Assignment Instructions

Business organizations have a mission and a commitment to its proponents, stockholders, stakeholders, associates and customers to evaluate and analyze its overall performance. This proves that they are intent in ensuring sustainable business growth. It is through evaluation and diagnosis of their operational systems during regular periods that they could arrive at the real, true and updated state of the business.
Diagnosing business organizations is very much like diagnosing a human being: a thorough assessment of the wellbeing of an organization; to institute corrective and preventive measures to avoid further errors and to enlighten on causes and effects of maladies. The Diagnostic Models In his white paper, Dr. Salvatore Falleta has expounded on the various models of organizational diagnosis. They are used in different types of organizations. The various models and where they are suitable guides and assists organizational diagnosticians to appreciate and comprehend the different types of organizational behavior and performance.
The different organizational diagnostic models are: Force Field Analysis: In 1951, Kurt Lewin designed this simple method to evaluate problems of business organizations. The method basically evaluates only two of the major forces in an organization: the restraining forces and the driving forces. The restraining forces are the limitations of the organization. The driving forces are the positive aspects of the organization. Leavitt’s Model In 1967, H. J.
Leavitt designed a diagnostic tool that specified the various features of an organization : the tasks undertaken; the structure built; the technology utilized and the human resources placed. The principle underlying this method of zeroing-in on organizational features instead of organizational forces says that changes in any of this features will incur a domino effect on the other. Likert System Analysis This method, designed in 1967, looks into organizational characteristics such as: motivation; communication; interaction; decision-making; goal-setting; control and performance.
To look into such characteristics, R. Likert defined four management systems that cover and summarize such characteristics. He also created a survey questionnaire that evaluates those characteristics. Open Systems Theory A “feedback loop” that transpires in an organization affirms the participation of society in an organization’s activities. The loop consists of: inputs (feedbacks that comes from consumers); outputs (feedbacks that organizations give consumers); and the throughputs (the initiatives of organizations towards research and development)
Weisbord’s Six-Box Model Purposes, structures, relationships, leadership, rewards and helpful mechanisms – are the six broad categories that Weisbord boxed in as the basis of diagnosing organizations. This diagnostic model designed in 1976 “focuses on internal issues within an organization” by asking “what is” and “what should be”. The Congruence Model for Organization Analysis Nadler-Tushman came up with a congruence model to diagnose organization. This is incorporates the Open Systems Theory; the Leavitt System Analysis; and the Weisbord Six-Box Models.
The congruence model considers the social status of organizations; it considers that change is inevitable; it considers the real human behaviors that profoundly affect organizations. McKinsey 7S Framework This model was designed within 1981 to 1982 by McKinsey Consultants. There are “7-S” focal organizational variables that the framework considered: style; staff; systems; strategy; structure; skills; shared values. These variables are metaphorically represented as “cells and molecules”. These cells and molecules are interdependent: changes must be applied on all, if any change at all must be adopted.
Tichy’s Technical Political Cultural (TPC) Framework The TPC framework is a model that includes the environment surrounding and organization and its history to be focal variable in diagnosing its performance. Designed in 1983, the diagnostic process looks into the cultural, political and technical dynamics of the organization. High-Performance Programming There are four organizational levels that this model diagnoses: Level 1 is the reactive aspect; Level 2 is the responsive level; Level 3 is the proactive level; and, Level 4 is the high-performance level.
When Nelson and Burns designed this diagnostic model in 1984, the used the Likert System Analysis as the basis. Diagnosing Individual and Group Behavior In 1987, M. I. Harrison created this diagnostic model that focuses on the specific behavior of the individual employees in an organization. This model is also inspired by the Open Systems Theory. It also considers variables on the organizational level; on the group level and on the individual level. The Burke-Litwin Model of Organizational Performance & Change This is the most modern organizational diagnostic model.
It was designed and updated by Burke and Litwin nearly the beginning of 1990s. The diagnostic process covers: the 12 theoretical variables; the consideration of the variable effect of the climate and culture of an organization; distinction between transactional and transformational dynamics; specification of the nature and direction of the effect of the variables. Harley Davidson Motorcycle Company With its over a hundred years of corporate existence and business experience, the Harley Davidson Motorcycle Company sustained its ranking in the top companies in the United States.
The latest 2008 ranking of Fortune Magazine reported the 397th position of the company with a 2007 year end revenue of US$6. 1 million. This however reflected a minute downtrend in its performance compared to 2006 year ending’s revenue of US$6. 8 million. The variances in the effects of overall cost of energy all over the world that has been plaguing the markets for two years now could have caused the trend in Harley Davidsons’s performance. This is considering that its main product being motorcycles and a mode of transportation is dependent on gas for its functionability.
The company has adopted a meticulous Corporate Governance Policy that is created, reviewed and evaluated by its Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. Among its practices include board independence; committee independence; function through committee structure – Human Resources, Audit, Operation, Continuing Education, Compensation and Ownership. In addition they have Financial Code of Ethics; Environmental Policy; Policy on Manging Disclosure and Material Information; and Supplier Code of Conduct. These augment the transparency and efficiency of their corporate governance.
With their sales and marketing process generally rendered through dealership, the Burke-Litwin diagnostic model will the better of methods that will bode well on the very comprehensive and dynamic customer and stockholder services that this reputable company serves. References: Corporate Governance. Harley Davidson Inc. 2008 http://www. harley-davidson. com “Fortune 1000” of 2008 Fortune Magazine http://money. cnn. com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2008/full_list/ Falletta, S. V. , Ed. D. , “Organizational Diagnostic Models: A Review & Synthesis”. 2005 http://www. leadersphere. com/img/Orgmodels. pdf.

