Class 9: The Organization as Client UTA SSW, SOCW 5306: Generalist Macro Practice Professor Dick Schoech Copyright 2005 (permission required before use) Suggest printing slides for class using: Print | Handouts | 3 slides per page | grayscale options

Summary of Classes 1-9  Generalist macro practice history, change process, roles, levels of intervention  Theories, values, perspectives  The community as client  Conditions as problems/opportunities  Assessing social conditions/communities  Intervening in social conditions  The organization as client §

Remaining classes Mar: The organization as client Mar: Administrative practice overview Online 11. 7Apr: Assessing organizations Apr: Supervising Apr: Leading in Organization & Communities Apr Societal & Political practice §

Overview of session  Organizations vs Communities  Goal of social work where organization is client  Characteristics of organizations  Contingencies of organizational practice  Difference between business production organization and HSOs §

Organizations Vs. Communities Depends on org type, business, association, etc. Organizations selected because of goal, career Communities selected for association & interaction The lines may be blurred, e.g., church community, GM §

Goal of social work where organization is the client Building healthy organizations Linking organizations (Coalition building, Weil, p. 41) Building systems of organizations (services integration) §

Contingency view of orgs

Difference between HSO & Business organizations Best seen by examining org contingencies Purpose i.e., goals of the organization People, e.g., professional, motivation, etc. Tasks, e.g., nonrepetitive, nonprescribed, Technology, e.g., procedures & tools Structure, e.g., hierarchy, network, etc. Environment (political, ecc, tech, sociocult) §

Purpose Production Org  Mission based in profits  Multiple goals, not conflicting  High accountability for product HSOs  Mission based in society’s values  Many goals, often conflicting  High accountability for process §

People Production Org  Most skilled at top  Complex motivation  Identity to organization  Salaries can be high HSOs  Most skilled at bottom  Motivated by task  Identity to profession  Salaries are modest §

Tasks Production Org  Involve things  Repetitive  Programmable  Easy to measure units of production  Easy to measure outcome & impacts HSOs  Involve people  Non-repetitive  Non programmable  Hard to quantify unit of service  Difficult to measure outcome & impacts §

Technology Production Org  High use of hard technology (machines)  High use of soft technology (protocols) HSOs  Low use of hard technology (machines)  Low use of soft technology (protocols) §

Structure Production Org  Single management hierarchy  Driven by profit HSOs  Dual professional and management hierarchy  Driven by accountability §

Environment Production Org  Customer funded  Influenced by market forces  One customer with well defined needs  Customers always voluntary  Customers have few rights  Advertising is key  Lobbying is good HOSs  Taxpayer funded  Influenced by socio-cultural forces  Many clients with conflicting needs  Clients may be involuntary  Clients have many rights  Advertising is suspect  Lobbying is illegal §

Consequence of HSO uniqueness  Street level bureaucrats (Lipsky) Workers make decisions with little management input Difficult to control workers  Management information has little worker value  Survival is often not tied to client services, e.g., satisfying funders is more important that satisfying clients  Business practices may not work in HSOs §

Solution=goal of effectiveness (Patti)  value oriented mission  documentable technologies  measure outcomes  well developed performance standards  motivate by supporting workers  mobilize constituencies around effectiveness §

Skills needed to manage HSOs  flexibility  no one right way  diagnostic  integrative  broker  facilitator  negotiator  resource provider  quality monitor  exception monitor  networker  interpreter of the environment  system designer  evaluator §

Conclusion  HSO management is influenced by Theory Society’s values Organizational contingencies  We must advocate the goal of effectiveness  Questions and discussion