The Main Perspectives on Organisation a Human Capacity Building - Essay Example

Critically evaluate the main perspectives on organisation and human capacity building/ development, using the underlying assumptions, which form Classical, Human Relation and Modern (Open system) approaches. Abstract The aim of this paper is to critically evaluate the main perspectives on organisation and human capacity building/ development using the underlying assumptions, which form classical, human relation and modern (open system) approaches. Before coming up with the major perspectives and evaluating them, the paper examines the three important literatures that form the core of this discourse. In this expose, the concept of classical, human relation and modern (open system) approaches as paradigms to management and leadership examined as they inform capacity building. The second step was to interrogate the concept of capacity building and establish the nexus between it and the three informing theoretical propositions outlined earlier. Apart from these, to build that vivid picture, the paper examines how certain organisations, which deal with development, poverty reduction and wealth creation have embraced and applied the same concepts. Lastly, based on the previous four discussions, the paper critically elaborates the main perspectives on organisation and human capacity building. One finding was that having a consensus on what entails capacity development is difficult task, as most will define it depending on their stakes. However, the two emerging themes out of this conceptualisation are development of competencies and capabilities of individuals and organisations respectively for self-sustenance, sustainability, effective utilisation of resources, resilience and poverty reduction through wealth creation. Organisations like UN and its relevant institutions have applied the same concept in empowering communities to reduce poverty and create wealth. This is based on the realisation that reducing vulnerabilities associated with inability to utilise resources effectively is critical in delivering development. The finding of the paper is the main perspectives of capacity development are enhancement of competencies, capabilities, empowerment and the process being integrative. 1.0 Introduction The need to make organisations and individuals resilient and enable them to sustain development gains made without relying on external support has gained paramount position globally (Lusthaus, Adrien and Perstinger, 1999, p.1; Otto, Agapitova, and Behrems, 2009, p.1). This helps in reducing an individual’s or organisation’s vulnerability (Lusthaus, Adrien and Perstinger, 1999, p.2-5). There are some management models like classical, human relations and modern open system approaches to managing people and organisations that are effective in explaining capacity development. The aim of this paper is to critically evaluate the main perspectives on organisation and human capacity building/development using the underlying assumptions, which form classical, human relation and open system approaches. 2.0 Information Review 2.1 Classical, Human Relations and Modern (Open System) Approaches 2.1.1 Classical Model The classical model relates to the works of Henry Fayol and stresses the need of technical skills such as controlling and coordination as the core responsibility of a manager (Pindur, Rogers and Kim, 1995, p.61). Because of the later, the emerging weakness is that it treats employees as machines and not the fact that they are social beings and hence various psychosocial factors affect their performance (Pindur, Rogers and Kim, 1995, p.60 & 61). An organisation that aims only at tightening control over their employees reduces their creativity, as they operate on the known path that has worked over a period. This is a risky approach since the organisation that is not able to anticipate and direct change is likely to perish with time (Agboola and Salawu, 2011, p.236). 2.1.2 Human Relations This framework realises that employees’ needs are more than economic gains as they have other psychosocial needs as well. Ability to recognise this appreciates the fact that performance of an individual is tied to a wide array of factors which act as constraints (Pindur, Rogers and Kim, 1995, p.65). Hence, it anticipates that the route out of the shortcomings associated with scientific approach is related to having a mix of people’s skills and technical skills. According to Gitman & McDaniel (2008, p. 226), technical skills consist of specialised areas of knowledge and expertise and the ability to apply that knowledge. On the other hand, people’s skills allow a manager to understand formal and informal relations between people (Armstrong, 2012, p.7). These soft/ people skills include emotional intelligence, leadership and motivation. Such skills are integral in overcoming psychological resistance to change and building close working rapport in the organisation and thus improving synergy (Gillard, 2009, p.726). 