Business organizations have a mission and a commitment to its proponents, stockholders, stakeholders, associates and customers to evaluate and analyze its overall performance. This proves that they are intent in ensuring sustainable business growth. It is through evaluation and diagnosis of their operational systems during regular periods that they could arrive at the real, true and updated state of the business.
Diagnosing business organizations is very much like diagnosing a human being: a thorough assessment of the wellbeing of an organization; to institute corrective and preventive measures to avoid further errors and to enlighten on causes and effects of maladies. The Diagnostic Models In his white paper, Dr. Salvatore Falleta has expounded on the various models of organizational diagnosis. They are used in different types of organizations. The various models and where they are suitable guides and assists organizational diagnosticians to appreciate and comprehend the different types of organizational behavior and performance.
The different organizational diagnostic models are: Force Field Analysis: In 1951, Kurt Lewin designed this simple method to evaluate problems of business organizations. The method basically evaluates only two of the major forces in an organization: the restraining forces and the driving forces. The restraining forces are the limitations of the organization. The driving forces are the positive aspects of the organization. Leavitt’s Model In 1967, H. J.
Leavitt designed a diagnostic tool that specified the various features of an organization : the tasks undertaken; the structure built; the technology utilized and the human resources placed. The principle underlying this method of zeroing-in on organizational features instead of organizational forces says that changes in any of this features will incur a domino effect on the other. Likert System Analysis This method, designed in 1967, looks into organizational characteristics such as: motivation; communication; interaction; decision-making; goal-setting; control and performance.
To look into such characteristics, R. Likert defined four management systems that cover and summarize such characteristics. He also created a survey questionnaire that evaluates those characteristics. Open Systems Theory A “feedback loop” that transpires in an organization affirms the participation of society in an organization’s activities. The loop consists of: inputs (feedbacks that comes from consumers); outputs (feedbacks that organizations give consumers); and the throughputs (the initiatives of organizations towards research and development)
Weisbord’s Six-Box Model Purposes, structures, relationships, leadership, rewards and helpful mechanisms – are the six broad categories that Weisbord boxed in as the basis of diagnosing organizations. This diagnostic model designed in 1976 “focuses on internal issues within an organization” by asking “what is” and “what should be”. The Congruence Model for Organization Analysis Nadler-Tushman came up with a congruence model to diagnose organization. This is incorporates the Open Systems Theory; the Leavitt System Analysis; and the Weisbord Six-Box Models.
The congruence model considers the social status of organizations; it considers that change is inevitable; it considers the real human behaviors that profoundly affect organizations. McKinsey 7S Framework This model was designed within 1981 to 1982 by McKinsey Consultants. There are “7-S” focal organizational variables that the framework considered: style; staff; systems; strategy; structure; skills; shared values. These variables are metaphorically represented as “cells and molecules”. These cells and molecules are interdependent: changes must be applied on all, if any change at all must be adopted.
Tichy’s Technical Political Cultural (TPC) Framework The TPC framework is a model that includes the environment surrounding and organization and its history to be focal variable in diagnosing its performance. Designed in 1983, the diagnostic process looks into the cultural, political and technical dynamics of the organization. High-Performance Programming There are four organizational levels that this model diagnoses: Level 1 is the reactive aspect; Level 2 is the responsive level; Level 3 is the proactive level; and, Level 4 is the high-performance level.
When Nelson and Burns designed this diagnostic model in 1984, the used the Likert System Analysis as the basis. Diagnosing Individual and Group Behavior In 1987, M. I. Harrison created this diagnostic model that focuses on the specific behavior of the individual employees in an organization. This model is also inspired by the Open Systems Theory. It also considers variables on the organizational level; on the group level and on the individual level. The Burke-Litwin Model of Organizational Performance & Change This is the most modern organizational diagnostic model.
It was designed and updated by Burke and Litwin nearly the beginning of 1990s. The diagnostic process covers: the 12 theoretical variables; the consideration of the variable effect of the climate and culture of an organization; distinction between transactional and transformational dynamics; specification of the nature and direction of the effect of the variables. Harley Davidson Motorcycle Company With its over a hundred years of corporate existence and business experience, the Harley Davidson Motorcycle Company sustained its ranking in the top companies in the United States.
The latest 2008 ranking of Fortune Magazine reported the 397th position of the company with a 2007 year end revenue of US$6. 1 million. This however reflected a minute downtrend in its performance compared to 2006 year ending’s revenue of US$6. 8 million. The variances in the effects of overall cost of energy all over the world that has been plaguing the markets for two years now could have caused the trend in Harley Davidsons’s performance. This is considering that its main product being motorcycles and a mode of transportation is dependent on gas for its functionability.
The company has adopted a meticulous Corporate Governance Policy that is created, reviewed and evaluated by its Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. Among its practices include board independence; committee independence; function through committee structure – Human Resources, Audit, Operation, Continuing Education, Compensation and Ownership. In addition they have Financial Code of Ethics; Environmental Policy; Policy on Manging Disclosure and Material Information; and Supplier Code of Conduct. These augment the transparency and efficiency of their corporate governance.
With their sales and marketing process generally rendered through dealership, the Burke-Litwin diagnostic model will the better of methods that will bode well on the very comprehensive and dynamic customer and stockholder services that this reputable company serves. References: Corporate Governance. Harley Davidson Inc. 2008 http://www. harley-davidson. com “Fortune 1000” of 2008 Fortune Magazine http://money. cnn. com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2008/full_list/ Falletta, S. V. , Ed. D. , “Organizational Diagnostic Models: A Review & Synthesis”. 2005 http://www. leadersphere. com/img/Orgmodels. pdf

