v1n7 Developing a Hierarachy Organizational Objectives

Organizational objectives allow for the communications of the purpose and direction of the organization. In addition, organizational objectives serve to sharpen the focus of the it's resources toward its purpose. The organizational objectives as a means and measure provides the organizational community a powerful tool for increasing the effectiveness. The organizational objective means provides for an increased understanding of the organization and its purpose and provides for a succinct statement of l staff performance outcomes.

There are several characteristics of a good objective.

The objective should be stated using the active form of the verb.
The objective should specify the expected outcome.
The objective should specify the level of effectiveness expected to be achieved.
The objective should indicate the length of time in which it is expected to be achieved.
The objective should indicate the conditions under which the behavior is expected to occur.

A strategy for developing organizational objectives is based on a hierarchical concept. The strategy is divided into five basic steps.

1. Clearly state the ultimate objective.
2. State the mission statement and organizational-wide objectives.
3. Develop the unit objectives.
4. Specify the performance objectives.

A work groups should be chosen to formulate a statement of philosophy. Representation on the work groups should come from all segments of the organization.

Select a task manager who will coordinate the task of philosophy statement. If their is a current statement of philosophy, the task manager should distribute it to all members of the work groups with a set of questions to guide the review.

After the questions have been discussed, each member of the work groups should collect specific information needed to develop the new philosophy. Each member might better collect information from there own representative group. There are various methods that can be used to collect the information such as surveys, questionnaires, informal contacts, formal meetings, letters and memoranda's.

The information should be reviewed for its repetition and differences. Belief statements should be written embodying this information.The crude belief statements will have to be modified and reviewed until they become acceptable as a statement of philosophy. The first revision is the responsibility of the task manager.

The task manager routes the rough draft to all the other members of the work groups for their suggestions and revisions. The task manager incorporates all appropriate changes into the statement of philosophy and gives it to the employee's of the organization.

The employee's reaction to the statement are incorporated into the final draft of the statement of philosophy.

A work groups should be selected; could be the same work groups used in stating the ultimate objective.

A task manager should be chosen to assume the responsibility of coordinating the task of writing and making consistent the ultimate objectives, mission statement, and organizational-wide objectives.

The work groups should formulate an ultimate objective. The ultimate objective is a succinct statement of the final draft of the statement of philosophy. This work groups should draft an supportive mission statement focused on management functions.

The work groups should relate the mission statement to all the organizational-wide objectives. Both the mission statements and organizational-wide objectives should reflect the purpose(s) of the organization. The work groups should decide which purposes are directly related to the outputs of the organization.

Determining the kinds of functions which organization-wide objectives should include: List the functions that reflect the major operations of the organization, personal relations, financial management, etc.

Working in teams of two, the work groups should propose several function arrangements depicting the relationship between the functions and the organization-wide objectives.

After agreeing on a particular arrangement of function, the work groups should write objective statements which encompass all of the functions.

These statements should be reviewed and revised before a tentative final draft is submitted to the whole work groups, the chief administrator, for their review.

A task manager should be chosen to assume the responsibility of coordinating, writing, and making consistent the unit objectives.

A work groups, comprised of the unit staff or representatives from the staff, should discuss the mission statement and the organ-izationalwide objectives that have already been constructed.

The work groups should examine any other data that have been collected; i.e., test, survey, questionnaire data, interviews.

The work groups should put in writing the mission statement of the unit.

The work groups should identify the unit objectives, both develop-mental, maintenance, and problem solving.

The work groups should identify the sub-unit objectives and specify the unit elements objectives.

The work groups should lay out a unit for each unit, sub-unit, and unit element objective.

Understanding and approval of the unit from the individual the unit manager report to.

The unit staff should be involved in the detailed writing for each unit level objective.

Define the limits within which the unit staff members can operate.

Define the necessary evaluation-devices so that the unit manager can periodically assess progress.

Performance objectives should be developed for every support function in the organization.

All other objectives (ultimate, organization-wide, and unit) should be reviewed and performance objectives developed so that the other objectives will be attained.

