Introduction
It has been observed that elementary school teachers love their children, high school teachers love their subjects and university professors love themselves. We know all three sets than a modest fact to these generations. It appears that the more research is being carried out towards the move of education hierarchy, the more difficult it is to bring about change. There is no doubt, as it appears that the pressure for change from sources outside the educational or organizational leadership is mounting (Owens, 1995). However, this provides an opportunity for educational institution to redefine themselves in ways that deeply enhance many to lead this transformation.
Consequently, leaders, who are outstanding or out of the common move people, stimulate excitement and enhance or intensify the best in individuals. When attempting to put in plain words why the affectivity, we speak of strategy, vision, or powerful ideas. But the reality is much more as an important component: extraordinary leadership works through strong feelings. No matter what leaders lay out orderly or logically to do-whether it’s creating plans or mobilizing teams to accomplishment of an action-their success is contingent upon on how they do it. Even if they get everything else correct, if leaders fail in this primal undertaking of motivating emotions in the right direction, nothing they do will work in addition to it could or show.
Nevertheless, the noticeable heterogeneity of knowledge, skills, and abilities in the Education/Organizational Leadership creates both a challenge and an opportunity for educating an organization, because shared organizational leadership is a continuum, people need to be met where they are on their journey and coached to progress to the next point.
However, a strong intellectual challenges or adversity continuing education program that is integrated into all departments and service lines through the organization can present the mechanism for continuous learning and performance improvement.
The educational method is designed to build up the knowledge, skills, and abilities in the accountability-based governance’s environment. An essential hoped outcome of an educational program is for participants to relate their new leadership skills in assisting every organization in developing its accommodative capacity.
Proportional to the last mentioned, major change initiatives in higher education, elementary and secondary schools, and government-led reforms and have connected them to strong literature on change management in all sectors (Owens, 1995).
The framework of change is of key significance. This recounts not only to how tertiary institutions keep in step with fast changing setting but, more important, how tertiary institutions as knowledge organizations develop and change within its environment.
In this paper, we will discuss organizational theory related to conceptualizations of organizational structure. We’ll present various typologies that have been developed to explain and conceptualize organizational structure, and the theories that describe specific constructs of organizations are reviewed, and lastly conceptualizations of organizational structure in terms of critical predicaments provide a structure for considering the transitional nature of the organizational structure of schools.
Problem statement
One of the critical problems in educational structure is not just admittance but completion. However, examining the organizational structure of schools presents a foundation for understanding the basic concepts of organizational behaviour and organizational leadership. Scholars of organizational hypothesis have conceived organizational structure in a number of ways in an effort to first categorize and then generalize universal properties of organizational systems. Consequently, the real development of organizational theory has changed cultural and economic shifts in society.
Literature Review on educational or organizational leadership
A great deal has been written about the importance of leadership for effective organizations in general and for schools in particular.
Early educational or organizational theorist studied educational/organizational structure from the perspective of the developed era. As social and economic forces have shaped organizational and institutional changes, organizational theory has shifted to bring back these transitions. Educational organizations, however, are slow to change.
Schools in particular are institutions that are in an inextricable manner tied to culture in which they operate; thus, the organizational structure of schools is strongly influenced by its past origins. Many of the abstract or general idea of organizational structure and behaviour that compare to an earlier developed era are still operational in school organizations. It is essential for educational leaders to comprehend these historical foundations as well as organizational structures that are more intimately associated with the cultural demands and expectations of a post-industrial society.
Educational leaders in the present day must understand that the schools they are leading are marked by continuous change or effective organizations action (Schein, 1985).
Traditional functions of leadership characteristically are described as including prioritization, goal setting, and planning; administering and managing operations; and supervision and evaluation of organizational and personal performance, additionally, characteristics of effective leaders include important personal qualities such as organizational and interpersonal skills.
Effective leaders also identify important themes, or a vision for the organization, that others can identify with and rally round. Good leaders are able to balance the responsibility for their own decision making with the responsibility for developing organizations wide participation of others in decision making at all levels in the organization.
Most recent literatures on school leadership emphasises other functions, roles, and characteristics of effective leaders, many of which are the result of recent changes in the political and social contexts of education universally. Consequently, some of the more important changes in context which are impacting schools and school leaders are: the increased diversity in students and families; the globalization of the economy;
Applications for School Leaders
Understanding organizational structures will help school leaders to:
- Analyze the fundamental structural components of a school district in terms of their functions, specializations, and interrelationships.
- Align the goals purposes, and functions of school organizations with the larger cultural and societal goals, norms, and values.
