The Organisational Culture At Enron Corporation Commerce Essay

The Organisational Culture At Enron Corporation Commerce Essay This paper analyses the Enron organisation culture and the key issues that eventually led to the Enron Corporate debacle and why it is so vital that top level management is the main proponent of this culture shaping lower level employees behaviour of moral reasoning. Moreover, as there is a need to understand how the different types of cultures may effortlessly help business to perform, this essay will identify the type of Enrons corporate culture through applying the assessment instruments developed by Cameron and Quinn (1998). In todays business environment the culture has huge impact on organizations performance. It is widely recognized by the managers, that the adoption of organisational culture as an effective control tool, gives the opportunity to affect on what people think, believe and value (Ray, 1986). It is commonly known that different organisations have typical cultures. The culture of a group can be defined as: A pattern of shared basic assumptions that the group learned as it solved its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, that has worked well enough to be considered valid and therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems ( Schein, 1993: pp373-374). Organisations develop their own culture through history and structure that gives a sense of identity. Therefore, every culture possesses its own traditions, knowledge, art, moral issues, law, customs, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by individual as a member of society (Tylor, 1970).It ascertains, through the beliefs, values and norms the way how things are done around here (Mullins, 2002: p802). Organization theory scholars distinguish that organizational cultures associate to the concept of an organization. However, Huczynsk i Buchanan (2001: p627) argue that the facade symptom of culture are its most visible and most accessible forms, which are the visible and audible behaviour patterns and objects. In the case of Enron, the analysis for the companys downfall moved well beyond financial and economic debate as the corporate culture was shown to be a main reason and contributing issue (Rapoport Dharan, 2004). The society got a shockwave when it came to that Enron was seen to be an example of corporate citizenship and ethics previous to its fall down (Sims Brinkmann, 2003) while in reality the company was cheering a culture for back-biting management possessed with exhibiting short-term profits and inflating the companys stock value. Sims and Brinkmann (2003) point out that this difference between the culture shown to the public and investors and the values being enacted within the organisation is an example of the conflict that can be found between levels of culture within an organisation as suggested by Schein (1985). Conducting the further analysis of the Enrons downfall it is vital to identify the organizational culture that the company could be identified with. Hence, in accordance to Cameron and Quinn (1998) and their developed marking criteria, there are four types of organisational cultures identified which include collaborate (clan), create (adhocracy), control (hierarchy) and compete (market) cultures. After close research and analyse of the types of organisational cultures and relating the criteria to the case study it shows that Enron applied a compete culture, which to some extent, brought the company to downfall.  Compete (market) organizations are focused on relationships- in particular, transactions-with suppliers, customers, contractors, legislators, consultants, regulators, etc. Through efficient external dealings they feel that they can best achieve suc ­cess. Compete (market) organizations are concerned about competitiveness and efficiency through accent o n partnerships and positioning (Cameron and Quinn, 1998). Enron executives spent more time distressing about reputation and getting ahead than trading with the everyday business processes needed to prolong the company.  The top managers believed Enron had to be the best at everything it did. When there existed failures and losses in their business performance, what they did was covering up their losses in order to protect their reputations instead of trying to do something to make it correct. In the case of Enron, the mutual goal of winning that is frequently anxious in compete culture organizations, did not translate past rough business deals and unethical business practices. In Enrons case, its corporate culture played an important role of its collapse. It was culture of greed and moneymaking In Enron, greed was good and money was God. There was a little regard for ethics or the law. Such attitudes infused the whole company from the top down to individual workers. Organisational culture supported unethical practises- corruption, cheating, and fake practices were widespread. Many executives and managers knew that the company was following some illegal and unethical practices, but the executives and the board of directors did not know how to make the ethical decisions and corporate ethical culture. Creative accounting and misleading profit reports were a matter of everyday procedure. Denial and reputation management enabled them carry on their unethical and often illegal activities. In addition, if the company makes huge profits in unethical way then individual who joins the organisation would also have to practice unethical things to survive in the compa ny. The management was blinded by greed and ambition, their decisions became seriously flawed. Thus company fell back and managers had to pay in the form of fines and imprisonment. Thus, disregard