2.1.3 Modern/ Open System Open systems are able to interact with their environment. In systems approach to management, the realisation is that the organisation is strong at its weakest link (Dettmer, 1997). Therefore, systems approach advocates for holistic approach in dealing with employees. This approach sees employees as contributors to the growth of organisation if well remunerated instead of being seen as those who withdraw resources (Pindur, Rogers and Kim (1995, p.70)/ it also observes that the approach is tied to exellence in the context of knowledge and reputation instead of ranks. 2.2 Capacity Building Human beings face myriad of challenges. Various countries have signed the millennium development goals as a means of overcoming these challenges (UNDP, 2008, p.24). However, there is the realisation that this cannot be achieved through providing development alone. There has to be accompanying process that guarantees the sustainability of the same. Based on this realisation, countries are now integrating capacity development into their poverty reduction and wealth creation programme (UNDP, 2008, p.3). The first perspective is in relation to the capacity and an individual’s duty of delivering development programmes. If they can’t attain the same, the process is as good as dead ones since the prospective recipient of development programmes relies on them to transfer this empowerment through training, financial aid and creation of enabling environment. Take the case of an individual who is not able to exploit the available livelihood sources since he or she has no capacity to exploit the same. The same can be extended to society. This person is likely to be vulnerable to external shocks thus, not allowing him or her to attain his or her dreams. These shocks may include physical vulnerabilities, extreme economic situations, diseases and malnutrition (Turner, 2006, p. 26). This calls for an integrated programme that empowers the society or individual so as they can contribute in shaping their own destiny in the best way they feel it should be within the acceptable legal limits (Lok-Dessallien 1998, p.7). How various organisations conceptualise capacity development is tied to their areas of operation and interests. However, the apprehension from those concerned with underdevelopment is on quality of life improvement by reducing external shocks through an integrated approach at different levels (Pradhan, 2010, p.2; Lusthaus, Adrien and Perstinger, 1999, p.3&4). Moreover, the view that technological and economic developments have not necessarily solved the problems afflicting certain fraction of society has equally led to adoption of capacity development (Lusthaus, Adrien and Perstinger, 1999, p.1). Lusthaus, Adrien and Perstinger (1999, p.2) observe that the concept emerged in the 1980s with the scope entailing institution building, human resource development, institutional development, institutional strengthening and development administration/ management. According to Otto, Agapitova, and Behrems (2009, p.3), “capacity for development is the availability of resources and the efficiency and effectiveness with which societies deploy those resources to identify and pursue their development goals on a sustainable basis”. Pradhan (2010, p.1) observes that people have associated capacity development with training and technical assistance. However, Pradhan (2010, p.1) calls for a paradigm shift with the focus being on “the ability of leaders, organisations, coalitions and society at large to catalyse institutional change to achieve development goals”. These two definitions show three integral factors in capacity development. The first is the enhancement of employees’ competencies through best human resource management practices like training so that they can contribute effectively in development delivery. The second is expansion of organisation’s capability through funding, re-organisation of structures, research and innovation so that they can help the public. Lastly, is to deliver the required change in the society. 2.4 Case Example: Application of the Concepts by UN and it Agencies UN recognises the importance of capacity development in all their programmes. The Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review acknowledges this fact by stating, “capacity development and ownership of national development strategies are essential for the achievement of internationally agreed development goals” (United Nations, 2007 cited in UNDP, 2008, p.3). The institution has documents such as UN Development Group (UNDG) position paper on capacity development (UNDG, 2006, cited in UNDP, 2008, p.3). Others include UNDG Capacity Assessment Methodology and United Nations Development Assistance Framework. UNDP as an example makes it a mandatory process in any development programme they engage in. They recognise the fact that capacity development occurs at three levels. These include the macro level, organisational level and at individual level (UNDP, 2008, p.6). In addition, to the above, the body has five principles that act as guiding framework in actualisation of capacity development. These include national ownership, going beyond individual skills and a focus on training, adaptation of local conditions, sticking with the process and comprehensive approach among others (UNDP, 2008, p.7). 