- Employ organizational structures, procedures, and mechanisms to influence a school’s culture and climate
Organizational Typologies
Educators in the present day frequently express grief verbally that their roles have increased in extent. Schools have been given more and more social force that binds them to the courses of action demanded by that force –like the responsibilities once reserved for families, churches, or community- for instance drug education, sex education, athletics, and after-school day care. In line with this, the recognition of an organization’s role in the society serves as an essential component to defining its primary purpose, recognizing its goals, and structuring that organization in a way that best matches its social function.
Parsons Talcott (1960) classified organizations based on the social function they carry out. He acknowledged four types of organizations in terms of the wide-ranging problem they served in order to deal with the society. His organizational classifications were:
- Economic organizations that serve to solve the problem of adaption, or acquiring sufficient resources and adapting to environmental demands.
- Political Organizations that operate to achieve basic societal goals.
- Integrative organizations, such as courts and social agencies, that serves to maintain solidarity and unity within the society.
- Pattern-maintenance organization, such as schools and churches, that operates to preserve and transmit a society’s culture.
Parson’s classification according to general type (typology) suggests the grandness of the relationship of an organization to its environment and the larger society. Although Parson’s typology has been point out real or perceived flaws because it was unsuccessful in establishing reciprocally exclusive general concept that marks divisions or coordination’s in a conceptual scheme (Carper & Snizek, 1980), Parson’s proposal that organizations received public support proportional to the value society places on the organization’s most important function is a considerable concept for educational leaders. A society’s educational or organizational institutions are deeply or seriously thoughtful of cultural values. As a result, if a society highly values education it will distribute according to plan more substantial resources to these organizations that it will also do the same to other types of organizations.
Blau, Peter, & Scott, W.Richard. (1962) arranged organizations into classes in terms of who benefits. They further, present for consideration, examination, and criticism four types of organizations based on their prime beneficiaries: The four organizations are: mutual benefit organization, Business organization, Commonwealth organization’s and lastly service organization.
- Mutual benefit organizations: this is where the prime semantic role of the intended recipient who benefits from the happening denoted is the members of the organization. Examples of mutual benefit organizations include labour unions, political parties, professional associations and churches.
- Business organizations: this is where the most important beneficiaries are the owners. Such organizations include banks, manufacturing and service industries, and wholesale and retail enterprises.
- Commonwealth organizations: this is where the primary beneficiaries is in the general public. Examples of commonweal organizations are the military, police departments, and fire departments.
- Service organizations: is where the main beneficiary is the public being served by the organization. Schools, hospitals, prisons, and mental health clinics are examples of services organizations.
Blau and Scott assert that while every category of organization has a key beneficiary, others also achieve from their formal organization of people or groups of people within the organization. They further declared that each type of organization approaches peculiar structural issues or problems.
In that of Mutual benefit organizations’ its major problem is to supply membership control with necessities and support. Absence of emotion or enthusiasm among the membership in many cases or instances results in a select group becoming a political system governed by a few people. The main problem for the educational and leadership sector is motivating and impacting knowledge and skills through efficient use of resources. In contrast, commonweal organizations must bring efficiency into balance or equilibrium with the objective of serving the best interests of the public. Service organizations oppose, as in hostility or a competition the problem of maintaining a centre of attention on the client as the main beneficiary rather than others linked with the organization. In schools, for example, the centre of attention must remain on what is best for students, in spite of teacher demands or administrative quality of being suited to the end in view.
The immediately following in order typology is offered by Etzioni Amitai (1961), in which he arranged organizations into classes based upon the sort of power possessed and exercised by leadership. However, he identified three types of power:
- Coercive power: Actual or threatened application of physical sanctions, such as detention, suspension, or expulsion
- Remunerative power: Use of material rewards such as salaries, bonuses, or fringe benefits.
- Normative power: using or proceeding by means of symbols or employing symbolic rewards or sanctions such as recommendations, commendations, honours, or grades.
He further recognized three types of reactions to power along a continuous nonspatial whole of involvement. Commitment is the most extremely positive reaction. Etzioni used the concepts of power, reactions, and organization types as a basis for showing the compliance theory, often with explanation and alternatives and offering reasoning from detailed facts to general principles about organizational structures. He represented accurately or precisely four organizational variables: (a) goals, (b) elites, (c) communication, and (d) socialization.
A goal is what an organization is making an effort to accomplish or to achieve. Compliance theory however, classified or distinguished three types of goals:
- Order goals: attempts to control members through segregation or preventing members from becoming involved in activities markedly different from an accepted norm.
