Political Frame to organization

Please see attached.
SLP Overview
In the Module 3 SLP, you will write a 3- to 4-page paper in which you will apply the Political Frame to the organization in which you are currently employed (or in which you have worked previously).
Assignment
The Module 3 SLP requires that you write a 3- to 4-page paper, in which you address the following:
After giving a brief description of the organization in which you presently work (or in which you have previously worked), apply the Political Frame to 2-3 examples of political behaviors that are presently occurring – or have occurred – within your organization.
Keys to the Assignment
The key aspects of this assignment that should be covered in your paper include the following:
Briefly describe your organization – name, what it does, size (number of employees, annual revenue, relative market share, etc.);
Choose 2 or 3 examples of political activities within your organization. These might include, e.g., networking and coalition building, informal communications, bargaining and negotiation (for power or for resources), etc. etc.
Using Bolman and Deal’s Political Frame as a lens, discuss the relative impact of the political characteristics or events you have identified (do the political behaviors you have cited have negligible impact on the organization as a whole, or are do they have more significant impact instead?).
What are the consequences and outcomes of the political behaviors you have identified? Are they positive or negative, good or bad for the company for the short-term? For the longer run (decisions that benefit the short-term are often in conflict with longer-term outcomes, and vice-versa)? Explain.
SLP Assignment Expectations
Your paper will be evaluated using the following five (5) criteria:
Assignment-Driven Criteria: Does the paper fully address all Keys to the Assignment? Are the concepts behind the Keys to the Assignment addressed accurately and precisely using sound logic? Does the paper meet minimum length requirements?
Critical thinking: Does the paper demonstrate graduate-level analysis, in which information derived from multiple sources, expert opinions, and assumptions has been critically evaluated and synthesized in the formulation of a logical set of conclusions? Does the paper address the topic with sufficient depth of discussion and analysis?
Business Writing: Is the paper well-written (clear, developed logically, and well-organized)? Are the grammar, spelling, and vocabulary appropriate for graduate-level work? Are section headings included in all papers? Are paraphrasing and synthesis of concepts the primary means of responding to the Keys to the Assignment, or is justification/support instead conveyed through excessive use of direct quotations?
Effective Use of Information (Information Literacy): Does the paper demonstrate effective research, as evidenced by student’s use of relevant and quality sources? Do additional sources used in paper provide strong support for conclusions drawn, and do they help in shaping the overall paper?
Citing Sources: Does the student demonstrate understanding of APA Style of referencing, by inclusion of proper end references and in-text citations (for paraphrased text and direct quotations) as appropriate? Have all sources (e.g., references used from the Background page, the assignment readings, and outside research) been included, and are these properly cited? Have all end references been included within the body of the paper as in-text citations?Organizations are complex entities with potentially large numbers of motivations, capabilities, and limitations, among other elements.  Leaders use frames to assess an organization and understand it as intricately as possible within the organizational setting. Additionally, while several tools are at the disposal of leaders for this purpose, the four-frame model by Bolman and Deal provides an in-depth and effective method (Bolman & Deal, 2013). In light of this, this paper presents a brief description of the selected organization, describes the organizational design, identifies two structural characteristics, and discusses the relative effectiveness of the characteristics identified. In part two, the paper presents the scores for each of the four frames and outlines how they inform my leadership.Brief Organizational DescriptionThe Civil Engineering Squadron is a part of the United States Air Force, responsible for providing engineer support to the installation and rapid repair of damage in airfields and other critical facilities. When there is no war, the unit oversees the maintenance and construction of bases for the air force. In terms of size, the unit has around 370 employees and annual revenue of $25M.Organizational DesignThe Civil Engineering Squadron has a functional organizational structure, which involves dividing the major functions of an organization into multiple groups. The organizational design vertically structures various groups with different roles, starting from the highest rank to the lowest rank, and each group reports to a single entity, occupying the top office (Awa, 2016).  For an organization such as the Civil Engineer Squadron, where employees have different skills and experiences, it makes it easy to group similar employees, which improves efficiency. With this type of structure, roles and tasks do not change, which means little time is lost learning new skills or knowledge. Additionally, since the structure is simple, employees know who to report to, and accountability is clear.                  