to organisational culture and mismanagement in huge proportions and, mainly, greed is among the key factors that brought the Enron the most innovative company to downfall. Enron was looking into the ways of getting bigger, greater and more progressive than the other companies at that time. And it seemed to be really well on the way to that target. However, the analysis of Enrons organisational structure reveals that top managers of any organisation at all times must be responsible of everything that happens in their company. Hence, the Enrons top manager (Kenneth Lay) did not have his objectives, right interest and mission in the organisation. But the success of the business depends on the executives abilities to leadership, influence on others and how the real interests and goals are foll owed by. K. Lays position as a chairman was just a title for the company and as evidence of that is the action of passing along the responsibilities to the Jeff Skilling. That could be seen as the countdown of the organisational structure breakdown which is related as the key issue to all the businesses. A wise decision-making abilities and achievement of organisational objectives truly correlates with the companys organisational structure. In Enron case, people responsible for making such wise and important decisions were obviously those from the top of the management; however they did not really possess any of the productive objectives in their minds. The final decision-making was left for the chief financial and chief operating officers whose ability, in the other hand, excluded any sense of any kind of the responsibility for the consequences could occurred. The basic interest, as it seems from the case study analysis, was the financial profit- money. Thus, decision-making was easily blinded with the quantity of the business deals made and money seen, without any of the consideration of the future problems of the organisation, such behaviour could cause. According to Reh (2002), It is the leaders job to provide the vision for the group. A good executive must have a dream and the ability to get the company to support that dream. But it is not enough to merely have the dream. The leader must also provide the framework by which the people in that organization can help achieve the dream. This is called company culture (p.1). Generally, corporate culture refers to the prevailing implicit values, attitudes and ways of doing things in a company. It often reflects the personality, philosophy and the ethnic-cultural background of the founder or the leader. Corporate culture dictates how the company is run and how people are promoted (Wong, 2005, p.185). The leadership of the Enron could not cope with providing the guidance to help the business to survive. Hence, that is the clear evidence that Jeff Skilling proclaimed the Enrons corporate culture- the culture of greed, corruption and deception. He wanted profits at all cost, in addition the hiring practices became obsessed with finding aggressive, greedy, unethical employees who could deliver on the organisations demand for short term profits. There is a direct connection between the way a business and its people conduct themselves and the leadership within it. There was no respect or responsible decision-making in the Enron. The management of the organization was totally broken down by the companys executives, who displaced their responsibilities to unprofessional staff and there was no rigorous standart of the performance for their business. The senior management failed to maintain a relationship of openness and trust with employees. Staff members who questioned the wisdom of some of Enrons decisions and practices were either ignored or silenced. Senior management cared more about self-enrichment than the needs of employees. They showed little regard for meaning and ethics beyond the bottom line (Wong, 2005, p.185).And when the top managers turned a blind eye on the legal aspects when performing financial operations, the clear message of the tolerance of the illegal practices was sent. After analysing the case study I suggest that the most important lesson is that corporate culture matters it can either bring prosperity or disaster to the organization. A company needs to promote an organisational culture with moral way of thinking as Peters Waterman (1982: p75) points out that without exception, the dominance and coherence of culture proved to be an essential quality of the excellent companies. This culture should be top level management as they are key figures, which employees will follow. If executives of a company consider the short term bottom line to be the most important factor to success then lower level employees will soon get the message and acquire the game rules. This environment is exposed to the actions such as intentionally breaking the rules, if results cannot be achieved within the legal framework. From studying the Enron case it is seen that collapse was brought on by a lack of respect, lack of concern of management and real goals. To point out that the enormous amount of losses of the company destroyed the lives of the Enrons employees and the investors who trusted and heavily invested in the business. After all taking on to account that organisational culture is able to bring an enormous difference and guide the organisation to success and prolong reasonable rewards (Hoecklin, 1995) by possessing effective management (Miroshnik, 2002), the Enrons example demonstrates that when there is unhealthy corporate culture in the company which lacks the true leadership, true interests, true goals, wise decision-making and the main issue is greed for money, then such a business is exposed to become the bankrupt.

