusses and agrees upon a course of action, are particularly effective in a public administration context because they emphasize inclusivity and transparency (Vigoda-Gadot & Schlag, 2017). Additionally, the use of a consultative approach, where the manager seeks input before making a final decision, can enhance collaboration without relinquishing ultimate authority.

Another useful tactic is the use of facilitated group discussions or brainstorming sessions, which encourage diverse perspectives and creative problem-solving. For example, scheduling regular team meetings with clear agendas allows team members to contribute their insights, leading to more innovative and accepted decisions. Employing a democratic style, where leadership encourages input and debate, aligns well with the goals of effective public administration, which values stakeholder participation (Ingold, 2019).

Types of Power in Decision-Making

Power within organizational settings can be categorized into various types, including legitimate, expert, referent, reward, and coercive power. In a small government department, the strategic use of these powers can influence decision-making processes appropriately. Legitimate power, derived from a manager’s hierarchical position, provides authority but must be exercised judiciously to avoid authoritarian tendencies. Expert power, based on knowledge and skills, can be highly effective in influencing team members when the manager demonstrates competence and credibility (French & Raven, 1959).

Referent power, rooted in personal charisma and interpersonal skills, can foster trust and loyalty, encouraging team members to align with the leader’s vision voluntarily. Reward power, which enables granting incentives or recognition, can motivate high performance and collaborative engagement. Conversely, coercive power, which involves threats or punishments, often undermines trust and should be used sparingly, especially in a public administration context that emphasizes ethical practices and community trust.

Differentiating Powers in Public Administration

In public administration, the appropriate exercise of power hinges on transparency and ethical considerations. Legitimate power should be balanced with consultative and consultative powers to promote participatory governance. Expert power enhances decision credibility, especially when decisions require technical or specialized knowledge, such as policy analysis or regulatory compliance. Referent power builds rapport and trust, vital for public sector leaders to effectively engage their teams and stakeholders.

For example, a department head who relies on expert power to interpret federal regulations can build trust through clear communication, thereby facilitating compliance and community confidence. Conversely, over-reliance on coercive power can lead to diminished morale and increased cynicism among staff, contradicting core values of public administration.

Personal Experience of Positive Engagement in Decision-Making

In my previous role as a project coordinator, I was not in a formal leadership position but was actively involved in team decision-making processes. During a community outreach initiative, I suggested a collaborative approach where stakeholders from various sectors contributed to shaping the program. By facilitating open discussions and emphasizing shared goals, I helped foster a participatory environment that enhanced buy-in and implementation success. My role was more of a facilitator than a decision-maker, which demonstrated how leveraging interpersonal skills and expert knowledge can positively influence organizational outcomes without formal authority. This experience reinforced the importance of inclusive processes and respectful communication in decision-making.

Conclusion

Developing effective decision-making processes within a small government department involves selecting tactics that promote collaboration and open communication. Employing diverse types of power ethically and strategically enhances credibility and stakeholder trust. By fostering a participatory environment and balancing authority with inclusiveness, public sector leaders can promote organizational effectiveness aligned with democratic principles and organizational ethics.

References

• French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. Studies in Social Power, 150-167.
• Ingold, J. (2019). Public administration and participatory decision-making. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 25(2), 245-263.
• Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Schlag, S. (2017). Leadership and organizational change in public administration. Public Administration Review, 77(1), 121-130.
• Raelin, J. A. (2016). Facilitating leadership in small teams: An integrative approach. Leadership Quarterly, 27(5), 652-664.
• Bryson, J. M. (2018). Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations. John Wiley & Sons.
• Kelly, S., & Driscoll, K. (2020). Building trust in public organizations. Public Management Review, 22(8), 1159-1174.
• Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Architects, 35(4), 216-224.
• Kettl, D. F. (2019). The transformation of governance: Public administration for the 21st century. Public Administration Review, 79(3), 351-364.
• Rohr, J. A. (2017). Trust in public administration. Public Integrity, 19(2), 117-133.
• Kim, S., & Lee, J. (2019). Ethical decision-making in public administration. Journal of Public Ethics, 13(3), 275-289.