- Economic goals: this are those related to profit from the production of goods or services.
- Culture goals: this type of goal refers to intentions to create or preserve cultural symbols or artifacts.
Etzioni presented for consideration, and examination that each type of goal was best matched to a particular type of organization. Coercive organizations are inclined to have order goals; useful organizations are have made preparations towards economic goals; and normative organizations are for the most part concerned with culture goals.
The second organizational quantity that can assume any of a set of values is elites; this however, refers to those human beings who have power in the organization or tertiary institutions. Elites are categorised as (a) officers, (b) informal leaders, and (c) formal leaders. Officers gain their possession of controlling influence exclusively from their position or office within the organization. Informal leaders have no position of power or authority but do possess personal power to manipulate others. Formal leaders are those who hold an office within the organization and also have personal power (Etzioni, 1961; Blau, & Scott, 1962)
Officers of an organization tend to control what Etzioni termed as instrumental activities, those particular course of action intended to achieve a result which involves maintaining values and contributing to the progress or growth of social integration among members.
Structural Constructs of Organizations Organizational Components
Another approach to having the idea for organizational structure is to represent accurately or precisely the fundamental components of an organization. Henry Mintzberg (1979) identified three basic elements of the educational sector or any organization. These are (a) the operating core, (b) the administrative component, and (c) support staff.
- The operating core: The operating core is comprised of those people who carry out the basic tasks of the organization.
- The administrative component: The administrative component contains three parts-the strategic apex, the middle line, and the techno-structure. The strategic apex represents or expresses the top administrators who make sure that the organization operates in a systematic or consistent manner with its mission. The middle line consists of administrators who link the apex to the operating core. The techno structure is composed of administrators whose most important responsibilities are planning and training.
- Support staffs: Support staffs are specialists who provide support services for the organization but operate outside the organization’s operating progress (or rate of progress) in work being done.
The table below illustrates the Structural Constructs of educational or organizations organizational Components.
As part of the intensive examination testing proficiency in some special field of educational and leadership knowledge education program for leadership and development, the education council designed tools and methods to recognize up and coming learning needs and to collect data which have a device that reflects general participant contentment and program quality of being able to bring about an effect. In relation to this, continuing in time or space without interruption quality improvement is made easier by conducting formal appraisal of value or assessment after each education activity.
Learning outcomes are assessed by the formative and summative measures that are rooted into each learning activity. Behaviour changes are assessed by per preview within councils and teams and by supervisors using established employee performance review tools and methods.
Conclusion
The role of the educational leadership has changed significantly over the past decade. A contemporary and popular term for important and effective school leadership is collaborative leadership, which is characterized by a more flexible, problem solving style, built upon personal relationships and shared across organization.
School leadership may come from a variety of individuals functioning in a variety of roles and situations throughout the educational sector.
Educational/organization leadership may be provided at the each and every level of the educational sector and may also originate from a variety of positions and roles. Leadership may also be situated at the educational building level, and often the building principal is called upon to assume many important leadership functions (Owens, 1995).
However, others at the building level, such as assistant principals, supervisors, school psychologists, social workers, counsellors, other related service personnel, parents, or teachers may provide valuable leadership to the educational institution.
The revival of learning and culture in Education/Organizational Leadership is not likely to take place if leaders are not enthusiastic to significantly change the way they lead, design, and operate. The Education/Organizational Leadership must incessantly seek goodness of fit between the Education/Organizational Leadership and its environment, as well as internal goodness of fit between the staff, managers, and practitioners. For this to come about, decentralized power, authority, autonomy, and accountability for what happens at the point of every service must be accounted. Moreover, power, autonomy, authority, and accountability must be organized into a code or system in a workable participatory management structure. Care processes must be fixed or set securely or deeply with the best available valid and reliable evidence and put the students needs ahead of the department’s needs.
Works Cited
Blau, Peter, & Scott, W.Richard. Formal organizations: A comparative approach. San Francisco: Chandler. 1962. Print.
Carper, William & Snizek, William. The nature and type of organizational Taxonomies: An overview. Academy of Management Review, 5 (1), 65-75. 1980.
Etzioni, Amitai. Complex organizations. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. 1961. Print.
Mintzberg, Henry. The structuring of organizations. A synthesis of the research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 1979. Print.
Owens, Richard. Organizational behaviour in education (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. 1995. Print.
Parson, Talcott. Structure and process in modern societies. Glencoe, IL: Free Press. 1960. Print.
Schein, Edgar. Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 1985. Print.