THEWORLD BANK FDT7s Discussion Paper EDUCATION AND TRAINING SERIES Report No. EDT75 Designing Management for Uncertainly and Innovation in Education Projects John Middleton Dennis Rondinelli Adriaan Verspoor April 1987 Education and Training Department Operations Policy Staff The views presented here are those of the author(s), and they should not be interpreted as reflectingthose of the World Bank. Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized
Transcript
THEWORLD BANK FDT 7s
Discussion Paper
EDUCATION AND TRAINING SERIES
Report No. EDT75
Designing Management forUncertainly and Innovation
in Education Projects
John MiddletonDennis RondinelliAdriaan Verspoor
April 1987
Education and Training Department Operations Policy Staff
The views presented here are those of the author(s), and they should not be interpreted as reflecting those of the World Bank.
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Discussion Paper
Education and Training Series
Report No. EDTi5
DESIGNING MANAGEMENT FOR UNCERTAINTYAND INNOVATION IN EDUCATION PROJECTS
John MiddletonDennis RondinelliAdriaan Verspoor
Policy DivisionEducation and Training Department
April 1987
The World Bank does not accept responsibility for the views expressed herein,which are those of the author and should not be attributed to the World Bank orits affiliated organizations. The findings, interpretations, and conclusionsare the results of research or analysis supported by the Bank; they do notnecessarily represent official policy of the Bank.
Copyright t 1987 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank
Abstract
Uncertainty and instability in the implementation environment,and higher levels of innovation in objectives and strategies, havecombined to increase the difficulty of development projectmanagement in the education sector. For the World Bank, projectmanagement is further complicated by the large number ofeconomic, political and cultural contexts of project design andimplementation. This paper addresses the problems of education projectmanagement under varying levels of uncertainty and innovation. Theseproblems are addressed from the point of view of project design, thephase of project development and implementation where opportunities tostrengthen management arrangements are greatest. Findings from studiesand evaluations of Bank education projects are combined with a reviewof management and organizational theory, leading to the identificationof contingency approaches to project management design as appropriatefor the needs of the Bank and Borrowers.
Contingency management emphasizes the design of managementprocesses and organizational structures to fit with the varying levelsof environmental uncertainty and innovation that characterize differentprojects in different contexts. Routine tasks in certain environmentsshould be managed differently than highly innovative tasks inrelatively uncertain environments. The paper identifies fourapproaches to management which are appropriate for varying levels ofuncertainty and innovation, and the patterns of management processesand organizational structures appropriate for each.
An operational model to guide the process of management analysisand design is developed, along with models for establishing strategiesfor organizational development and/or project design modification inorder to reach an appropriate balance between the management capacityof project implementing agencies and the management requirementsimposed by the project.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Foreword vExecutive Summary vii
Chapter 1: EDUCATIONAL CHANGE AND THE NEED FOR 1IMPROVED PROJECT MANAGEMENT DESIGN
Educational Change in World Bank Projects 2Characteristics of Education Change Projects 3Implications for Project Design 5Implications for Management Design 14
Chapter 2: CONTINGENCY THEORY AND MANAGEMENT APPROACHES: 15AN OVERVIEW
Contingency Theory 17Mechanistic and Adaptive Approaches to Management 18Summary 24
Chapter 3: UNCERTAINTY AND INNOVATION: 25THE DETERMINANTS OF MANAGEMENT APPROACH
Planning and Decision-making 39Leadership and Authority 42Communication 47Coordination 49Control and Monitoring 53Staffing 56Simm ary 58
Chapter 5: ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE 61
Alternative Organizational Structures 62Decentralization of Organizational Structure 69Mixed Structures and Decentralization 71Patterns of Ownership 73Summary 75
- ii. -
Chapter 6: STAFF CAPACITY 77
Characteristics of Mechanistic and Adaptive Managers 78Staff Values 79
Chapter 7: APPLIED CONTINGENCY DESIGN 85
An Operational Model 86Implementation Strategies 98Summary: Innovation and Organizational Change 115
Bibliography 117
iii-
FIGURES AND TABLES
Page
Chapter 1
Figure 1.1 An Adaptive Approach to Project Design 13
Chapter 2
Figure 2.1 Elements of a Management Approach 16
