hogan outlet Metaphors In An Organization

Morgan is a writer who works with Uk Best Writing service, He has experience of more than ten years in [url=http://www.shewyne.com/hoganoutlet.html]hogan outlet[/url] acdemic writing. He provides students with Uk research papers, ssays writing service UK and Uk essay service online.
Historically, institutions have been related to various metaphors. The relationship between metaphor and theory is strong and direct, as Smith and Graetz stated "all theory is metaphor (2011: 57)." Utilizing metaphors to explore and comprehend organizational theory is a usually common practice. Scholars employ metaphors to give a material aspect to the abstract theories connected with organizational studies (Henderson, 1995: 45).
In fact, the very nature of theories lends themselves to expression via metaphor, which can be considered for utilization as a meaningful and powerful instructional tool. In a nutshell, metaphorical analyses form an important part of organizational studies. This paper focuses on the river metaphor used to explain an organizational structure and strategic decision making adopted by various organizations. A case study of Arsenal Football club gives a practical evaluation of the river metaphor. Lastly, a self-reflection, at the end of the paper, gives my personal views and attitudes on the metaphor analyzed. Organizational theory offers a precise evaluation of organizations and its processes. Earlier on, organizations were looked at using weber's theory of bureaucratic structures.
However, it was complex hence there was a need to develop simpler concepts. The concepts developed nowadays focus on decentralization within organizations (Barry, 2002: 45). This is possible if an organization has several independent units operating simultaneously. There are several metaphors put across by organization theorists to explain the structural model of organizations. The metaphors simplify the complex structure of organizations. This makes complicated arguments understandable hence it becomes possible to make a connection between the metaphors and the operational structure of organizations. If we think of the hierarchy in an organization, then, the river metaphor comes into mind. An organization requires various inputs, which could be likened to the [url=http://www.shewyne.com/moncleroutlet.html]moncler outlet[/url] tributaries of a river.
The river applies the [url=http://www.jeremyparendt.com/jimmy-choo.php]jimmy choo chaussures[/url] principle of self-organization. Rivers do not burgeon from single primary units, but rather develop their patterns through local interaction of their components. This is reminiscent of the structure of an organization that requires several functional units to facilitate its operation. Rivers are flexible which could be likened to flexibility in organizations when making decisions. Flexibility enables a river to change course and facilitate its movement forward. Without flexibility, organizations would be stuck up, and this is detrimental to the future of such organizations. They need to be flexible, in order to [url=http://www.rtnagel.com/airjordan.php]nike air jordan pas cher[/url] sustain their growth and expansion over the years (Buono & Poulfelt, 2005: 34).
Organizations need to have constant movement just like rivers. This is crucial especially when making vital decisions. Using the river metaphor, organizations could be viewed as structures which are not discrete but in constant movement. On this aspect, the river metaphor is comparable to the human body metaphor that acknowledges that an organization should grow; failure to which it would simply die. Just like the human body, if an organization is not growing, it would simply die. The river metaphor could also be used to explain strategic management in organizations. The river metaphor for strategic management is a relatively new concept developed to replace the concept of path dependency.
It puts emphasis on timing, the association between strategies and institutional environments, momentum of strategies and the systematic nature of making decisions. It is based on the paradigm of organizational evolution and respects the realities of making decisions in the management. Long before, the river concept came into being, theorists argued for use of path dependency in strategic management. [url=http://www.fayatindia.com/giuseppe-zanotti.html]giuseppe zanotti[/url] However, this later resulted into some issues such as co-evolution, timing, time spacing and patching. The concept of the river strategy sees strategic decision making as rivers which are constrained by historical decisions, matters to do with timing and interplay with the environment. Strategic decision making occurs in systemic, network-like settings that resemble the molecular structure and behavior of water. Future strategic decisions of a company depend on the current velocity, mass and direction just like in rivers (Lamberg & Parvinen, 2003: 23).
The Human Body Metaphor, on the other hand, is applicable to consulting situations. In the context of an organization, the HBM is effective in exposing territorial and ethnocentric tendencies [url=http://www.tagverts.com/barbour.php]barbour online shop[/url] in behaviors and thinking, such as the function limitations "silo" thinking. In addition, HBM offers a "safe" language and environment to explore these tendencies alongside their impacts. It is the iceberg model that best demonstrates the multifaceted aspect of culture within an organization. This model illustrates culture as an iceberg, having the tangible expressions of behaviour and culture above the river surface, and the underlying beliefs, attitudes, meanings and values below the surface.
