Organization theory and behavior exploration

Attachment Theory, Motivation Theories, Bureaucracy, Organizational Structure

Excerpt from Study Proposal:

The Philadelphia mayor, and any kind of mayor in general, must be characterized by

power by a certain level. Public government employees generally hold

great power, and mayors generate no exception, to the contrary.

In our circumstance, the mayor’s sources of person power will be:

. The power to reward, to manage the advantages process in the

organization

. The energy to sanction other staff

. The mayor’s formal placement within the corporation

. Personal charm

. The mayor’s authority since an expert

. The mayor’s personal drive pertaining to power

. Self-confidence

The company sources of electrical power include aspects of the

company system and intensely important supervision situations that

grant selected employees or groups of employees a relatively excessive ability to

effect others. One of the most important company sources of electric power

resides in controlled resources. The more directly a person controls more

resources, like human resources, financial resources, technical assets

or information, deciding upon all their allocation, the greater the effect

that person has on its subordinates.

Another company source of power consists in the formal

specialist and competence that a person holds. This kind of authority lives in the

rights that a person has in making decisions and taking actions. In other

words, the higher the task, the greater the energy a person can benefit from.

In the MANEUVER situation, it really is more than clear that the Phila.

mayor advantages from a great amount of electric power. His electrical power comes from the two

individual and organizational resources. On established level, the mayor contains

the greatest electricity within his organization. A lot more, his power can be

employed further than his organization, because the gran can use its power to

modify things in his community. Truly, this is the work he is paid out to

perform: exerting the ability invested in him in order to counteract the

problems that his community is working with.

But in the case, the creciente did the precise opposite point. In the initially

phases from the problem’s creation, he did not use his power at all

because he would not take virtually any actions, which usually would have been quite easy to get

him. It is quite hard to determine exactly why the mayor would not act upon

the situation from the beginning, enabling this problem to develop, to go out

of hand, and also to follow the alternative described in case study.

For me, the creciente refused for taking serious procedures from the

beginning because he under estimated the situation. He probably regarded

that the difficulty would not develop more than it had already. A lot more, the

creciente probably regarded as that the difficulty will minimize in time. This kind of

means that the mayor was characterized by inefficiencies.

Reference list:

1 ) Henry Mintzberg (2008). Wikipedia, the cost-free encyclopedia.

Gathered July a few, 2008 from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mintzberg%27smanagerialroles#The

oryonOrganizationalForms.

2 . Fiedler contingency style (2008). Wikipedia, the free of charge

encyclopedia. Gathered July a few, 2008 from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiedlercontingencymodel.

three or more. Mintzberg, Henry. Developing Theory about the Development of

Theory. Gathered July 5, 2008 by

http://www.mintzberg.org/pdf/devtheory.pdf.

some. Antoine, Patrich. Fiedler’s Contingency Theory of Leadership.

Retrieved July five, 2008 by

http://www.stfrancis.edu/ba/ghkickul/stuwebs/btopics/works/Fied

. htm.

Tweet