|← Article Review||Unemployment and Political Business Cycle →|
Barriers to Success This paper depicts, analyzes and attempts to resolve the query of the particular barriers to success issue related to the matters of leadership and staffing and connected with the implementation of the new project in HLR Inc. We will use the academic approach (combined with practical experience) to successfully break those barriers to success in this organization. There is some support in the literature for thinking about cultural factors in terms of their negative or unintended effects. The literature describes this inappropriate behavior as pathological, as barriers, rather than aids, to success (Berkley, 1984). These research findings give us some understanding of system- and/or human-based barriers that hinder group and individual success. The TQM focus on continuous improvement of the system is a current example in which experts recognize failures in the situation--for example, the tasks of leadership, the presence of fear, unclear or inappropriate organizational aims as the root of dysfunction. We can find other examples of these organizational system or personality barriers throughout the literature. The following summary of the most common cultural system and human barriers to a trust relationship may help place the problem of inappropriate human behavior in perspective. This discussion points up potential problem areas leaders may need to consider as they go about creating and managing appropriate cultures that support a trust relationship. Uncontrolled Growth One of the most evident barriers that may hamper development of a success in HLR Inc is growth.
There is a tendency among organizational leaders and followers toward growth--in the size of the organization, in product mix, in market share. Many of the managers in HLR equate success with growth. In this company, it is rare to find a leader or a group who values stability in growth, the small-is-better philosophy or "right-sizing," without compelling outside pressures. Of course, managers argue, there are valid reasons for growth. It adds strength, vitality, opportunity to the institution, to its people, and to the larger society. But, increased size adds to the problems of creating and maintaining a trust culture. As more people are added to the work force in HLR, more complicated interpersonal relationships result. This causes an increase in leadership problems. Leaders in HLR need more time to train and interact intimately with more people. Growth in this organization requires more layers of leadership, which requires even more training and contact. Growth also in this case brings with it a tendency toward personal and institutional self-aggrandizement. Berkley (1984) referred to this tendency as an imperative for territory. Growth may easily become dysfunctional in HLR as individuals of subgroups contend with others to gain more control over more territory--be it geographical or institutional. Organizational System Barriers An organizational culture at HLR is a delicate construct composed of people in informal and formally structured relationships, work processes, physical facilities, and institutional goals. Failure in any of these subsystems can affect the whole.
Unfortunately, failures in organizational systems can happen when we do too much of the right thing as well as when we do things incorrectly. Some organizational barriers at HLR to creating or maintaining an effective trust culture flow out of these overdone actions. To resolve this matter, we should slow down development of an effective trust culture when HLR or one of its components survive beyond their normal effective life. We also hamper development of effective trust cultures when traditional behavior patterns dominate the need for change. This is also the case when the tendency toward bigness becomes counterproductive. Trust cultures suffer also when some organizational components seek status vis-à-vis their peers. A review of these system barriers follows. Traditionalism HLR have not only a natural tendency to survive, but this organization also has a tendency to maintain traditional ways of thinking and behaving. This tendency, like survival, can be either positive or negative. Past practice often becomes the basis for present activity. The idea that if "it isn’t broken don't fix it" is uncontrolled in organizational life of HLR. This attitude is a part of organizational culture maintenance and often can be a positive tool to perpetuate desirable organizational interaction and activity patterns. Over-reliance on past practice in HLR, however, narrows the organization's vision and cause leaders and followers to fail to see future targets of opportunity. Unfortunately, too much of a good thing can become dysfunctional for the HLR and forestall effective change to keep the organization up to date.
To resolve this issue, the company has to make constant evaluation of its mechanisms and processes. For instance, a regular performance update is a must. If the managers realize that some structural mechanism or leadership style isn’t functioning properly, the organization should either improve the process or discontinue it as such. Power Usage The need for personal power is strong in most healthy adults. Some say the pull of power is instinctual. Machiavelli said the desire to control our fellows is so strong that it dominates the minds of kings and commoners (Grifin, 1991). As followers in HLR come to demand more freedom to make their own work-related choices, the issue of the proper distribution of power becomes a central culture creation issue in this organization. Properly allocated and properly used, power is a tool to help leaders build a trust culture. The pressure for leaders to share their power with others, nevertheless, can be a barrier to development of a trust culture. Giving up our craving for power in favor of empowering others goes against longstanding leadership traditions and, maybe, psychological forces. Analysis of the idea of power use in an organizational context leads to the interesting conclusion that power use is a critical factor in determining leader dominance in a given situation (Fairholm, 1993). That is, the most influential person in the group can attain domination over others, called power targets. Powerful people become leaders.
Observation can identify a few simple tests of a leader's willingness to share power. When leaders are unwilling to share power, they make all decisions, no matter how trivial. There is no excitement about work. Everyone works at an adequate level, not beyond. They take acceptance for success but spread blame. They, along with workers, fear change as a potential harm to the power structure. On the other side of the power question, a leader may have difficulty in getting others to accept power. The presence in the organization of people who resist empowerment efforts offered by their leaders in some or any situation can also diminish overall success. We can classify this situation as dysfunctional, a barrier to development of a desired level of trust in the culture. The problem with empowerment is that it is powerful. Giving power to workers allows them to be more productive in group goal accomplishment. This power can also be used to move the organization away from desired goals. These organizational cultural barriers can frustrate leaders' attempts to focus group energy on needed results, even as they apply the latest theory of leadership technologies, therefore a thorough attention should be given to the subject and a feasible solution is to be developed.