Organizational role as given and as taken - Iloka Benneth Chiemelie, Muneed Mandalla

1. INTRODUCTION

Role has been the center of organizational discussion recently, as people are now thinking about organization in a scientific term. Practitioners have frequently been called by clients to analyze organizational life and the constant process of change, with the responsibility to recognize most organizational occurrences, be it in change process, strategy, or the structure of individual roles in the way role holder act and interact, both consciously and unconsciously (Krantz and Maltz, 1997).

But, there is still a great deal of confusion about understanding the meaning of role and how to apply it. It can range from an act someone does when playing a role in sports such as soccer, and this can have a different meaning to the role of writing and typing in organizations. The American Heritage Dictionary (1976) defines role as: (a) a character or part played by an actor in a dramatic performance; (b) the characteristic and expected social behavior of an individual; and (c) a function or position.

Krantz and Maltz (1997) defined role to include all proceedings in an organization. People "act" the part they are expected to play or the role as "given." In order to authorize the part to the played, the person authorizing the part must be in the role of a director or producer within the organization, he defined expectation, describes the steps in which he wants the players to follow, and gives the context and organizational meaning to the role being played (Krantz and Maltz, 1997).

The meaning emerging from these definition is that role is taken and given, and represents a part of a system of tasks. However, the definition doesn't quite inculcate all elements of a role in an organization, and this leads to the objective of this assignment which is to apply the organizational role analyses as defined by Krantz and Maltz (1997) in my current workplace and work experiences.

This paper is divided into three sections. The first section presents a background analyses on Krantz and Maltz (1997)'s role analyses, while the second section applies this definition in relation to my workplace experience. The final section contains the conclusions which shade light on the overall paper and recommendations for future workplace role application.

0.2 BACKGROUND STUDY

The concept of role is of great important within the intellectual machinery available for studying and understanding organizational life, and for appreciating the complexity associated with creating productive enterprises (Krantz and Maltz, 1997). The concept helps us to visualize where the person and the system intercept. At this point, we can start thinking about the interrelations between the two people involved (the director and the role player), as it renders the impact of organizations on individual visible, in terms of experiences for undertaking a roles, and it also renders the individual visible in terms of how the individual take up such roles (Krantz and Maltz, 1997).

The experience in role provides the data needed to understand the larger surrounding context and also shape the way in which people approach and understand us. It is the source of the explicit and tacit guideline needed to make productive contributions to the organization's system of tasks.

The framework that is essential for understanding the complexity that is inherent and experienced in role is built around two critical distinctions. The first can be seen as the method of how work is authorized in an organization and the second as the way in which the task is derived and undertaken. Krantz and Maltz (1997) categorized these distinctions as follows.

1. An aspect of role is either given by the organization or taken by the individual, and
2. The aspect under consideration is a result of the task and/or sentient system of the organization.

2.1 ROLE AS TAKEN AND ROLE AS GIVEN

This framework is formed where the two ways in which role is authorized and experienced intercept: role as taken and role as given. The role holder internalized the concept and constructs the view in her or role, how it is construed and understood subjectively, is the individual role as take. The people who define the individual's role as given are known as role influences (i.e. the people the role holder is working for and/or with) (Krantz and Maltz, 1997).

The given and taken aspects of role determine its authorization, as to whether the role is given to the individual by the organization and which the individual is held responsible for, or the role is taken by the individual in order to get his work done. Thus, the role dilemmas occur at this boundary between the organization's view of the role and the way the role is enacted by the role player.

For instance, let us consider the human resource department, where the HR manager gives orders to the HR executive to search and recruit staffs with required experiences to fill an open position in the organization. The way the manager gives the role (search and recruit) might be different from the way the executive takes the role. Illustrating further, the executive might be more intimate in the recruitment process and thus limiting the chances of the HR manager to better understand the new staff. This leads to dilemma as the HR manager can view the executive as being incompetent or unskilled, without understanding that it is more of an organizational process rather than a personal issues.

Figure (1) role as taken and role as given

.Source as adapted from: Krantz and Maltz (1997)

The figure (1) above, illustrated the relationships between "role as taken" and "role as given." The middle intercept is a representation of the degree to which the role as given is in line with the individual's role as take for the same role. This further show that there is a likely possibility of an individual not taking up his role as given in the system due to certain underlying dynamism with the system that remains unconscious, unnoted, and state to both the role player and role influencer. Thus, an individual's undertaking a role as given under his own style rather than given conditions does not necessary imply incompetency.

2.2 TASK AND SENTIENT SYSTEM ASPECTS OF ROLE

Another crucial dimension towards understanding organizational role is how the task is derived and motivated – the expression of the "task and sentient systems" (Miller & Rice, 1967). The difference between the task and sentient aspects of the role is critical within the organization as it is linked to one's responsibility (as take and given) and authorization (as given).

