Think about reporting relationships and how departments need to work together to achieve results. Your org chart that you retrieved helps you to see the current structure. Now, you must consider what the functions and vision are for the organization and if its structure should change to achieve results. Apply the tenets learned and the grounds and warrants’ principles discussed in the introduction of the course (critical thinking) to defend your position.
Your paper must include the following:
• Describe the current structure of your chosen organization and identify if a redesign (organizational structure change) would be more effective to reach its mission and values more successfully.
• Analyze and compare the current structure with the potential redesigned structure and decide whether or not a redesign or changes would improve results. The analysis should Include information from reporting relationships, how departments function, what department interfaces need to be and what reporting relationships should be.
• Apply the tenets learned and the grounds and warrants’ principles, that support critical thinking to defend your position.
Make sure to use at least five scholarly references, excluding the text to support your stance. This paper must be in APA format and should be 4-5 pages excluding the org. chart. The org chart should be in an Appendix, properly labeled and is referred to intext as you discuss the highlights in the narrative of your paper. See the rubric for grading guidelines. This paper is worth 40 points.
The associated program learning goals and competencies appear below:
Associated PLOs
• #2 Effectively communicate in all forms of expression to relate facts, simplify complexity, customize, and create persuasive arguments for the target audience to improve organizational function and/or to transform organizational vision for all stakeholders.
• #5 Evaluate political, economic, social, technological, workforce, legal, ethical and regulatory factors that impact systems, organizations, communities and individuals at multiple levels along the health care continuum.
• #7 Demonstrate leadership excellence through abilities and behaviors, which include establishing a vision and inspiring and supporting others to work towards that shared vision and related goals.
• #8 Evaluate alternative organizing structures and use organization structure to design performance improvement strategies.
• HS1: Apply management theories, approaches, and core functions to routine operations and to current and emerging issues in the health care environment.
• IE2: Translate the results of complex analyses into information that illustrates potential problems and opportunities in a persuasive, meaningful way.
• HS4: Make specific changes in the system or in own work methods to improve performance through evidence-based information and statistical metrics; pursue
Sample Answer
The user is asking for a comprehensive academic paper that analyzes and potentially redesigns an organization's structure to better achieve its mission. Since I cannot choose an organization or retrieve an original org chart, I will provide the structure, key analytical points, and the critical thinking framework necessary to complete this 4-5 page paper successfully, assuming a hypothetical mid-sized healthcare organization (e.g., a community hospital or a multi-specialty clinic) as the chosen entity.
Analysis and Redesign of Organizational Structure for Enhanced Mission Achievement
Introduction
This paper will analyze the current organizational structure of [Insert Name of Hypothetical Organization Here], a mid-sized healthcare entity, and evaluate its effectiveness in successfully reaching its mission and values, specifically concerning [mention a specific challenge, e.g.,
quality improvement or patient satisfaction]. Drawing upon established organizational tenets and the principles of critical thinking (grounds and warrants), this paper will defend the position that a structural redesign, specifically a transition from a traditional functional structure to a matrix or service-line structure, is necessary to improve results. This analysis uses the organization's current structure, depicted in Appendix A, as a baseline for comparison.
Current Organizational Structure: Description and Effectiveness
A. Description of the Current Functional Structure
The current structure of [Hypothetical Organization] (see Appendix A) is a traditional functional structure. This means the organization is grouped by specialized departments: Nursing, Finance, Operations, Human Resources, and Quality/Risk Management.
Reporting Relationships: Reporting is strictly hierarchical and vertical. For instance, all frontline nurses report to a Nurse Manager, who reports to the Director of Nursing, who reports to the Chief Nursing Officer (CNO).
Department Functioning: This structure promotes deep expertise within each function (e.g., the Finance department is highly efficient at cost control).
Drawbacks: This structure often creates "silos". Communication and decision-making flow slowly between departments. For example, a quality initiative requiring collaboration between Nursing (clinical) and Operations (flow) often stalls because both CNO and COO must coordinate efforts through the CEO, creating delays and potential conflict (Mintzberg, 1979).
B. Identifying the Need for Redesign
The organization's mission is "To provide exceptional, patient-centered care and achieve top-quartile patient satisfaction scores." The current functional structure hinders this mission because:
Weak Inter-Departmental Interfaces: Care delivery is horizontal (patient flows across departments), but the structure is vertical. The interface between the Emergency Department (Nursing) and Inpatient Bed Assignment (Operations) is often characterized by conflict, directly impacting patient flow and satisfaction.
Lack of Mission Focus at the Department Level: Departments focus on their internal efficiency (e.g., HR focusing solely on recruitment numbers) rather than the end-to-end patient experience, which is the core of the mission. A redesign is therefore warranted to prioritize horizontal integration and mission alignment (Porter, 1985).