Research
Paper 9: A Free Research Paper
Organisational
Role and Role Relationships
Prof Dr Crawford – Director
HRODC Postgraduate Training
Institute, A Postgraduate-Only Institution.
Role, according to Berger (1973. p.79), role is a "typified
response to a typified expectation". For Raven and Ruben (1976, p. 514),
role is a "pattern of behaviour that characterises and is expected of a
person who occupies certain position in a group or social organisation".
These two definitions bear some similarities. However, we might analyse the,
slightly more explicit, one by Raven and Ruben. There are two parts to this
definition. The first is, the pattern of behaviour that characterises a person
who occupies certain position in a group or social organisation. Suggestive,
here, is that a person who occupies a certain position takes on role
characteristics. This means that there are certain qualities or
characteristics, which are typical of a person within that position. Also
implicit, are the suggestions that: The behaviour, which is typical, is
contingent on the particular position. Certain behaviour is standard for one
position and might not be for another; the position, and its characteristic
behaviour, is standard. Whoever the post holder is, the behaviour which
typifies the position remains the same: The position makes no distinction
between personalities, who occupy the role; Although the incumbents, from time
to time, change, the role characteristics and standardised behaviour remain the
same.
The other part of the definition suggests that there is a pattern of
behaviour that is typical of a person who occupies a position in a group or
social organisation. Implicit, here, is the notion that not only is the
behaviour standard, but that there is a standard set of behavioural
expectations. This is a potentially conflicting situation, in that whilst the
behaviour is constant, or rather permanent, there is a set of expectations,
which is also fairly standard, but not necessarily in total conformity with the
standard behaviour. To make it even more confusing is the idea that the
individual, who occupies a certain position, has a set of people who expects
certain display of behaviour from him or her. This set of people, represents
the individual’s role set.
The fact that the role set itself constitutes several role segments or
subsets of the role set, means that what appears to be a standard set of
behavioural patterns and expectations becomes a varying pattern and
expectations of behaviour. This means that the incumbent is expected to respond
to the role set, collectively and satisfactorily, and at the same time
fulfilling the needs and aspirations of each segment. This seems highly
hypocritical, the fact that conflicts are almost inevitable - conflicts of
interests and expectations. Whenever the incumbent attempts to represent these
need, aspirations and expectations, one group or other groups might not be
satisfied. The incumbent, by virtue of his or her position as a role actor, may
act out different scenes within certain contexts. Then it might mean failing to
satisfy a number of role segments, while attempting to satisfy others. Some
segments may be satisfied on one occasion, and another or others on subsequent
occasions. Probably the most important thing, is that certain groups, or
certain segments, should not feel totally ignored, in terms of being given
preference to decisions.
As was indicated in the role relationship models, which are presented, a
manager has both his superior/s and subordinates to satisfy, along with those
people who are not necessarily under his direct control, but who are much lower
in the hierarchy. It could be a matter of making decisions in, for example,
resource allocation and utilisation. One example might be a production manager
who makes demands regarding, and expects his assistant manager to reduce the
level of consumption to be reduced from 5X amount to 4X. At the same time,
assistant managers own subordinates expect to be allocated 5X amount of
resources. These represent fairly constant demands and each of the segments
will increase its level of demands. It means that the manager or head of a
department might, at one time, satisfy the demands of her director or principal
by reducing the resource allocation and utilisation, but cannot do this at all
times. She is likely to find it necessary to satisfy the demands of her
subordinates, at least some of the times, in terms of the amount of resources
allocated to them. This is because he may want to establish or maintain a good
relationship with them on the perception that this will create the possibility
of a high level of influence, and reduce conflicts.
In society at large, and in the various sectors of society, there is a
high level of individuality with respect to roles. What happens is, in fact,
that the individual in society may change his or her role without seeking a
great deal of compromise from others. For example, a person who occupies the
position of a bachelor, may change to a married person without causing many
problems. The individual may also change occupation, quite easily. In an
organisational context, roles are tied to the tasks to be performed and the
individual finds it difficult to interchange between one role and another.
There is an abounding duty for an individual to play the particular role assigned
to him or her until, if and when, another assignment is given, in which case
another individual will occupy his or her former position as a replacement.
This does not preclude the occupation of more that one role, by one individual,
on a permanent basis, and rotation (moving from one job to another) on a
temporary basis.