Educational War Zone Essay -- Education, Bullying

On the afternoon of April 9, 2010 I found myself in a meeting with Kerri Evans, the assistant principal of Pleasant Ridge Middle School, and my son Nicholas. I was there because my son had become a victim of verbal abuse. It was shocking to learn that bullying has become such an epidemic in our school system. â€Å"Nearly 1 in 3 students is involved in bullying† (Hertzog, 2010). In a perfect world there would be no bullying. Kids wouldn’t get shoved into lockers, and they wouldn’t be beat up in the hallway. Students wouldn’t talk about another student behind their back because of their shape, size, race, or religion. In a perfect world this wouldn’t happen, but at that moment in our imperfect world it was happening to my son. The question is, why does it happen and what can we do to stop it? â€Å"According to a 2009 federal survey of school crime and safety, 32 percent of middle and high school students said they'd been victimized during the acade mic year, compared with 14 percent in 2001† (Tyre, 2010). Bullying was making its way into my home and affecting my life. It was then that I realized that bullying was a problem that needed to stop. Bullying in schools is escalating and becoming a bigger and bigger issue, and we must take action to eliminate it. According to Problem-Oriented Guides for Police Series: Bullying in Schools â€Å"bullying has two key components: repeated harmful acts and an imbalance of power† (Sampson, 2002). Although bullying occurs in many other places, school is where bullying is most prevalent and most concerning. In schools, physical bullying is more common among boys. This is because boys are much more aggressive than girls. However, verbal bullying such as gossip is much more common among girls. â€Å"Physical bullying... ...n reaction that Rachel wrote about. (www.rachelschallenge.org) Bullying is a repeated harmful act that continues to affect millions of students every year. There is no stereotypical person that is a target for bullying; anyone can be its victim. There may not always be any signs of physical harm during these attacks, but our children always suffer emotional harm. Educating students, teachers and parents seems to be the only valid solution to this problem. There are many organizations that can educate the schools on this subject but for it to work people must care. Maybe one day, when enough people realize that this problem will not go away with out their help, we can eliminate bullying from our schools. In a perfect world there would be no bullying, but if you could ask Rachel Scott she would tell you we do not live in a perfect world, only a hopeful one.

Theory of Management in Health Care

The essentials of management, by far, are not historically new. One can imagine the management that was needed to build the Egyptian pyramids or the Greek Parthenon. The requirement was to have people work efficiently together toward a successful common end. However, with the rise of industrialization and now with the rapid speed of change and technological advancements, effective management is needed more than ever. Healthcare, which is having such a significant impact on today's society and also undergoing many transitions in a short period of time, is a prime example of an industry that requires the best management possible. Peter Drucker, an economist and journalist, is regarded as the founding father of the study of management by experts in the worlds of business and academia. According to Drucker (2001, pg. 10), management is based on several essential principles: 1) Management concerns first and foremost human beings, who must be made capable of joint performance, their strengths effective and weaknesses irrelevant; 2) Management is thoroughly a part of individual cultures and is variable; 3) Each organization must have a commitment to common goals and unifying objectives that are set my management; 4) Management must find ways of encouraging growth and development of the organization and its members as opportunities change; 5) Within every organization are individuals with different skills and knowledge accomplishing different types of work. This necessitates effective communications as well as each person assuming responsibility for setting individual goals, making those goals known, and working with others to accomplish them; 6) Management is measured on such factors as innovation, market share, quality and people development, not by the bottom line or output quantity; and 7) Most important, results exist only on the outside with a satisfied patient, client or customer. In the early 1960s Drucker read Abraham H. Maslow's theory of management, which is based on the belief that each person has specific needs. He â€Å"became an immediate convert† (Drucker, 1999a, p. 17). Essentially, this means that different groups of employees have to be managed differently, and that the same group of workers has to be managed differently at different times (pg. 21). However, stressed Drucker, â€Å"one does not ‘manage' people. The task is to lead people. And the goal is to make productive the specific strengths and knowledge of each individual (pg. 21-22). In these days of global competition, such a leadership style is essential to point individuals in the most productive directions. One also has to prepare for continual change. In the past, management commitments for the future were based on the question, â€Å"What is most likely happen?