I have introduced the definition so to understand the next thing about one of the types of organization, the passive-aggressive organization. When an organization is healthy and resilient, communications and information cross in the organization smoothly where all teams work efficiently with managers and supervisors are strong at their responsibilities. Why strong? Because these managers receive good amount of incentives and rewards to act in behalf of the organization and carries out plans well in their respective areas of responsibilities. On a passive-aggressive organization, “everyone agrees, but nothing changes.” Which now belongs to a not healthy type of the organization.
Every employee would love to belong to a resilient organization where everything is “as good as it gets”. I have been to a passive-aggressive type of the organization but all along we are trying to get out of this state to make everything work well in the organization.
I believe communication is one of the significant keys to make this happen. Why? In an organization with staff over different countries, like I have, it takes good communication for everyone to coordinate and cooperate. Without such, we assume that everyone is doing their job and everything is handled properly. We have meetings, yes, but we cannot guarantee that people involved will really work for what has been tasked of them.
Just for example when we had a meeting with all leaders in technical department to plan and prepare for a possible increase in our clients. Increase is good news for the company of course because that means that our software will have more users. Increase in investment from the company too will be needed. So we foresee the possible days this surge increase will happen. We need to increase the number of our servers and add more human resources such as programmers, system administrators, testers, account managers and customer support. The discussion went well. Deadlines were set and everybody was expected of their responsibilities. I sent all information to my team leader handling a small group of the department. I entrust her the responsibility since it is her coverage and told her if she has something needed, I will help. Entrusting to her means that she will handle everything. Then days after, there came a concern from migration team that needs more fixing on the script. This is important as fixing them will lessen testing tasks and fixing bugs. Here comes the nearing deadline and I was asked of the progress from testing. Seemingly pointing the bottleneck on the part of the plan. Programming and migration teams did extra hours to beat deadline, and asked when the testing part came in and the progress. I was a bit off-guarded when told that 100+ schools, web applications, are ready for migration testing. Here, comes two loopholes on my part, first is assuming that the concern of migration team extends the deadline and second is not being able to coordinate efficiently with the team leader for the progress. Or say when having to meet the team, they will report that everything is in proper order or that no concerns are raised but in reality there were.
If there is no proper communication, we assume something is working or not working. In this case, I assumed that the deadline was extended and got relaxed with the needed resources (staff) I should have prepared. And I assumed that the team leader I entrusted the management has strongly carried out the distribution of staff and monitoring progress.
There are three points that made this part of the organization a passive-aggressive one: unclear scope of authority, misleading goals, and agreement without cooperation.
I believe that the success of the organization depends on what type of people it has. Resilient or passive-aggressive, the claim is from the behavior one acts for the organization. And in this case, I was party being a passive-aggressive employee.
No comments:
Post a Comment