The task area is made of the role aspects that belong to the structures, procedures, and technologies, which is independent of the individuals within the organization. The group of tasks one knowingly believe is more easily recognizable as part of role since conscious expectations are built in, performance measurement occurs (the role as given), and the individual undertakes al task as taken. The extent to which someone is authorized within this area builds the space between what is given and what is taken (Ashkenas et al., 1995).

The sentient system is the human process in the organization: the symbols, meaning, unconscious forced and/or experienced emotional significance and attitudes and beliefs that are based on needs, fantasies, and patterns of identification contained within a role (Miller & Rice, 1967). This aspect of role is built around the hopes and fears that govern an individual's expectation how they will be viewed by others and the beliefs and attitudes on which they base their working principles from past experiences with others, and also how others respond to their growth identifications such as gender, ethnicity etc. (Walker, 1992).

Figure (2): taken and sentient aspect of role

Source as adapted from: Krantz and Maltz (1997)

The figure (2) above, depicts task and sentient systems, the intercept represents the boundary between formal and informal organizational expressions at work. The organizational development exits the most at this area and it include the dynamic process of teams, organizational change management, resistance to change, and other systemic views of how tasks are negotiated with the less visible parts of the organization.

For instance, in a manufacturing company were the machine operation is significantly shifted between the operators and engineer with the responsibility to coordinate operations, the output of the machine can be affected by the sentient behavior. Assuming the engineer meets the group of operators during their operating hours and starts instructing them based on his supposed roles with understanding the operators' different capabilities, the operators can react with anger since they might end up being given a task they are not good in, and thus distort the flow of operation.

In summary, the whole concept of role as given and role as taken, with the task and sentient system of role is trying to explain that within an organization, the bases of productivity is not always based on the order given to the staff but sometimes can be based on their view on the most effective ways to increase organizational productivity (Hirschhorn and Gilmore 1992). Thus, it is essential for the system to look beyond personal character and competence when judging the productivity of a staff, and prioritize achievement rather than the process through which it was achieved. 

3.0 APPLICATION ON MY CURRENT WORKPLACE EXPERIENCE

Currently, I work on a part time based with Bnetwork News Forum (www.bnetwork.us). It is a new network with the primary objective of providing its customers with the latest funny and weird news across the globe. I work as a publisher with the responsibility to publish funny and weird news, and also as an administrator with the responsibility to ensure that users to content offences sentence or comments that violate the new group's terms and conditions. Thus is a role analysis of my current experience in relation to Krantz and Maltz (1997).

3.1 MY ROLE AS GIVEN

Below is an analysis of the given roles I am authorized to undertake with the company.

3.1.1 Job description – my basic role is to publish at least 3 funny and weird news per day, and to ensure that no comment on my published news violates the forum's terms and conditions.

3.1.2 Goals and objective – the main objective is to provide users with new funny and weird news per day, with the objective of developing into one of the world's most famous news network and acquiring a great share of the new industry for the company.

3.1.3 Evaluation – my performance is evaluated by bnetwork owner, who checks on the total post I submit every day to ensure that I meet the set target.

3.1.4 Expectation – it is always expected that I meet the target and also submit posts that are relevant with source of where I got the post from.

3.2 MY ROLE AS TAKEN

As stated above, my role is to moderate comments on my post and post at least 3 new posts on weird and funny news per day. The problem is that it is not easy to get news that are just either funny or weird per day, thus I must diverse a way to ensure that I meet my job description as my salary is performance based.

Thus, I take the role as to get as much funny and weird news as possible, and post them online with the objective that I will post that I will post 21 funny and weird news per week (that is, three news per seven days), thus I can post more than 3 or less than 3 news per day but it must be equal to 21 per week. I explained my new definition of my role to the respect department and it was approved. Thus, they judge my performance on weekly bases, but they don't authorize carrying over of posts from one week to another.

3.3 REFLECTION ON MY CURRENT WORK ROLE

They have been numerous cases were I have engaged in crashes with the owner of bnetwork due to my posts being  marked as insufficient and not counted as part of the total post. The problem normally arises from the fact that the posts are still published under the website with visitors reading it, while it is described as insufficient in relation to my productivity and thus affecting my salary negatively.

I strongly believe that if the post is insufficient to the management, then they shouldn't publish it, else they should pay for the post. On my side, it create a sense of loss as I fell I am either being used by the management or my efforts are not gladly appreciated. I take strict measure to ensure that I adapt as much quality news as possible and also provide source to such rephrased news, thus, I don't see why they should be described as insufficient.