† Now, it is necessary to plan for uncertainty by asking â€Å"What has already happened that will create the future?† (Drucker, 1995, pg. 40). All organizations, especially ones in the healthcare field, have to look at such factors as demographic trends; changes in industry, market structure, values, science and technology already in place but yet to have full impact; and trends in the economy and structure of society. They must then convert these â€Å"what is most likely to happen† into opportunities for the organization based on its strengths and competence. Further, it must develop the knowledge and people to be able to respond to these opportunities. Global society is in the midst of a major transformation, where knowledge is the primary resource if, and only if, it is integrated into a task. For managers, this dynamics of knowledge requires building change into the organizational structure. The organization must commit itself to continually creating something new (Drucker, 1995, pg. 79). As a result, management must emphasize continuous improvement or kaizen, exploit its knowledge to develop the next generation of applications from its successes and learn to innovate in a systematic process. This means that organizations must continually make changes. This may even lead to closing down a hospital when changes in medical knowledge, technology and practice make a hospital with less than 200 beds uneconomical and unable to provide excellent care (pg. 81). The organizations of the future must also routinely say, â€Å"People are our greatest asset,† and loyalty is gained through offering employees exceptional opportunities for putting their knowledge to work. Ironically, however, knowledge about the knowledge worker productivity is minimal. For example, a fair-sized U.S. hospital of 400 beds has several hundred physicians and a staff up to 1,500 paramedics divided among 60 specialties, with specialized equipment and labs. â€Å"But we do not yet know how to get productivity out of them† (Drucker, 1992, pg. 336) What is known, Drucker says in Management Challenge for the 21st Century (1999b, pg. 142), are the six major demands that underlie this productivity: 1) need to ask, â€Å"what is the task?†; 2) individuals assume responsibility for themselves; 3) continuing innovation; 4) continuous learning and teaching; 5) quality over quantity; and 6) individuals recognized as an asset. Making knowledge workers productive necessitates changes in basic attitude of the entire organization. Knowledge-worker productivity is the largest of the 21st century management challenges. In the developed countries, it is their first survival requirement (Drucker, 1999b, pg. 157). One of the biggest changes is that workers will have to manage themselves and place themselves in the location where they can make the greatest impact. They will have to learn how to develop themselves and continuously better themselves. They will have to ask themselves: â€Å"What are my strengths?†; â€Å"Where do I belong?†; â€Å"What is my contribution?†; â€Å"Where can I take relationship responsibility?†; and â€Å"How can I plan for the second half of my life?† The lesson, concludes Drucker (1998, pg. 187) is that productivity of knowledge has both a qualitative and quantitative dimension. Managers (actually executives is a better word, he says) must manage both specialists and synthesizes of the different fields of knowledge. The healthcare industry will be significantly involved in all these changes if they are not already. In an online article â€Å"The Next Information Revolution,† Drucker said of healthcare: â€Å"In healthcare a similar conceptual shift is likely to lead from healthcare being defined as the fight against disease to being defined as the maintenance of physical and mental functioning.† The battle against illness remains an essential aspect of healthcare. However, it is rather a subsection of it. The traditional healthcare providers nor the hospitals and general practice physicians may survive this change, and definitely not in their present structure and function. In healthcare, the stress will therefore transition from the â€Å"T† in IT to the â€Å"I,† as it is transitioning in business and in the general economy. Is it possible that the information people in MIS and IT prepared for such changes? He sees no sign of this so far. The 21st century is heralding in a huge transition the healthcare focus (Drucker, 1999b) While the country spent most of the prior century managing disease, it will now spend time emphasizing life extension, or maximizing the length and quality of life. The key is having a work force of nurses and allied health professionals who are educated and skilled as a chronic care coach. It is a step that goes beyond case management since it involves most patients instead of those just with the most complicated cases and situations. Overall, it will involve a major redefinition of healthcare.

