It is true that the image of an organisation reflects its brain in terms of performance of the organisations. In university institutions for example, the organisational environment may create excitement and hence foster high quality education and learning.
Thus the organisational structure and the management style adopted by the institutional may inspire and motivate the learning processes or may fail to encourage learning culture in students in the university. The aim of every university is to help learners acquire skills, knowledge and experience while also helping them become flexible in their thinking and conceptualisation so that they are able to meet complexities in their day-to-day lives.
Universities therefore focus to help each student explore and recognize various alternative worldviews, practices, technologies and innovations among others. These desired changes in learners are achieved by involving all the personnel in the universities including lecturers and subordinates; the management, resources and the learners themselves.
According to Beer and Nohria (2000, 140) an ideal organisation should be able to balance between the O and E strategies. This implies that an institution should be able to balance between meeting the needs of the students and the needs the university staff and be able to integrate the ideas of the organisation. The institution’s management should be ready to listen, debate and also willing to learn from both sides.
The management should be ready to integrate the ideas of the university staff particularly the lecturers and technicians who constantly interact with the students as well as the students’ views on the direction of their learning. This means that the institution should be able to use the students and the university staff as the consultants besides the outside consultants to be able to ensure quality outcome in students.
An institution’s image is also enhanced by the level of motivation it offers to the university staff and the students. Recognizing the performance and commitment of the staff in achieving the objectives of the university also encourages the students to follow in the footsteps of their lecturers and other staff who are working hard to help them achieve their goals. The staff may be given monetary rewards or other forms of rewards which encourage achievement of the organisational culture and objectives.
The students on the other hand may be awarded scholarships, opportunities for exchange programmes with other universities in other countries or opportunities to represent the universities in forums and congressional meetings. The students hence practically learn the importance of giving rewards and various reward schemes that could be applied in their real working experience. According to Beer and Nohria (2000, 140) giving of rewards represent a fair exchange of values between the institution and individuals in the institution.
The management’s commitment to providing of total-quality training programs to students and the university staffs also reflects the quality of outcome from the university (Morgan 2006, 106). The university’s commitment to provide resources to facilitate learning and the university’s openness to help learners experiment on their talents help promote diverse quality outcome.
Universities should be able to access the status and the progress of every programme it offers to students and other customers and review them to be able to align them with the goals of the institution. It should also be able to review the capacity of its teaching staff as well as other staffs who support the teaching and learning process in meeting the objectives and be able to improve their capacities.
When the university encourages experimentation through provision of adequate and modern facilities, the students as well as the university staff are better enabled to expand their knowledge, skills and experience and therefore they become very innovative and creative in tackling challenges. Besides, both the university staff and the students become more receptive to new ideas.
In achieving the goals of the university as well as that of its stakeholders, the university has to eliminate the boundaries that may exist in its communication processes so as to achieve high-involvement of all the individuals in the institution.
Reference List
Beer, M., & Nohria, N., 2000, Cracking the code of change. Harvard Business Review, 78 (3): 133-141. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Morgan, G., 2006, Images of organization, updated edition. California: Sage Publications.