Structural Characteristics and their relative Effectiveness RulesIn an organization such as the Civil Engineer Squadron, employees depend on clear rules to understand how they will achieve their goals.  The rules structural characteristic creates the ideal environment of employees and improves efficiency since employees know what is expected of them and follow these rules strictly.  However, if I were in the top management, one of the changes I would make towards this structural characteristic is simplifying the rules.  Doing this would improve employees understanding of their roles and responsibilities and allow them to perform with more confidence.GoalsThe structural frame places a significant emphasis on the importance of goals to an organization. According to Harris (1990), the frame assumes that organizations exist to accomplish established goals and must develop appropriate structures to these goals and the environment. Setting goals at the Civil Engineer Squadron informs employees of their expectations and helps forge various structures to help attain these goals.  It helps determine the specifics of a project and decide the best way to accomplish it, including the best people to assign for each assignment to align with the organizational goals. Setting goals also minimizes the risk of unforeseen problems and provides clarity of the expected outcomes. This also motivates employees to work towards the preset goals and keeps them focused on the right path to expected results. Notably, without focus, it would be hard to keep the employees motivated and focused.Part 2: ____18___ ST __16___HR ___13__PL __10___SY __57___Total According to the assessment provided, scoring above the 75 percentile and some low scores below the 25 percentile indicates distinct preferences over some frames. Alternatively, attaining a balanced score indicates a balanced orientation that does not lean towards four frames. In my case, the structural frame score was above the 75 percentile, while the closest frame was human resource was at the 50 to 59th percentile. The political frame was at the 30 to 39th percentile. while the symbolic frame was below the 25th percentile. In this case, the scores indicate that I do not have a balanced orientation, and I tend to lean more towards the structural and human resource leaders. Specifically, my high score in the structural frame indicates that I lean towards rationality, analysis, logic, and data. In my capacity as a leader, the score indicates that I have a strong belief in the importance of having a clear organizational structure and well-defined management systems. The frame assessment also indicates that leaders who score high in the structural frame tend to better view and understand things.  They insist on thinking things clearly and thoroughly before making a decision. These leaders also have excellent analytical skills, which double up as their greatest strength in making the right decisions.Apart from the structural form, the score also indicates that I tend to lean towards the human resource form compared to the political and symbolic form. Leaders who have a higher score on the human resource frame tend to place a significant emphasis on the importance of people. However, my score was below the 75th percentile, which is classified as high. This means that while I understand the importance of people, the need to develop a good relationship with people does not receive high priority. I understand and believe in the importance of maintaining a good interrelationship with others, coaching, teamwork, and motivating others but not as strongly.Lastly, the disparity between the political and symbolic frame with structural and human resource frame indicates that I do not have a balanced orientation. While I believe that it is important to establish power bases, form networks and coalitions, they do not take center place in my leadership role.  The score also indicates that I am a poor negotiator and advocate, probably due to my limited understanding of politics and dislike of conflict. As a leader, I tend to stay clear from conflicts unless it is extremely necessary and unavoidable. I believe that conflicts are expensive due to the time and probably resources needed to resolve them. On the symbolic frame, I do not consider myself a visionary leader. I feel that my ability to influence others is limited. While I do not mind a little flair for drama, I tend to avoid it and prefer motivating people with facts and logic. I feel that it is better to motivate people with facts than use symbols and stories to motivate them. However, it is important to emphasize that while the low scores may be interpreted as my blind spots, on the contrary, they are not. I am aware of these weaknesses and I am working on improving them.ReferencesAwa, K. I. (2016). Functional structure and operational issues: An examination of core challenges and remedies. IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR-JBM), 18(1), 01-04.Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. Jossey-Bass.Harris, T. E. (1990). Understanding organizational communication: Applying the four-frame approach. The Bulletin of the Association for Business Communication, 53(4), 50-54.Organization DescriptionThe Civil Engineering Squadron is a part of the United States Air Force, tasked with providing rapid repair to damaged airfields and facilities during wartime. During peacetime, the unit is responsible for maintaining and constructing bases that the air force needs to execute its operations. In terms of employee’s number and annual revenue, the Civil Engineering Squadron has approximately 370 employees and annual revenue of $25M.Applying Bolman and Deal’s Human Resource FrameIn 1984, Bolman and Deal came up with the four-frame model, which comprises the structural, human resource, political, and symbolic frame (Bolman & Deal, 2013). The frames were designed to help leaders evaluate the challenges facing their organizations and develop a complete picture of the exact area they should address through these lenses. The frames are designed to be used when necessary. In light of this, focusing on human resources, the frame focuses on empowering employees and allowing them to fulfill their responsibilities while at the same time addressing needs such as job satisfaction, personal growth, and human contact. According to Harris (1990), the frame emphasizes the importance of people in an organization. It is about turning people into a sustainable competitive advantage. Subsequently, for this to happen, there must be a commitment to improving the human resource component of an organization. This paper focuses on applying Bolman and Deal’s human resource frame to development and training at the Civil Engineering Squadron and presents a discussion on the relative effectiveness of the two human resources characteristics selected.DevelopmentUniversally, employee development is recognized as a strategic tool for an organization’s continued growth, productivity, and sustainable competitive advantage. Without employee development, organizations are likely to find it hard to remain competitive in the current dynamic world. Secondly, they will find it hard to overcome the current challenge of skills shortage. Bolman and Deal’s human resource frame emphasizes the importance of empowering employees and allowing them to perform their job well while addressing their needs. Development is one of the best ways to empower employees and allow them to perform their jobs well. Through development, employers help employees improve their skills and expand their knowledge.Currently, at Civil Engineering Squadron, employees are usually taken for deployment readiness training the first time they join the unit. The unit also has regional training programs every three years to equip employees with knowledge and skills on equipment operations. When they are not occupied with wartime repairs, they engage in different activities to distract them and give them hands-on training. Nonetheless, if I were the person in charge of the unit, the first step towards employee development would involve working together with employees to identify areas that we are lacking and ascertain the right actions to take to acquire and embed the learning. According to the human resource frame, making decisions jointly enhances commitment (Harris, 1990) That said, I would also focus on expanding the employee development scope to cover other areas such as continuing education, research-related activities, and courses and initiatives designed to increase their skills and knowledge in new areas related to the operations of the unit. Another way to support employee development is to encourage cross-department collaboration. This type of employee development will be designed to help bridge the gap between cultures and give everyone a chance to learn the different aspects of the Civil Engineering Squadron unit. The other area I can emphasize is the development of soft skills. Skills such as leadership, communication, interpersonal, problem-solving, teamwork, and work ethic may seem like they are easy to acquire but are often difficult to master. The unit should consider looking for ways to help employees develop such skills through workshops or training programs organized at the organization.TrainingVirtually, training is a program designed to provide employees with the necessary skills and knowledge to execute tasks. Usually, organizations take employees for training to improve their skills and knowledge and subsequently improve job performance in their current roles. Additionally, although the importance of training is well recorded, most organizations neglect to provide employees with continued training, which often leads to lost talents. At Civil Engineering Squadron, employees attend regional training every three years. However, I feel that this is not enough. Considering that military operations often involve the precise application of advanced scientific research and technology, employee training at the Civil Engineering Squadron should happen more often to equip them with knowledge and skills on the latest technology. In this case, the unit should organize routine internal training programs to keep employees updated on the latest technologies and scientific developments that affect the unit’s efficacy. Under development, it was suggested that the organization should focus on helping employees improve their soft skills. Ideally, soft skills are necessary because they complement the hard skills. The unit should organize training programs designed to equip employees with these skills. I feel that providing these skills will help employees become creative, think critically, and be able to relate with others better when executing their roles. Besides, as Harris (1990) elaborates, by supporting employees’ personal growth, organizations boost employee motivation and self-actualization.ReferencesBolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. Jossey-Bass.Harris, T. E. (1990). Understanding organizational communication: Applying the four-frame approach. The Bulletin of the Association for Business Communication, 53(4), 50-54.