The Structure and Design of the U.S. Army
$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now
The paper discusses how the complexity of the U.S. Army's organizational design rests largely on its communication structure that is generally in a downward flow, where even two-way communication is not on a level playing field. The paper relates that the effectiveness of the organizational design is not measured through individual performance, but by the organization's success as a whole, and points out that all organizations, including the Army, require long term strategic planning. The paper discusses the Army's specific strategic plan for recruiting and image building activities and then asserts that creating a productive and successful organizational environment requires leaders to know how to manage change successfully. The paper identifies how organizational leaders can master the art of change management and looks at John Kotter's eight-stage model on how to successfully manage change.
From the Paper:"The complexity of the US Army's organizational design rests largely on its communication structure. According to Harris (2002) organizational design is influenced by the balance of goods and services offered, particularly in terms of whether it is a horizontal or a vertical structure. Horizontal communication occurs on a level playing field. In other words, the flow of communication is flat; it does not come from a higher or lower position on the company's structural hierarchy. In contrast, vertical communication is part of a top-down organizational structure in which leaders are communicating downward to subordinates, and subordinates are communicating upwards to leaders. As such, horizontal communication is usually informal, while vertical communication is usually formal.
"The Army is organized as a vertical structure, and as such the communication is generally in a downward flow. Downward (vertical) communication, according to Harris (2002), tends to have one of the following five functions: "(a) giving job instructions; (b) providing job rationale; (c) explaining procedures, policies, and practices; (d) furnishing performance feedback; and (e) transmitting information regarding the organization's mission and goals" (p. 232). Of these five functions, the one that is most likely to extend from one-way communication to two-way communication is performance feedback. The other four functions are most often merely a matter of a leader communicating something to a subordinate without any expectation of a response, other than to do what he has been instructed to do."
Sample of Sources Used:
- Allison, M. and Kaye, J. (2005) Strategic planning for nonprofit organizations, New York: John Wiley & Sons
- Canales, J. E., Kibble, B. D. & Terk, N.. (2000, Sep/Oct) One step beyond strategic planning. Foundation News & Commentary, 41(5).
- Harris, T.E. (2002) Applied organizational communication: Principles and pragmatics for future practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Gilley, A., McMillan, H. S., and Gilley, J. W. (2009). Organizational change and characteristics of leadership effectiveness. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 16, 38-47.
- Kotter, J.P. (2010). Leading change. In J.P. Kotter, The John Kotter leadership insights collection (4th ed.) Harvard Business Publishing
Cite this Term Paper:
The Structure and Design of the U.S. Army (2013, May 03) Retrieved December 07, 2021, from https://www.academon.com/term-paper/the-structure-and-design-of-the-us-army-153142/
"The Structure and Design of the U.S. Army" 03 May 2013. Web. 07 December. 2021. <https://www.academon.com/term-paper/the-structure-and-design-of-the-us-army-153142/>