Despite the claim regarding the high degree of permanence, it should
made quite clear that organisational roles can, in fact be and often are
disbanded or re-defined. This is particularly true in the event of
organisational re-design or re-structuring. The notion of accountability comes
into play, here, in which case an individual is accountable, not only to those
who make policy decisions, but also to the people who implement them and those
on whom they are likely to have an effect, negative or positive.
Another important aspect of role is the incumbent’s perception of the
requirements of his or her role. This perception, claims Wren and Voich (1984),
is a product of past experience or, in the case of a new incumbent, a personal
judgement of the role requirements. Implicit in roles are norms and values.
Values are highly abstracted and present great difficulty of interpretation. In
society at large, they are lade with requirement, the realisation of which is
of a high moral demand (Katz and Kahn, 1978). In organisations. there are
values too - however, they relate to goal accomplishment.
Norms are the behavioural expectations of a role set for a role actor.
Requirements may be specified, but not at the level of role expectations.
Norms, as proposed by Argyle (1972), represent a group’s solutions to the
external and internal problems that confront it. This, he asserts, is a rule,
e.g. about promotion and discipline, which are used to administer the
activities of the organisation. One major difficulty with norms is that an
individual is expected to interpret and respond to the demands of particular
situations as they arise.
LOW ROLE SPECIFICITY: ROLE AMBIGUITY ROLE AVOIDANCE
There should be no question concerning what is required of an incumbent
within an organisational setting (Weeks, 1974). He or she should know: what his
or her tasks are in relation to the primary task; his or her span of management
(if any); the different role segment which are associated with that role set;
the immediate role sender, that is the person to whom he or she is directly
accountable. A situation that falls short of this specification, may lead to
the role being ambiguous. Following from this, the situation will arise where
confusion persists.
The incumbent, is such situation, has very few choices, apart from
requesting that the role be specified. On one hand, he might enact the part of
a role misfit in which case he or she will narrow the boundary of operation
tremendously, to reduce the level of contact with the significant others (those
important role determiners). This might be if it results in low performance of
more explicit aspects of the role. On the other hand, the incumbent might draw
on his experience and make a number of assumptions regarding his role. The
implications are that conflict will result as boundary intrusion becomes
inevitable. This means that individuals perform their roles without specific
guidelines pertaining to their duties and areas of responsibility, thus leading
to inconsistent perception of roles. The fact is that there has not been a
mutual agreement regarding who should do what, means that it is likely that one
individual may perform activities that are presumed by another or others to be
within their area of operation.
Low role specificity could also have the reverse effect, thus resulting
in role avoidance. In this case, the role is deliberately shirked by one or
both parties who perform related roles. The notion of role avoidance is
distinct from the concept of role dodging, which is discussed below. While the
role avoider deliberately and openly rejects the implicit aspects of his job,
the role dodger is more discreet and exhibits a great deal of pretence, thus disguising
that he fails to perform his explicit duties. While the role dodger accepts the
responsibility for the performance of certain tasks, the role avoider points
the finger at someone else.
HIGH ROLE SPECIFICITY: ROLE DODGING - PLAYING IT SAFE.
While it is desirable for roles to be specified, too high a
specification might have tremendous ill effects. When role requirements are
detailed, there is no room for initiative. High specification requires close
supervision. This fact is noted by Katz and Kahn (1978) who suggested that
there is a high preference, among workers, for general, rather than close
supervision. Gray and Starke (1988, p.257) note that supportive behaviours from
the manager, not direction, will rebuild commitment of workers to organisational
objectives. Close supervision subsequently leads to role dodging and the act of
playing it safe. In this case, the organisation members try to do only the
things that are specified. Things that are well within their capacity to do,
but which are not specified, will be neglected. Role dodgers avoid work but
exhibit a great deal of pretence because they do not want the fact to be known
to those in authority. The underlying assumption is that no credit will be
given to them for undertaking activities that are considered to be outside
their specified areas of responsibility.
Not only are un-specified tasks avoided, but so are specified ones.
Previous research (Crawford, 1985) has indicated that role dodgers are often
commended for the behaviours that they make explicit, and which, therefore, are
noticed by those concerned and who are able to show recognition. In this case
study, one subordinate who, under normal circumstance, exhibited poor
professional conduct and a low level of competence was recommended for
promotion above others who, on the whole, were quite competent and exhibited a
high level of professionalism. ‘Mr T’, one of the role dodgers, made
significant efforts to draw the attention of the manager to any activity that
he had undertaken and which was considered worthwhile. As a result, he received
open commendation. In the presence of the manager, he made a marvellous
exhibition of his performance. Unfortunately, in his absence, ‘Mr. T’. reverted
to his usual poor performance.