Calculate Price


Price (USD)
$

Why Choose Us For Your Assignment?

Privacy

We value all our customers' privacy. For that reason, all information stays private and confidential and will never be shared with third parties.

Punctuality

With our service you will never miss a deadline. We use strict follow-ups with our writers to ensure that all papers are submitted on time.

Authenticity

We have no tolerance for plagiarism. All papers go through thorough checking to ensure that no assignments contain plagiarism.

Money Back

You feel unsatisfied with your results? No worries. We offer refunds to our customers if any paper is not written according to the instructions.

Clients Love Us

Client #121678
Client #121678
Read More
This is by far the best I have ever scored in a custom essay. I am surprised the writer handled this assignment so well despite the short notice. I will definitely use your service next time.
Client #21702
Client #21702
Read More
When I was recommended to you by my friends, I wasn't sure you could deliver excellent results for Masters research papers until I submitted my first order. I am all yours now.
Client #20730
Client #20730
Read More
Excellent Services! You are the only assignment helper I can rely on. I have worked with many before and your services are exceptional. I have recommended you to my friends and the results are similar.
Client #20387
Client #20387
Read More
I rarely write reviews online but your services are worth promoting. My paper was so urgent I was sure I was gonna miss the deadline but you turned things around. You are awesome!
Client #20189
Client #20189
Read More
I am a satisfied customer. I know I should have given a 5 star because you deserve it but I will give 4.6 because I almost missed a deadline because of a revision. Luckily it was minor and the writer acted promptly.
Client #20187
Client #20187
Read More
Great paper but there is still some room for improvement. I am impressed by your fast responses and how you tacked my concerns professionally. Thank you for being among the few genuine essay writing service providers.
Client #19783
Client #19783
Read More
I can't thank you enough for being a great part of my college life. I recommended you to two more of my friends. I am sure they will be making their orders soon. I love the fact that you offer free pages for referrals. I will be referring a few more and maybe I won't have to pay for my next two paper, LOL.
Previous
Next