2.4 Nexus between Capacity building and Classical, Human Relations and Modern (Open System) Approaches Overall, the emerging picture is that management theories become critical in capacity development because for capacity development to occur there is the need for institutional strengthening, institutional building and administration among others by eliminating forces restricting performance (power relations). Approaches to managing people at work equally tie with the approaches to capacity development such organisational approach, institutional approach and systems approach (Lusthaus, Adrien and Perstinger, 1999, p.5-8). The same applies to public service, which is key to empowerment and service delivery (Garofalo, 2000, p.96). In the three models, the role of a manager slightly differs. The scientific model bestows responsibility to manager as a supervisor who should ensure the workers deliver irrespective of other factors. However, the last two sees the need to engage employees in shaping the common destiny of the organisation. The nexus that one can build between the classical scientific approach to management and capacity building is that, it does not encourage the later. Since capacity building is about enhancing competencies of individuals and capabilities of the organisations, classical model does not support the same. Classical model is all about control (meaning ramming down employees throat instructions and orders as perceived by the management). Secondly, it sees employees as machine with motivation being money. This view, does not offer room for seeing employees as centre of creativity and innovation and thus, no need for empowering them to contribute to the same (Swanson and Holton III, 2001, p.147). Thus, if taken from the human development approach, it registers certain failures (UNDP, 2008, p.24). Capacity building is conceptualised as involving performance, people managing their own affairs successfully and effective utilisation of resources to attain desired goals. The nexus that human relations approach attains is the ability to allow manager to enhance capabilities and competencies of individuals through interpersonal skills. The essence of interpersonal skills like leadership is to create enabling environment and sense of possibilities beyond expectations. This approach sees management as a collaborative approach through participation, with all players being integral in information generation and manager as an apex of consolidating the same. The last framework addresses integrated approach as a means of enhancing output. The last two theories highlight critical connections. That capacity building is attainable through various factors like leadership, culture, strategy, participation and systems 3.0 Analysis of the Main Perspectives 3.1 Means of Enhancing Capability and Competencies Based on the bias of the various institutions, there are various perspectives that emerge out of the capacity development. However, the integral perspective is to enhance capability of the organisations and institutions to deliver services to the public. The second is to enhance the competencies of the employees so that they can deliver. This can be achieved through technical assistance, training and system development (Pradhan, 2010, p.2). An organisation or institution that has the required level of capability is likely to deliver as per its vision and mission. Capability of delivering services by institutions concerned with delivery of development involves an array of factors. Employees are critical source of innovation and idea creation; they are the implementers of corporate decision and customer contact points. One way of developing competencies of employees involves training. An effective human resource management should embrace human resource development as means of expanding capacity of their employees. The importance of human resource cannot be over-emphasised. Apart from the training that one received while pursuing academic qualification, it is important for organisation to train its employee and expand their human capital on the job and through refresher courses. This allows them to grasp new concepts in their field of profession and be engaged in domestication of these new ideas for the organisation. Briefly, this allows employees to improve their performance and enhance their personal development (Joy-Matthews, Megginson and Surtees, 2004, p.58). 3.2 Capacity Development as Empowerment Tool The other aspect that comes out strong and is the ultimate goal of capacity development is empowerment. Empowerment relates to enhancing capabilities and competencies to reduce vulnerabilities and barriers to performance at individual level, organisational level and at macro or national level (UNDP, 2008, p.6). Any development process availed to a given society is considered successful only if it is able to empower the intended beneficiaries by being able to utilise the resources in a sustainable manner (Lusthaus, Adrien and Perstinger, 1999, p.1). In talking about empowerment, the issue of effectiveness and efficiency comes in (Otto, Agapitova, and Behrems, 2009, p.3). Empowerment is a whole bunch of aspects. These may include empowering people at the local