A further explanation of the notion of role dodging is that whenever the
role dodgers are being watched, they make great effort to please their
superiors. On the withdrawal of close supervision, they revert to their normal
behaviour, that of neglecting some elements of their role. The idea of ‘playing
it safe’ relates to the fact that some individuals might behave in an expected
manner, merely to satisfy the onlooker. The resistance or non-commitment of
these individuals to the required role enactment is therefore a latent factor.
ROLE ACTUALISATION
It might be worth considering the social anthropological view of role.
is seen to consist of "the activity the incumbent would engage in were he
to act solely in terms of the normative demands upon someone in his
position" (Katz and Kahn, 1978. p.85). Implicit in this definition, is the
suggestion that certain normative demands are made of individuals in given
positions, in which event total conformity is optional. Realistically speaking,
some truth is conveyed. This is if whatever built-in role requirements there
might be, there will be varying levels of compliance. The levels of compliance
will depend on the particular personality as a role incumbent. The idea of
self-image is nonetheless evident, thus particular personality traits might be
associated with a given role. The role incumbent is therefore expected to
change to fit closely into the role. Although the personality requirement is
implicit, there is no rule regarding the universality of roles accompanying
each position. As noted by Goffman (1973) what is handled from one position in
one organisation, may be apportioned to two or three kinds of positions in
another organisation. The point made, is that what is seen as a single role in
one organisation, may be several roles in another. An added complication is
that although the role sectors or role segments might be similar in two
organisations, the actual role enactment might be different. The role of a
director for example, differs from one organisation to another. The incumbent
at first, behaves according to his perception of the behaviour that is expected
of him. Later, adjustments are made in conformity with real expectations.
An important point made by Berger (1973) is that identity comes with
conduct and that conduct occurs in response to a specific social situation.
This means that the person playing a particular role expects social support
from his role set. His behaviour might generate social characteristic like,
democratic, autocratic, generous, dedicated. This social self (the self seen by
others) helps in maintaining his self ideal (whom he actually is,
behaviourally), thus strengthening his role position. Implicit, here, is the
suggestion that the incumbent is constrained by, not only the expectations of
his role set, but also the support that it is willing to give. This has
implications for the management of organisations in that the manager might, in
some cases, be able to generate acceptable behaviour, and at other times is
unable to do so. Whatever strategies are used, it is expected that when policy
decisions are made, they will be, largely, acceptable to those who are to
implement them. The degree of acceptability pertains, not only to the
strategies used, but, to the extent to which these strategies conform to the
expectations of the role set. Pertinent to these expectations is the pattern
that the incumbent has established, about his choice of strategies.
The structure of an organisation dictates the extent to which roles
might be specified. The degree of specificity of organisation structure rests
on a continuum, from high to low. If the hierarchical and matrix structures are
placed on the extremes of the continuum from left to right, respectively, the
hierarchical structure will be seen to have a high role specification and the
matrix structure, low role specification (see Fig.). It therefore means that
organisations that fall on different points of the continuum will have varying
degrees of role specification. Since organisation structure embodies a system
of relationship, it follows that these relationships relate to the roles. The
implications are that while some organisations (those toward the left of the
continuum) will require clearly defined role relationship, others (those on the
right) require low level of specification.
The fact that there are problems with both high and low role
specifications, heralds the necessity for deliberate attempt to create levels
of relationships that will generate a balance, thus avoiding the two extremes,
high and low role specification. This situation is difficult to achieve because
roles and role relationships are an essential function of organisational
structure. Nevertheless, the fact is that the degree, to which an
organisational structure is permanent, is contingent on the extent to which the
members of the organisation are unwilling to change their behaviour. This is
suggestive of the fact that, despite the difficulties that are implicit, the
possibility does exist for such major change.
Avoidance of extremes, high and low role specifications, can allay fears
of excessive role dodging and role avoidance, particularly because low role
specificity connotes arbitrary role enactment, and a high level of
specification suggests a great deal of rigidity.
Fig. 1: Relationship
Between Organisational Structure and Role Specificity.
Hierarchical Structure
Matrix Structure
High Role
Specification Low
Role Specification
ROLE SET
Each individual in organisations belongs to two or more groups - in the
most formal sense, she belongs to one or two command groups (a group consisting
of a superior and her subordinates) and an informal group. The individual also
belongs to the larger group, the organisation. There are also several groups of
which the individual is not a member. For example, if he works in the accounts
department, he might not be a member of the marketing group. All the different
groups and individuals within them have perception as to how a particular role
should be enacted. As a result, they have expectations of the behaviour of the
incumbent.
