For the purpose of this entry, I will focus on my district as an organization encompassing the structural framework’s drivers and barriers.
Based on the fact that my organization is a Baldrige National Quality Blue Ribbon Winner, there is data to support the structural framework. The key drivers of the organization are:
1. an aligned, integrated management system
2. a continuous improvement model utilized to produce measurable results
Training is provided for the creation and alignment of District and School Improvement Plans. The expectations are clear. Specific feedback and coaching is provided quarterly to support the work of all organizations within the larger framework. The alignment of systems begins with NC BOE requirements and goals and goes all the way to the students as they write their own goals based on their learning gaps.
The work of our system is based on measurable data and is continuously monitored to change the work and processes when the data indicates it is not working. The data is transparent for all stakeholders. Two-way communication allows stakeholders to have input in the processes.
Annual reviews occur to monitor district processes in all departments and adjust funds where needed. The departments share funds to ensure the gaps are addressed. Annual review information is reported back to all schools, classrooms and located on the district webpage for all stakeholders to view if interested.
In this system, student achievement, academics and operational data is increasing while the climate and Teacher Working Conditions data is on the decline. This leads me to the barriers of this system.
We find there are barriers that tend to be just as strong in this type of organization. The first is the lack of human resource focus. It is very data driven, not people driven. The focus is on improving the system, not the people.
I have witnessed mass turnover due to the tight requirements and work loads data driven empowerment brings.
There is also very little room for stepping outside of the system without having data to support the change. Even being innovative requires extra paperwork and red tape to prove your way may be better. This is frustrating for many Theory Y and right brain workers.
With the recent changes in senior leadership, we are experiencing a shift in our organizational structure. The shift in drivers and barriers are evident. While we are heading to a more Human Resource Structure, the lack of barriers are becoming the drivers while the lack of the enablers are becoming the drivers. The shift is causing an uneasy sense with the level of uncertainty for many. While those who prefer the Human Resource Structure are beginning to celebrate a bit.
5 comments:
I too believe in the importance of valuing the ideas of stakeholders. Yes, data is important, but people, not numbers, are our most valuable resource. I know it can be difficult to have to always validate a strategy that the faculty/staff knows would work well with one's demographics. It seems that a combination of frames works best for some situations.
With this shift in leadership is the internal structure going to shift from a rigid data driven structure frame to a more humanistic frame?? Or will it turn into a political jungle with those who struggle for power trying to move up?
AMY-
You point to a critical tension between tight, high performance structure and human frustrations...a powerful example about the need to balance the HR and structural thinking.
Vachel
As I have four children in this system, I agree with Amy, there is a tremendous amount of focus on data and not much on the individual. My kids fill out data charts for everything. While this certainly helps them to see their progress, they are more than just some line graphs. As a parent, I do not always have my emails or phone calls returned. Now, that would be an anathema (sp) in my system. We have 24 hours to return phone calls and most of us return them that day whenever possible. I have emailed my elementary kids' principal several times with no response. He is a nice guy, but the message he is sending is that my children are not that important to him. I'm sure that is not the intended message, but that is what is being received. I know if I wanted to look at my kids' data, it would be there. Ideally, there would be a combination of structure and human resource.
There is a great chasm between data "driven" and data "informed". I believe the strategic apex has crossed over. When you look at Mintzberg's model, I sometimes view the apex as the spinner on an old-fashioned top -- give it a twist, and everything goes wild. Change is difficult enough when need outweighs resistance. It becomes counterproductive when the usual early adopters are thrown off base.
Post a Comment