George Washingtons First Inauguration

The inauguration of George Washington as the first President of the United States on April 30, 1789, was a public event witnessed by a cheering crowd. The celebration in the streets of New York City was also a very serious event, however, as it marked the  beginning of a new era. After struggling with the Articles of Confederation in the years following the Revolutionary War, there had been a need for a more effective federal government and a convention in Philadelphia in the summer of 1781 created the Constitution, which established the office of president. George Washington had been elected as president of the Constitutional Convention and, given his great stature as a national hero, it seemed obvious he would be elected as the first President of the United States. Washington  easily won the first presidential election in late 1788 and when he took the oath of office on the balcony of Federal Hall in lower Manhattan months later, it must have seemed to the citizens of the young nation that a stable government was finally coming together. As Washington stepped out onto the balcony of the building, many precedents would be created. The basic format of that first inauguration more than 225 years ago is essentially repeated every four years. Preparations for the Inauguration After delays in counting votes and certifying the election, Washington was officially informed that he had been elected on April 14, 1789. The secretary of Congress traveled to Mount Vernon to deliver the news. In an oddly formal meeting, Charles Thomson, the official messenger, and Washington read prepared statements to each other. Washington agreed to serve. He left for New York City two days later. The trip was long, and even with Washingtons carriage (a luxury vehicle of the time), it was arduous. Washington was met by crowds at every stop. On many nights he felt obligated to attend dinners hosted by local dignitaries, during which he was toasted effusively. After a large crowd welcomed him in Philadelphia, Washington was hoping to arrive in New York City (the location of the inauguration as D.C. had not yet become the nations capital) quietly. He didnt get his wish. On April 23, 1789, Washington was ferried to Manhattan from Elizabeth, New Jersey, aboard an elaborately decorated barge.  His arrival in New York was a massive public event. A letter describing the festivities that appeared in newspapers mentioned a cannon salute was fired as Washingtons barge passed the Battery at the southern tip of Manhattan. A parade formed consisting of a cavalry troop formed when he landed and also included an artillery unit, military officers, and the Presidents Guard composed of Grenadiers of the First Regiment. Washington, along with city and state officials and followed by hundreds of citizens, marched to the mansion rented as the Presidents House. The letter from New York published in the Boston Independent Chronicle on April 30, 1789, mentioned that flags and banners were displayed from buildings, and bells were rung. Women waved from windows. During the following week, Washington was kept busy holding meetings and organizing his new household on Cherry Street. His wife, Martha Washington, arrived in New York a few days later accompanied by servants which included enslaved people brought from Washingtons Virginia estate at Mount Vernon. The Inauguration The date for the inauguration was set for April 30, 1789, a Thursday morning. At noon a procession began from the Presidents House at Cherry Street. Led by military units, Washington and other dignitaries walked through several streets to Federal Hall. Keenly aware that everything he did that day would be seen as significant, Washington chose his wardrobe carefully. Though he was mostly known as a soldier, Washington wanted to emphasize that the presidency was a civilian position, and he did not wear a uniform. He also knew his clothes for the big event had to be American, not European. He wore a suit made of American fabric, a brown broadcloth made in Connecticut that was described as resembling velvet. In a small nod to his military background, he wore a dress sword. After reaching the building on the corner of Wall and Nassau Streets, Washington passed through a formation of soldiers and entered the building. According to an account in a newspaper called The Gazette of the United States and published on May 2, 1789, he was then introduced to both houses of Congress. That was, of course, a formality, as Washington would have already known many of the members of the House and Senate. Stepping out onto the gallery, a large open porch on the front of the building, Washington was administered the  oath of office by the Chancellor of the State of New York, Robert Livingston. The tradition of presidents being sworn in by the Chief Justice of the United States was still years in the future for a very good reason: the Supreme Court would not exist until September 1789, when John Jay became the first Chief Justice. A report published in a newspaper (The New York Weekly Museum) on May 2, 1789, described the scene which followed the administration of the oath of office: The Chancellor then proclaimed him THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, which was followed by the instant discharge of 13 cannon, and loud repeated shouts; THE PRESIDENT bowing to the people, the air again rang with their acclamations. He then retired with the two Houses [of Congress] to the Senate Chamber... In the Senate chamber, Washington delivered the first inaugural address. He had originally written a very long speech which his friend and adviser, future president James Madison, suggested he replace. Madison drafted a much shorter speech in which Washington expressed typical modesty. Following his speech, Washington along with new vice president John Adams and members of Congress walked to St. Pauls Chapel on Broadway. After a church service, Washington returned to his residence. The citizens of New York, however, continued celebrating. Newspapers reported that illuminations, which would have been elaborate slide shows, were projected on buildings that night. A report in the Gazette of the United States  noted that illuminations at the homes of the French and Spanish ambassadors were particularly elaborate. The report in The Gazette of the United States described the end of the great day: The evening was fine — the company innumerable — everyone appeared to enjoy the scene, and no accident cast the smallest cloud upon the retrospect.