The iceberg metaphor presents a picture of the dual aspect of culture, i.e. the invisible and the visible. The invisible look is the inner appearance of culture, the organizational core beliefs that show the way people make sense of their attitudes, their world, their values, their principles, etc. This hidden face corresponds to 70 percent of the element of culture and is relative to the iceberg immersed under the water surface. The visible face, on the other hand, is the outer appearance of culture, to be exact, the peripheral aspects like people's [url=http://www.mnfruit.com/airjordan.php]jordan[/url] patterns of behaviour, social etiquette, their body language, etc. It is understood that just like the visible mass of ice floating, the visible face stands for only 30 percent of the enormity of culture. Just like the river bed, in the [url=http://www.mnfruit.com/airjordan.php]jordan pas cher[/url] river metaphor, culture conceals more than it discloses and, extraordinarily enough, what it conceals, it hides most efficiently from its own participants (Buono & Poulfelt, 2005: 83).
Precisely, this is mysterious intangible and hidden aspect of culture that might be an essential source of misunderstanding and miscommunication in intercultural communication, just because people are not aware of the subsistence of something that is concealed and hence they cannot see. Still [url=http://www.rtnagel.com/airjordan.php]jordan pas cher[/url] on the iceberg model and metaphor, when people are approached from other cultural settings, this image may bring to mind the liner Titanic moving towards the ice block and the crashing point into a mass of ice. Just as the systems of an organization can be seen as a metaphorical-circulatory system, the structures of an organization can be seen as the skeletal system.
That is, the bones that gives the framework and support in which the systems function. The structure of an organization, like an organizational system, relates to the manner in which the entire body is interconnected. For instance, a structure together with its hierarchies can affect the [url=http://www.gotprintsigns.com/abercrombiepascher/‎]abercrombie soldes[/url] manner in which the organizational members relate, just as body structures can affect the connection with the bones. More distinctively, structural hierarchies, like professional bureaucracies and Weberian influence the ways in which support and work roles are structured or planned within an organization (Casey, 2002: 23). Based on this reason, the structure type can affect [url=http://www.mxitcms.com/abercrombie/]abercrombie milano[/url] the capability or lack of capability for groups and people, within an organization, to function together, innovate and support one another.
The way in which those groups or people interact, in turn, can impact the continued existence of the organization, its mission and vision. In a comparable manner, the existence of the skeletal system as well as its parts can impact the type of lifestyle and health which can be followed by a person. From the river metaphor viewpoint, it is fascinating that the most of rivers are managed not only [url=http://www.jeremyparendt.com/Hollister-b5.php]hollister[/url] by natural motives, but also by modified river slopes, water volume control-systems and built channels. In a way, organizations are comparable phenomena with such like man-made establishments. They are socially generated rules that impact not only the organizational direction, but the velocity too. Organizations do not only control strategic decision-making. They provide directions, as well, by formulating structures and rule-settings hence making strategizing more expected. For instance, several countries make a hostile setting for ventures because of their unsound rule-settings. Basically, it is difficult to see the river direction if there are no dependable guidance systems.
Furthermore, the river, its landscape, such as the non-institutional and institutional settings and the timing elements make a co-evolutionary course that can offer opportunities for new organizational directions. The dissimilarities in the rocks resistance and escarpments create irregularities in the river bed and can, therefore, cause waterfalls and rapids. Likewise, long times of frost (the depressions that reduce investment opportunities) or rains that cause floods (economy-wide change periods) can facilitate crossing rivers or trim down the strategic alternatives. Therefore, to be able to comprehend the formation of strategic options, one has to recognize the co-evolutionary interaction between the river, landscapes and a variety of time-related elements (e.g. varied cycle phases, as well as, the timing of decisions-making).
相关的主题文章:

[url=http://park1.wakwak.com/~flyfisher/cgi-bin/zz7/joyful.cgi]barbour online shop Large For[/url]

[url=http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110854464629]hollister Profit Warnings[/url]

[url=http://www.cty-net.ne.jp/~ocean/yybbs/yybbs.cgi]woolrich outlet Things To Kno[/url]

The post has been approved 0 times