We might therefore define a role set as all those who have general
behavioural expectations of an incumbent and in some way affect his behaviour.
It is therefore possible for the role set to extend beyond the boundaries of
the organisation. It is important to note that individuals within a role set
might have quite different expectations of an incumbent. This makes the role
set’s expectation of an incumbent general, rather than specific.
ROLE SEGMENT
Since each individual might perceive the role of an incumbent
differently, it is possible that they are grouped in accordance with their
similarity of expectations of the behaviour of incumbents. Those who have
similar and specific expectations of incumbents for segments or sub-groups,
which might relate to the way in which they are grouped for the performance of
formal organisational tasks.
A role segment might then be regarded as one or more people who are
members of a role set and who have similar expectations of an incumbent.
Colleagues of an incumbent might also form a segment of his role. Despite the
fact that the model below highlights the role of the managing director,
connoting that the person who enacts that role is the incumbent, it must be
remembered that anyone and everyone is an incumbent and therefore has a role
set.
CONFLICT AND ROLE CONFLICT
Conflict might be
regarded as:
- A disagreement;
- A discord or disparity between role
perception and role expectation; or - Competing role expectations
The traditional view of conflict is that
it is something to avoid at all cost, a phenomenon that has disastrous
consequences for the organisation. This is not the full story. Conflict is
desirable but must be managed effectively.
Fig. 2: Role Relationships In A Manufacturing Company
Fig.
3: Role Relationships In A Social Services Department
Conflict enables individuals to re-evaluate their stance, usually
arriving at a ‘satisfying’ solution in the interest of the organisation.
Conflict of this sort is explicit and might manifest in a display of extreme
emotion (verbal outburst) that some US practitioners refers to as ‘Going Into
Excess’. ‘Going into excess’ might not be bad, after all – but seeks to
establish the degree to which individuals wish to defend their stance on
particular issues. In fact, a number of organisations deliberately introduce
conflict. This might be achieved through the employment of individuals of
strong personality. who have other characteristics that are at variance with
those of the pre-existing group. One positive effect of this strategy is that
it reduces the likelihood of groupthink – where the group is likely to make
ineffective decisions – improving the organisation’s overall decision-making
process. Conflict might also be introduced through various team development
activities.
While conflict has a generally positive effect on organisational
functioning, if it is left unmanaged it might have disastrous consequences.
This means that conflict is allowed to persist, resulting in the impairment of
role performance. As effective conflict management suggests, conflict should be
dealt with in such a way that role conflict is avoided. The following
scenario is an example of conflict manifesting in role conflict. How
should the manager and supervisor have addressed the situation, so as to avert
role conflict? How would you address the current situation?
THE SUPERMARKET CHECKOUT
A supermarket checkout, Deidre, has been faced with the challenge of
meeting the expectations of her manager and supervisor, in two related
segments, her colleagues and accountants in others, respectively. Since she
started four weeks ago, she was faced with the prospect of pleasing her
colleagues and others and dissatisfying her superiors, or satisfying the
expectations of her superiors and disappoints the other internal members of her
role set. She chose the latter - who were quite aware of the situation -
because of the implications that her behaviour has on her continued
employment.
When Deidre’
arrives at work one morning, she was accosted by her colleagues (other checkouts)
and accused of ‘showing them up’ by doing the following things:
- Arriving at work much ahead of schedule
- Remaining behind to receive the accountants’
report regarding the taking of the day
- Sending Money to the cash office more frequently
than they do
- Keeping her uniform neat and tidy.
Deidre’ was extremely upset but tried to forget the incident and took up
her position as usual. She maintained her usual speed and, as was
characteristic of her, was courteous to customers. However, about four hours later,
a few minutes before her lunch-break, she remembered the encounter - while
checking a customer’s purchase. She went completely motionless, for an
observable period, to the expressed annoyance of queuing customers. She
returned from her lunch break, feeling somewhat relieved. However, she checked
20% less customers and handled 30% less transaction than her daily average.
This undesirable situation persisted for approximately 3 weeks.
The supermarket manager, having noticed the difference in Deidre's performance,
summoned her to a meeting, during which she gave her a verbal warning. The
manager having exhibited no understanding of her explanation and her feeling
that she had no support, Deidre's performance got gradually worse, to the
extent that she was brought before a disciplinary panel.