This influenced my productivity to a great extent, as it demotivated me. To me, writing is more than a responsibility, it is my hobby and a way of self nourishment as the more I write the more I read, and subsequently the more I know. Thus, I am more motivated with appreciation for my works than on monetary bases. A situation whereby I view myself as being used by the management definitely influence my productivity, because when I start to see it as a job instead of a hobby, I will focus on just the objectives rather than ensuring that my audience always enjoy my posting.

Overly, it can be see that Krantz and Maltz (1997)'s idea of how role should be evaluated is correct. The role players should not be judged by the directors based on how they performed their task, but rather as to whether they were able to undertake the required task. This is because; judgment in the form of criticism can reduce an employee's morale and thus negatively affect his or her productivity. Thus, the objective should be designed as to what is to be given, but how it is taken shouldn't be a big point of consideration so long as the employee takes exactly what is given to him.

3.4 MY WHEEL OF CHANGE

The wheel of change can be described as the elements that guide individuals in determining whether or not to change, and choosing their own change processes. Based on my experience with the management, and consideration of my job description, I drafted a balance sheet of change as illustrated below to guide me as the determining factor of whether or not to change. The change occurred because they reason to change is greater than reason not to change.

Table (1): my balance sheet of change

Reasons to change

Reasons not to change

Job security – the current economic situation making find job difficult, and is am willing to comply with their requirement, it will help me after graduation to secure a permanent position in the company. Paid work – currently I am receiving salary on monthly bases and if I decided not to change and quit, it will result is having nothing at the end of the month. As a source of motivation – the job helps me in building my emotional and psychological strength of motivating myself, and it will help me in the future as I will find it easy to deal with any situation. Intellectual growth – having the opportunity to work with bnetwork also services as a source of intellectual growth, as I have to first read all the news and understand them before publishing them for review.

No payment for my posts – when my post is marked as insufficient, the post will still be published with the site, but I will not get any payment for such post and it makes me feel like I am being used by the company. Stressful – combing studies with work is stressful and while I have to meet the job description, I also have to ensure that I make good results for my future. Not my dream job – my dream job is to work in the bank, and publication is not something I have fancied before. I just took the job because I had no choice.

4.0 CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the above project paper has been able to help us understand roles in relation to organizational undertaking. Which role can be defined as all task related to a set objective within an organization, the way they are understood by the employee (taken) can sometimes differ from the way they are authorized by the employer (given).

However, the research paper illustrated that while it is necessary for employers to ensure that their employees undertake given roles in relation to the way they are authorized, employers must also understand that different in the way these roles are undertaken doesn't necessary imply incompetency on the side of the employee, but a sort of change within the system and the employer sometimes is doing so in order to ensure efficiency and increase productivity.

This was illustrated with my role which stated that I should ensure to publish at least 3 news per day, but since all news available across the globe are not central towards the funny and weird category, getting news based on these categories can sometimes the difficult. For instance, I can see five new posts in these categories some days, and about 1 or 2 in order day. Thus, in order to ensure that I meet the set objective as my salary is based on productivity, I change the way the role was given ( 3 news per day) by taking it in a different way (21 news per week). Therefore, someday I can publish 5 new posts and some other days I can publish just 2 new posts which will sum up as 21 by the end of the week.

However, the management system undertakes certain actions that deter my task performance by indicating some posts as insufficient and yet publishing these post. This reduced my morale as I believe I should be paid for every post published and whether insufficient or sufficient, but I end up getting paid for only the sufficient post. Thus, it can be concluded that, the organizational system is a complex environment and in order to reduce possibility of conflicts and thus increase employee's morale, the director who authorizes the rule should bear in mind that there is a possibility of the role being taken in a different way; but so long as the employees achieves the objectives, they should appreciate their efforts.

Reflecting on the whole situation illustrates that sometimes change is not a thing of chose, rather a forced process we adopt as we don't have other supplements if we decided not to adopt it. I stayed with the job and associated stress because I have no other job and I need the money as well as experience it brings. However, this have taught me a great reason and given me reason to carefully negotiate my job description in the future.

5.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ashkenas, R., Ulrich, D., Jick, T. and Kerr, S. (1995) The Boundaryless Organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Hirschhorn, L. and Gilmore, T. (1992)“The New Boundaries of the Boundaryless” Company. Harvard Business Review, May-June. Boston: Harvard Business Review.

Miller, E. J., & Rice, A. K. (1967). Systems of organization: The control of task and sentient boundaries. London: Tavistock.

Krantz, J. and Maltz, M. (1997) "A Framework for Consulting to Organizational Role," Consulting Psychology Journal, Vol. 49, No. 2, 137-151. Available at: http://www.worklab.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Role-Consultation-Article2.pdf[Accessed on: 13-04-2012].