Sunday, February 5, 2012

Week 02 Application Assignment - David Ebmeier


For this week’s assignment I began looking for articles that would reference the Galbraith’s Star Model within a real world application.  I found some articles that were close - but did not really give me what I what I wanted.  I decided to take a different avenue and look within.  In going through my employment history I realized that the military presents a potentially strong example for the application of Galbraith’s model.
Unlike my past work experiences, with the United States Navy, I can cite specific examples as to how each of the categories work in relation to day to day operations.
The company’s strategy specifies the goals to be achieved, as well as the values and missions to be pursued. (Galbraith, 2011).  According to the official United States Navy website; the mission of the Navy is to “maintain, train and equip combat-ready Naval forces capable of winning wars, deterring aggression and maintaining freedom of the seas.” http://www.navy.mil/navydata/organization/org-top.asp
This mission is taught to everyone one who enlists in the Navy, from the first day of boot camp, and it is reinforced throughout one’s military career.  My fellow shipmates would often be unclear in their own minds as to why they joined the Navy – but they were always crystal clear on the mission of the Navy itself.
Structure is another design policy that is easily be applied to the United States Navy. 
Structure policies fall into four areas:  Specialization, Shape, Distribution of Power and Departmentalization. (Galbraith, 2011).
Although some people do enlist the military with no clear path, most recruits have already gone through a series of aptitude tests and have chosen their career path, long before they join.  Each job requires a certain and specific skill set and the recruit is set on an educational or vocational path from broader to more specialized training schools as he continues on his journey. 
Shape is defined by organizational charts and a billeting system that ensures that each command receives the exact amount of people with the exact amount of job types that it needs to function.
Distribution and Departmentalization are two more policies that can also be clearly applied to any of the military branches.  The chain of command is another concept instilled within each recruit from the first moment they set foot on a base.  Since everyone is aware of the distribution of power and they can refer to it easily, there is never any confusion as to who to report to or why.  Additionally, every service member can see where they are within the chain of command for their department, as well their branch of military, from the top to the bottom of the chain.
Regarding the category of Processes; the usage of both Vertical and Lateral Processes can be seen in the Navy.  The needs of different departments are centrally collected, and priorities are decided for the budgeting and allocation of the resources to capital, research and development, training and so on. (Galbraith, 2011).   In the Navy, departments were given specific missions and would use the chain of command to pass on information and ideas about budgeting and training.   Lateral processes are evident when different departments form individual teams or watches which have autonomy to complete their daily missions.
With the constant stress that comes with being an active duty service member, it is essential to have a clearly defined rewards system in place.  Rewards that make sense in corporate jobs may not apply to the military and consequently different rewards need to be offered to the service members.   For example, 401k’s and stock options are not realistic to offer a service member, but Veteran’s programs that help retired members buy a house inexpensively are examples of possible rewards alternatives.
The final category in the star system deals with People and human resources.   Recruiters adhere to specific guidelines that ensure that they are enlisting people with the skill sets and aptitudes needed to fill the available positions.
Galbraith., J.R.. (2011) The Star Model, pp. 1-6

9 comments:

  1. David, very interesting to see the application of the STAR model to the U.S. Navy. You very clearly address all 5 dimensions of the model. You focus on some of the advantages of how the Navy approaches each of these 5 dimensions. Do you think the Navy is an exemplary model of clarity and integration across the dimensions? How does it compare to your other work experiences? Based on your experience, are there any shortcomings to the Navy's approach? Are there things you would change?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi David,

    Very interesting insights into how the star model fits the approach of the U.S. Navy. My uncle is a Green Beret in the U.S. Army, and reading your illustration leads me to believe both branches of the military are similar. It almost seems that the U.S. Navy perfectly fits all five elements of the star model - did you identify any areas of improvement?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi David,

    Thank you for your interesting review of the Navy according to Galbraith's model. One of my favorite lines of your post was: "My fellow shipmates would often be unclear in their own minds as to why they joined the Navy – but they were always crystal clear on the mission of the Navy itself." It seems like in each of the four structure policy areas that you listed: Specialization, Shape, Distribution of Power and Departmentalization, the Navy's mission was carried through (Galbraith, 2011).