Research Paper 9: Organisational Role and Role Relationships
- A Free Research Paper from Prof. Dr. Crawford,
HRODC Postgraduate Training Institute, A Postgraduate-Only Training Institute: http://www.hrodc.com;
http://www.hrodc-mobile.com/;
http://www.hrodc-business-products-and-services.com/index.html
HRODC Postgraduate Training Institute
A Postgraduate Training Institute, based
in United Kingdom, with International Operation, HRODC Postgraduate Training Institute
is registered with the UK Register of Learning Providers (UKRLP), of the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS), formerly Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills
(DIUS). Its Registration Number is: 10019585 and can it be Verified at: http://www.ukrlp.co.uk/.
It has been engaged in Postgraduate
Training and Consultancy since 1996. Our Institute offers over 800 Diploma – Postgraduate – Short Courses, and 57 Postgraduate Diploma Programmes.
1.
Our
websites are:
2.
We
admit full-time students and delegates (short course participants) with
academic qualifications ranging from Undergraduate Degrees to PhDs;
3.
Classroom-based
Diploma – Postgraduate Short Courses are of a minimum of 5 days (30
Credit-Hours);
4.
The
equivalent Video-Enhanced On-Line (Video-Enabled Face-to-Face) delivery for a
5-day course is 10 days, based on 3 hours per day;
5.
Intensive
Full-Time {5 days (30 hours) per week direct lecturer-contact} Postgraduate
Diploma Programmes last 3 months (360 Credit-Hours);
6.
Full-Time
(15 hours direct lecturer-contact) Postgraduate Diploma Programmes are of 6
months’ duration (360 Credit-Hours);
7.
Video-Enhanced
On-Line Postgraduate Diploma Programmes (360 Credit-Hours) last 20 weeks. This
delivery is based on direct lecturer contact for 3 hours per day, 6 days per
week (http://www.hrodc-business-products-and-services.com/);
8.
Students
who successfully complete the Postgraduate Diploma will progress to a
Postgraduate Degree – MA, MBA, MSc - by a 15,000 to 20,000 words supervised
dissertation, the prerequisite for which is course #7 (Research Methodology);
9.
Courses
are delivered in over 30 Cities including Dubai, Kuala Lumpur, Paris, Milan,
Caracas, Manila, Manama, Istanbul, Jakarta;
10. The UK Deliveries are usually in Central
London and occasionally in Manchester, Birmingham and Wolverhampton;
11. Hotel ‘Academies’, Conference and
Meeting Rooms are utilised for course delivery purpose.
The
Programme and Course cost does not include living accommodation. However,
delegates are treated with the following:
Ø
Free Continuous snacks throughout
the Event Days;
Ø
Free Hot Lunch on Event Days;
Ø
Free City Tour;
Ø
Free Stationery;
Ø
Free On-site Internet Access;
Ø
HRODC Postgraduate
Training Institute’s Postgraduate
Diploma; or
Ø
Certificate of
Attendance and Participation – if unsuccessful on resit.
HRODC
Postgraduate Training Institute’s Complimentary Products include:
1.
HRODC Postgraduate Training Institute’s Leather Conference Folder;
2.
HRODC Postgraduate Training Institute’s Leather Conference Ring Binder/ Writing Pad;
3.
HRODC Postgraduate Training Institute’s Key Ring/ Chain;
4.
HRODC Postgraduate Training Institute’s Leather Conference (Computer – Phone) Bag – Black or Brown;
5.
HRODC Postgraduate Training Institute’s 8GB USB Flash Memory Drive, with Course/ Programme Material;
6.
HRODC Postgraduate Training Institute’s Metal Pen;
7.
HRODC Postgraduate Training Institute’s Polo Shirt.
**Please see product images, as a separate file
- Complimentary Products For Students, from HRODC Postgraduate Training
Institute**
HRODC Postgraduate Training Institute’s
Global Telephone Numbers
|
||||
You are most
welcome to communicate with me, view our progress or follow us, on:
|
|
Outlook:
|
|
Skype:
|
hrodcltdpgti4
|
Facebook #1
|
|
Facebook #2:
|
https://www.facebook.com/institute2?fref=ts
|
Facebook #3
|
https://www.facebook.com/groups/CoursesWorldwide/?ref=bookmarks
|
Twitter:
|
|
Linked-In:
|
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/prof-dr-crawford-hrodc-postgraduate-training-institute-71b5452a
|
You Tube:
|
|
Website #1
|
|
Website #2
|
|
Website #3
|
|
Website #4
|
|
With Kindest Regards
ProfDr Crawford
Prof Dr Crawford -
Director
