Theory of change Practical analysis in organization

By
Tom lupton

In the job of manager essentially clinicians the difficulties they most confronted is
demand resolution so they should be decide whats is to be done, and who is to do it
and how to get it done. Social scientist proposed the hypotheses sort the
observations try to make theories to explain the human’s social sciences behavior to
resolve a clinical difficulty the social scientist have expectations of the theories which
would be applies to improves the managerial performance. The manager often do
this might be every manager has his own psychological and sociological theories
which will serve him well in practices. Or it could be affirm that social scientist pay
very less attention to the clinical problem of the manager and write in jargon that
cannot be understandable. I assume that managers expect from social scientist the
ready-made answers of their problems.
The point here is to be argue is if the manager use the method of social scientist as
the tool of analyze rather then wait for concluded finding and ready made
techniques. We describe a model of organization derive from the work of social
sciences in first part. But in second part we demonstrate the practical uses of social
sciences model and analysis the decision when an organization is under doing
change. An organization may use inattentiveness as an being existing in an
environment. Therefore it may be regarded as acting in such a way as to hold up in
the face of changes in the environment.
An organization which do not alter the cease to survive that an organizations exist to
make profit and cease to survive when they stop doing so; but that only exist in
some organizations in some organization the process of continuous adaption is
compulsory in order to survive. For example, industrial organizations have market to
supply change in those markets which may be lie in outside the control of the
organization want that the organization makes certain modify. To exemplify if an
organization move from the place where there the small competition to highly
competitive place then an organization might have to adapt the new technological
implementations in order to reduce costs and ensure survival. This concept of
organizational adaption might not be very fresh but it is surely not set up in many
well used texts about management.
The model found three objectives from which is deduce a proper structure of
authority and the set of administrative and technical process to attain that objective
effectively. The pyramid of authority is a common represented aspect of this
concept. If there are oblique which are too big for one man to follow. This mean one
man should have an authority over the other they follow his instruction and the sub-
ordinates will be obligated to him. That is what co-ordination means to inform the
managers that whats their sub-ordinates doing and how they are doing. But there is
one big problem one person cant not control so many sub-ordinates so there should
be right span of control. The overall concept of this model is to treat the human
being in the organization as if he existed only as tool to accomplish the objective of
an organization.
The need to alter this mechanical model was the growth of the human relation
movement which protest inter alia that if you treat people as a tool to an
organization objective and your theory about human motivation is unskilled then I
would be not so good. Because when the employee start to protest or refusing to
participate or start working slow so its means if you want to handle the tools you
must have to apply a better theory motivation “Human Relation” writers are gives
stress on that men are not only get motivated for desire of more money but also
seek for certain social satisfaction at work. The link between these elements are not
only economic and technological, but also sentimental. In formal organization the
argument got arise form the elaboration of behavior. It may lead to less than
satisfactory performance of productive role.
This seems to make some sense but its inadequate in two ways. It is the in-dynamic
picture of an organization. Its assumes that there are identifiable objectives to which
an organization is directed. The individuals are not only the instrument to be
organize also to be prepared to do as we told to be. It is true the individual also a
satisfaction seeker. If the pay not good then the one becomes frustrated and
possibly aggressive. So we want that type of dynamic model which treats individual
as someone who reacts emotionally to them and to other social excitation.
After this subject of matter on the merits I have called the classical and human
relation theory of human behavior in an organization. That organization might
usefully be regarded as system adapted to there environment. If the organization is
easy to consider the idea of a boundary between it and its environment. The
boundary is both geographical and social. In social boundary there are men whose
role it is to decide, In relation to their explanation of what is happening in the
environment, what strategy the organization must adapt if it to so adapt effectively.
These boundary rules are must be unrestricted.
When dynamic strategies are adopted this demands a change in the structuring of
rules and the working activities that go with them. The stresses and tensity in the
organization grows from one that might describe as structure inertia, This
phenomenon tends to base from trying to ensure enough control of the behavior of
sub-units, groups and individual in term of past strategy.
The state of an organization culture of conventional and hallowed way of doing thing
and also have thinking to contribute to structural inertia. In this dynamic model the
organization is seen perpetually adapting and approaching inertial problem of
structure and functioning. By joan Woodward, there seems to be a casual link
between technology, role, and social structure but now the social structure and
determinants of behavior through the system if rewards and punishments which
manipulate role behavior.
Then factor pf personality might play a major part In determining the definition of
the role that is why now we have role, social structure, personality and a few
supportive concept that shows how they related to each other. An organization
theme to problem of change and adaption might conceive the idea of employing a
sociological intelligence unit whose task would be to keep the record as an aid to
managerial decision making. Which would be useful for minimizing the unforeseen
consequences of purposive social action.