    Taking the other readings into consideration, I was wondering your thoughts on the military's adaption to its environment. The structure of the military is a traditional fixed structure. Do you think that in a setting like the military that it helps or hinders progress? You touched briefly on the People portion, and when I think of military, I immediately think of officer ranking. Do you think that cross functionality may, in fact, give military officers more depth of knowledge and skills? Do you think there are ways that the military could be even more effective and successful?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi David,

    This was a very interesting comparison of the Star Model and the Navy. As I read through your examples, I clearly understood which of the five dimensions of the model were applied. I especially thought it was interesting to know that even if a crew member did not know why they enlisted, they at least knew what the Navy's goals were. Your detailed dialogue shows how with a clear vision and the right chain of command, an organization can run like clock work.

    I do wonder...do you recall it being a challenge to fit into the Navy's structure? It seemed like you literally walked into an already moving machine where you either could sink or swim. Also, since you experienced such a structured system, how was it when you left the Navy and ventured on to new career adventures? Did you maintain that Star Model-like frame of mind?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for all of the great comments from everyone.

      To answer Crystal's questions - Yes - it was very challenging to fit into that structure. It was a serious culture shock and a challenge to realign my thinking to the realities of military life. One of the things that was an eye opener for me was the fact that you are government property starting on your first day of boot camp. My friend got a bad sunburn and was written up for destruction of government property.

      The entire time I served, I had wanted to get out of the Navy for a plethora of reasons. Once I got out - I was dismayed to find that I missed the easy access to the chain of command and found that many organizations were poorly planned and poorly executed.

      I attempted to maintain the Star Model-like mentality, but had to manage my expectations as I found that most of the my workplaces did not follow through with their strategic planning.

      Delete
  5. David--

    This was very interesting---thank you for sharing this detailed insight into the organizational design structure of the Navy. Knowing what little I know about the armed forces, I did expect to be a very structured organization, as you detailed.

    I'm curious about the reward aspect: you described VA loans as being a future reward, but are there other rewards or incentives while still serving? What about nontangible rewards like earned rank or respect?

    Good job!

    Dawn

    ReplyDelete
  6. David,

    The military is an excellent example of an organizational structure. It has defined goals and perhaps the best chain of command structure. Everyone knows their job and what is expected of them. It is unfortunate that outside of the military this is often not the case.

    I can say from personal experience I would rather work with a military type of structure. I like to know what is expected of me and what I need to do. I once had a manager that was overwhelmed with her position. She did not clarify objectives and gave very little direction.

    The point you made about military persons taking aptitude tests to determine the most appropriate position is a great point. I'm sure many people wonder why they are doing the job that they have, and maybe, it is because it is not the appropriate job for them. Some people like to multitask, others don't. Yet, we see companies and people spend significant resources on careers that may not be best suited for them.

    The question I have for you is, do you think a military model would better serve more corporations?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi David.

    Great breakdown of the Navy structure! I’m a public affairs officer in the Navy and didn’t even think about evaluating the Navy with the Star Model. The Navy is a huge, complex organization and the way you broke it down was very interesting.

    I find the experience in the Navy to be quite different than the Air Force. (I have only been a Navy Officer for 4 years, but I was Air Force enlisted for 14.) Though the structure is definitely functional with a very strict top-down organization based upon rank and position, I see the Navy structure starting to shift a bit and embrace horizontal coordination between specialties. Perhaps this is due to the unusually close quarters in which Navy personnel live and work, but I’ve enjoyed watching creativity and teamwork that I haven’t previously seen in other military organizations in which I’ve served.

    Due to the nature of the dangerous work that the Navy, and other military branches engage in, and the fact that once you join you actually lose many of your rights, the ability of an organization to attract and retain individuals is quite a unique challenge.

    ReplyDelete