grassroots on how to deal with challenges facing them, demanding services from public institutions, leadership and creation of platforms from driving change (Pradhan, 2010, p.4 & 5). Empowerment has also become critical in institutions and organisations. This belief is based on the fact that empowerment of individuals is carried throughout various institutions. Real impact of development would only become effective if it is able to empower people and organisations by increasing their abilities: to perform functions, solve problems and achieve objectives; to understand and deal with their development need in a broader context and in a sustainable manner (UNDP, 1997; Lusthaus, Adrien and Perstinger, 1999, p3). These advancements in organisational and individual empowerment are what make a difference between the developing economies and the developed ones. Moreover, they are reflected in public education, holding authority into accountability, public health and collective action. Peter Morgan (1996 cited in Lusthaus, Adrien and Perstinger, 1999, p.3) affirms this view of empowerment by stating that “capacity building is the ability of individuals, groups, institutions and organisations to identify and solve development problems over time’. 3.3 Capacity Development is Integrative Conducting capacity development in not a one off engagement, requires input from multiple stakeholders so that the dream of empowering community or individual is to be realised. To attain capacity development for a community, input from public sector is critical as well as private sector (UNDP, 2008, p.19). The process of conducting capacity development is only realisable with the input of various players at individual level, organisational level and at the larger environment. All approaches to capacity development recognise the need for integrative approach at all level through a participatory manner. For instance, systems approach to capacity development recognises the fact that institutions are not isolated elements, but also those that are connected with external environment and internal sub components (Lusthaus, Adrien and Perstinger, 1999, p.7). 4.0 Conclusion The aim of the paper was to critically evaluate the main perspectives on organisation and human capacity building using the underlying assumptions, which form classical, human relation and modern approaches. The discourse highlighted three important perspectives. The first is about enhancing capabilities of the organisation so that it can contribute to development effectively and enhancing the competencies of employee. The second is about empowering the ultimate beneficiaries so that they can utilise their resources effective. The last perspective is that the process is an integrative one. References Agboola, A. A. and Salawu, R. O. 2011. Managing Deviant Behavior and Resistance to Change. International Journal of Business and Management, 6(1), 235-242. Armstrong, M. 2012. Armstrong’s Handbook of Management and Leadership: Developing Effective People Skills for Better Leadership and Management. New Delhi: Kogan Page Limited. Elimination Programme, UNDP. Retrieved on 26 December 2012 from: http://www.undp.org/poverty/publications/pov_red/ Garofalo, C. (2000). Can elephants fly? Drucker and governmental reform. Journal of Management History, 6 (2), 94-110. Gillard, S. (2009). Soft skills and technical expertise of effective project manager. Issues in informing science and information and technology. Volume 6. Gitman, L. J. & McDaniel, C. (2008). The future of business: the essential. Mason, Ohio: Thomson Higher Education. Joy-Matthews, J., Megginson, D. and Surtees, M. 2004. Human resource development. London: Kogan Page. Lok-Dessallien, R. (1998). “Review of Poverty Concepts and Indicators”Poverty Lusthaus, C., Adrien, M. and Perstinger, M. (1999). Capacity Development: Definitions, Issues and Implications for Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation. Universalia Occassional Paper No. 35, September 1999. Retrieved on 26 December, 2012 from: http://preval.org/documentos/2034.pdf. Otto, S. Agapitova, N. and Behrems, J. (2009). The Capacity Development Results Framework: A strategic and results-oriented appraoch to learning for capacity development. Retrieved on 26 December, 2012 from: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTCDRC/Resources/CDRF_Paper.pdf. Pindur, W., Rogers, S. E. and Kim, P. S. (1995). The history of management: a global perspective. Journal of Management History,1 (1), 59-77. Pradhan, S. (2010). Capacity development bfiefs. Retrieved on 26 December, 2012 from: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/WBI/Resources/213798-1259011531325/6598384- 1268250496864/CD_Brief_May_2010.pdf. Swanson, R. A. and Holton III, E. F. (2001). Foundations of Human Resource Development. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. Turner, B. S. (2006). Vulnerability and human rights. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press. United Nations Development Programme-UNDP (2008).Capacity Development Practice Note. Retrieved on 26 December, 2012 from: http://www.undp-globalfund- capacitydevelopment.org/media/8651/pn_capacity_development.pdf. Read More