Compare and contrast of organizational climate with organizational culture
In comparing and contrasting organizational climate with organization culture, I have learned from studying the Army Field Manual on Army Leadership and from other readings that organizational climate is shaped by organizational culture.
The organizational command climate of a unit is reflected in the behavior of the members. Even if organizational culture is invisible to the naked eye, its power to shape an organization is visibly manifested in the behavior of the unit. The behavior of the unit is influenced by how the members interpret the culture that exists within a particular organization.
The unit’s behavior is therefore rooted in the group’s shared beliefs and values. When confronted with a situation, a particular member need not consult the manuals, he/she simply reacts based on the type of organizational culture instilled within him. At the same time, his behavior is conformed to the behavior of the group.
In the Army, there are two things that stand out when it comes to organizational culture and these are leadership and team work. When a group of individuals are immersed in this particular culture, it will not take long before they experience the transforming power of shared beliefs. When this organizational culture is a part of the unit’s daily life, then, it is the framework used to accomplish the task at hand.
Contrast
After reading FM-622, I realized that there is a big difference between organizational climate and organizational culture (Field Manual 6-22, 8-4). An organizational culture requires a great length of time to form.
On the other hand, an organizational climate requires very little time to manifest because it is an automatic reaction based on how an individual, leader, and group reacts to a particular situation or task at hand. It is, therefore, important to inculcate the positive influence of organizational culture as quickly as possible. Organizational culture provides a clear directive and at the same time compels members of the group to behave in an acceptable manner.
Compare and Contrast situational awareness with situational understanding
The common denominator between situational awareness and situational understanding is information. Both are based on effective use of information and knowledge management. Information and knowledge management is the byproduct of surveillance and other forms of data acquisition that enable leaders to make informed and timely decisions regardless of the challenges imposed by different circumstances.
An effective use of knowledge and information management enables commanders to have a clear vision of the tactical requirements involved in a mission. At the same time it provides clear directives to subordinates. The absence of situational awareness and situational understanding forces the leader to make hasty decisions that can endanger the lives of his subordinates.
It is, therefore, important for commanders to have access to quality information. At the same time, they must have the capability to sort, store, and analyze information collated through different types of data gathering schemes. They must have the ability to access needed information at a moment’s notice in order to make quick decisions. More importantly, commanders must have the ability to analyze the information that they possess in order to utilize it more efficiently in order to enhance the unit’s decision-making process. The absence of situational awareness and situational understanding can easily lead to defeat.
Contrast
At first glance, situational awareness and situational understanding are synonymous. But upon closer examination, it can be argued that situational awareness is a leader’s less refined interpretation of information at hand. It implies an immediate reaction to raw data made available through different types of surveillance strategies. Situational understanding on the other hand is a more sophisticated application of the information and knowledge management system.
Situational understanding is a careful analysis of the different variable involved leading to a more accurate and informed decision. Situational awareness requires little effort and little experience. But situational understanding not only requires a more disciplined analysis of the information available to commanders, it also requires experience so that the commander can fully appreciate the information made available to him.
Compare and Contrast Operational art and Operational design
Operational art is linked to operational design because commanders are unable to develop a clear vision of the battlefield and how to execute their strategies if they do not understand the importance of operational design. A commander must learn to develop operational design first using principles gleaned from the study of full spectrum operations (Field Manual 3-0, 7-19).
These are the byproducts of the careful utilization of end state, center of gravity, and lines of effort and other principles of operational design. It is the first requirement before engaging in a mission. The commander must be able to develop an operational design that considers every known variable.
Operational design is an important first step but without operational art a commander will be unable to have a holistic understanding of the operational environment. Operational art enables the commander not only to have a clear overview of the operations but also the ability to dynamically manipulate the different elements of the operational design and translate it into tactics and strategies for his subordinates to follow and execute.
Operational art is synonymous to effective leadership because it is the effective use of resources to move equipment and personnel in order to accomplish a particular goal. Operational art goes hand-in-hand with operational design because these two systems enable the commander to have a deeper understanding of the environment and the problem surrounding a particular task.
Contrast
Operational design and operational art compliment each other but these are two different concepts when it comes to accomplishing a particular goal. Operational design focuses more on operations and tactics. It is a more detailed understanding of the different elements involved in a particular mission. Operational art on the other hand considers other factors that cannot be analyzed quantitatively.
Operational art is much broader vision of the task at hand. It enables commanders to see the big picture and connects the different factors involved. Operational art enables commanders to understand the importance of fighting a war and the need to deter war. Operational art enables commanders to understand the importance of resolving conflict and promoting peace. Operational design on the other hand is limited to accomplishing the task at hand.
Operational art is the ability to consider the long-term effect of a particular action. It is important to have this capability in order for the commander to develop an accurate time-table when to engage and when to end a particular conflict. It is an important framework for decision-making processes because it understands the other elements involve in a particular mission or conflict.
Works Cited
Field Manual 3-0. Operations. Washington, D.C.: Army Headquarters, 2001. Print.
Field Manual 6-22. Army Leadership. Washington, D.C.: Army Headquarters, 2006. Print.