Hospital is an integral part of the society in the modern world. With the development of the science and technology, the medication process has also improved. This has fuelled the rise of the hospitals. Worombye Regional Hospital, in Queensland, is one of the most important hospitals in the country. It is under the control of the Government as the funding is done by the state Government. However, a separate Board of Directors (BOD) looks after the affairs of the hospital. The duality of the vision in the management and the owners has been responsible in the mismanagement of the hospital.
The management is bureaucratic and thus the decision making process is slow. The management has not been able to control the employees and motivate them. The management has to look into the matter and this will help in developing the performance of the hospital.Identification of the problemIn the above mentioned case, the structure of management is the problem. The leadership in the management is autocratic which underlies the fact that the decisions are taken by the top level management only.
The employees are not a part in the process. Moreover, the vision of the management is not clear. The structure of the organization changes frequently which makes it confusing for the employees. In addition to this, there is no system to motivate the employees in a proper way.
The situation can be explained with the help of Fiedler’s model of contingency theory. In the autocratic type of leadership, the labor turnover is high while the morale is low. (Eade, n.d.; P 1). The autocratic leadership styles are prevalent in the governments of the countries like Nigeria. The country was affected by the poverty and widespread mismanagement.
(Rotberg, July, 2004).Critical analysisThe problem in the case can be explained with the help of Fiedler’s model of contingency theory. The theory helps in the measurement of the effectiveness of the leader. The effectiveness depends primarily on two factors- style of leadership and the situational favorableness. The style of the leadership can be measured by Fiedler by the help of the Least Preferred Co-Worker (LPC) model.
In this process the leader is given a task of rating his co workers with whom he has worked from a scale of 1 to 8. Various traits of the leaders are measured in this technique. For example, hard working may be given a scale of 1 and lazy may be given the scale of 8. A leader who has a high LPC score will be more inclined in maintaining good relationship with the people. On the other hand, the leader with the lowest LPC score will be more task oriented.
People who give importance to the relationship tend to rate the coworkers the highest while people who give more priority to the tasks and functions will rate the workers lowest. However, Fiedler did not think that the style of leadership is the most important constituent in the effectiveness of the leaders. It is the situation that shapes the efficiency of a leader. Fiedler has underlined three situations in describing the situational effectives. These are stated as follows:Leader-Member Relations: It refers to the relationship between the leader and the subordinates in the organization. The relationship between the two groups of people must be smooth and they should have trust in their functions.
Task Structure: It refers to the organization of the tasks in the company and the clearness of the instructions of the management to the workers.Leader Position Power: It refers to the position of power held by the leader in the organization.The condition is termed favorable when the three situations are present in an organization. The three factors help in the development of the organization. In the case of the favorable situation, the low LPC leaders perform well, while the high LPC leaders do well in the case of the intermediate favorableness. The Fiedler’s model has been helpful in the measurement of the effectiveness of the leadership and the development of the condition of the company. However, it has to be stated that the leadership of an organization depends on the situation and the situation may demand changes on the part of the management. The organization and the leader may improvise the situations to develop the favorable situations.
The development of the organization depends upon the responsiveness of the management to change. (Fiedler’s contingency theory, n.d.
; Pp 1-2)In the case of the Worombye Regional Hospital, the situational analysis states that the three factors are not present in the organization. The relationship between the management and the workers is poor. The tasks in the organization depicted by the management are not clear and they frequently change. The leadership style of the management is autocratic and the employees do not feel motivated to work in the organization. The decision making process has to pass through different steps and thus is slow. The leadership has been coercive in nature. The management is interested in the completion of the tasks. However, there has been no clear structure about the formulationof the tasks.
This adds to the chaos in the environment. (Case Scenario: Worombye Regional Hospital, n.d.
)The autocratic leadership has gone out of fashion in the case of the modern day organizations. The decision making process rests with the upper level management. It may happen that the upper level management was not able to take the right decision. This requires intervention by the workers. However, in this case, the workers are not allowed in the management. This effects the development of the organization.
(Autocratic Leadership Jerk Leaders and The ‘Secret ‘ to High Performance and Loyalty, n.d.; Vliert, n.d.).The modern organizations have given way to the autocratic form of management and accepted the democratic style. However, in the case of the new organizations, a leader is needed to guide the affairs of the company.
The need for the autocratic leadership has not vanished and there are organizations in the world like the hospital employing the autocratic form of leadership. (McCrimmon, 6th August, 2007; Theyagu, n.d.; Woods. P, 2004 )RecommendationsThe management should change its views regarding the treatment of the workers.
The vision should change from the task oriented to the people oriented forms. Certain policies to reward the employees should be implemented. This will increase the functions of the workers in the organization.
The level of management should be departmentalized further. There should be small divisions handled by the separate managers. The manager of each division should be responsible for the operation and function of the division. Training and development should be provided to the employees. The idea of the self managed teams should be implemented. They should be integrated in the process of the management.
(Manufacturing: Brent style shows how not to do it, 17th March, 2005; Vugt et al, 25th June, 2003; Sargent & Miller, n.d.).ConclusionsThe main problem of the Government has been the autocratic form of leadership. The workers are not taken in the decision making process and this makes them demotivated to work. Moreover, the vision of the management is unclear. The management should offer a concise structure in the level of management and the workers. The employees should be invited to provide the suggestions to improve the functions of the organization.
A mixture of the autocratic and democratic leadership would be good for the company. The Government should imply direct control ion the management of the organization. This would bring stability in the organization.