We established the need for a logical, systematically-derived comprehensive statement of outcomes or objectives to be accomplished by an organizational-wide system. The systematic ordering of organizational objectives can be most effectively accomplished through the use of an objectives hierarchy framework. An objectives hierarchy is a systematic mapping out of all objectives necessary to the accomplishment of a given overall, ultimate objective.

Starting with the general or ultimate objective at the top and preceding down through increasingly more specific objectives, the hierarchy provides a comprehensive, functional means of organizing objectives into a logical, internally consistent focusing of energies toward the accomplishment of the ultimate organizational objective.

In an objectives hierarchy, the objectives are arranged in levels so that as you go down the hierarchy, each level explains a " HOW " the level above it can be accomplished and as you go up the hierarchy, each level explains " WHY " the level below it is necessary

The actual construction of the hierarchy begins at the top with the ultimate objective and works down the successive levels. The number of levels utilized and the terminology applied to these levels is a function of the specific needs and characteristics of the particular system to which the hierarchy is being applied.

Ultimate Objective. Is a succinct statement reflecting the philosophical beliefs and values basic to the organization. The ultimate objective delineates the philosophical parameters for the lower level objectives.

Mission Statement.The mission statement is derived directly from the ultimate objective. The mission statement specifies the major elements or components critical to the accomplishment of the ultimate objective. The mission statement reflects those basic support elements or components essential to the accomplishment of the ultimate objective. The support elements deal with the managerial functions needed to attain the desired Outcomes.

Starting with the mission statement level, the objectives hierarchy is vertically divided. The mission statement constitutes the rationale behind organizational-wide objectives as well as delineates the scope of organizational-wide objectives coverage.

Organizational-wide Objectives. Organizational-wide objectives specify those factors critical to accomplishing the mission statement. Organizational-wide objectives are necessarily more precise than the mission statement and there are more of them, usually three to ten. There are two types of organizational-wide objectives: instructional and support.

The total set of organizational-wide support objectives, delineates the scope of major functions which must be performed in order to accomplish the mission statement.

By clarifying these functions, the total set of organizational-wide objectives provides the focus for unit areas. Although the total set of organizational wide objectives provides the focus for all unit areas, a given organizational-wide objective may or may not cross-cut all unit areas.

Unit Objectives. In effect, unit objectives constitute mission statements for each of their respective unit areas. The unit objective clearly delineates the functions to be performed and the responsibilities to be assumed within that particular unit area.

Support units objectives incorporate supportive functions such as trans-portation, management, food services, purchasing, etc. Unit objectives set the parameters for the types of lower level objectives to be included within a given unit area.

The terminology applied to the mission, organizational-wide and unit levels remains the same for support objectives. However, the nature of the Objectives below the support unit objectives level are called performance objectives. These objectives describe the tasks which must be performed in order to provide support services. There are three basic types of performance objectives: problem-solving, developmental, and maintenance.

Things to look for:

Participation: Did all have opportunities to participate? Were some excluded? was an effort made to draw people out? Did a few dominate?

Manager-ship: Did a leader, as such, emerge? was a leader designated? Was manager-ship shared? '.was there any structuring of the group?

Roles: Who initiated ideas? Were they supported and by whom? Did anyone block? Who helped push for decisions? Was there any attempt to summarize and pull together various ideas?

Decision Making: Did group get a lot of ideas suggested before beginning to decide, or did it begin deciding on only a single idea? Did everyone agree to the decisions made? Who helped influence decisions of others? What issues did the group seem to resolve? Not resolve?

Communication: Did people feel free to talk? Was there any interrupting ocutting people off?. Did people really listen to others? Was-there clarification of points made? Who did people look at when they talked) single out others, scan the group or no one?

Sensitivity: Were members sensitive to the needs and concerns of each other? What feelings did you see being expressed either verbally or non- verbally?

Feedback to group: Talk about the above items or anything else of general interest that you observed about the process.

Alan L. Joplin serves as the Special Needs Specialist and a faculty member in the Department of Social Sciences, Scott Community College/Eastern Iowa Community College District-Davenport, Iowa.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Original file name: speced - converted on November 1, 1997, 08:55