Table 2.1 Three Contingency Variables 17Table 2.2 Contingencies in Mechanistic and 19
Adaptive Management
Chapter 3
Figure 3.1 Organizational Power Setting 28Figure 3.2 Degrees of Uncertainty in the Project 31
EnvironmentFigure 3.3 Degree of Innovation in Project Tasks 34Figure 3.4 Alternative Management Approaches 36
Table 3.1 Factors in Environmental Assessment 30Table 3.2 Criteria for Judging Levels 33
of Innovation
Chapter 4
Figure 4.1 Continuum of Leadership Behavior 44Figure 4.2 Managerial Orientations of Project 46
Leaders
Table 4.1 Planning and Decision-Making 41Contingencies
Table 4.2 Leadership and Authority Contingencies 43Table 4.3 Communication Contingencies 47Table 4.4 Coordination Contingencies 50Table 4.5 Monitoring and Control Contingencies 52Table 4.6 Staffing Contingencies 57Table 4.7 Sumary of Management Process 59
Contingencies
- iv -
Chapter 5
Figure 5.1 Management Approaches and Alternative 63Organizational Structures
ApproachesFigure 7.6 Modifying Innovation Under 113
Fixed Levels of UncertaintyFigure 7.7 Modifying Innovation Under 114
Changing Levels of Uncertainty
Table 7.1 Task Analysis Example 89Table 7.2 Contingencies in the Implementation of 101
Educational ChangeTable 7.3 Elements of Organizational Change 103
Action StrategiesTable 6.4 Modifying Elements of Innovation 108Table 6.5 Implementation Strategy Contingencies 112
Foreword
In 1984 the Education and Training Department (EDT) of theWorld Bank initiated a series of studies of education projectmanagement, with a view towards the development of practical guidancefor Bank and Borrower staff in the design of management arrangements.The work grew out of difficulties being encountered in the field withproject management, and from a general recognition that educationdevelopment projects had grown more complex over the previous decade.
Under the coordination of Adriaan Verspoor, work began withan analysis conducted by John Middleton of seventeen projects selectedby Bank staff as illustrating either good management or significantmanagement problems. This analysis identified several major parametersof project management success, including environmental stability, thedegree of innovation required by the project design, and theeffectiveness of key management systems -- notably access to authority,coordination and control, and staffing. The study argued for acontingency approach to management which would enable Bank and Borrowerstaff to create management arrangements which would help fit a projectwith its environment and the management capacity of Borroweragencies.11
At the same time, Verspoor began studying educational changein Bank projects. This work has documented the increasingly innovativenature of World Bank investments in education, and identifiedstrategies for the successful management of educational change.21
These two lines of research were drawn together in apreliminary fashion in a seminar for World Bank education sector staffin November, 1985. Participants in the seminar found the work useful,but urged EDT towards further development and integration of theresearch and theory presented to provide field staff with easy accessto the wealth of complex conceptual material that had been presented.
11 John Middleton with Habteselassie Woldemariam and CarolynMayo-Brown, Management in World Bank Education Projects: Analysis ofExperience. Discussion Paper No. EDT42. Washington, D.C.: Education andTraining Department, World Bank, 1986.
2/ Adriaan M. Verspoor. Project Management for Educational Change.Discussion paper No. EDT12. Washington, D.C.: Education and TrainingDepartment, World Bank, 1985.
- vi-
Dennis Rondinelli joined Verspoor and Middleton as aconsultant, and a draft concept paper on education project managementwas prepared. In addition, a set of analysis instruments was developedto guide the application of concepts to management design. The paperand the instruments were then tested with simulation cases at a secondseminar for Bank staff in April, 1986.
Again, participants were encouraging, but suggested furtherimprovements in the paper and the instruments. A number of Bankeducation project staff, notably Jacomina de Regt, ErnestoSchiefelbein and Nadine Dutcher, joined the effort and began testingthe concepts and the instruments in the course of project development.A revision of the paper was evaluated in a third seminar, leading tothe present version.
In working interactively with the professionals who dealwith practical management issues the authors have had a uniqueopportunity to develop their ideas -- and synthesize those of others.The challenge has always been to strike the proper balance between acomprehensive application of organization and management theory andresearch on the one hand, and the exigencies of field work on theother. This challenge has been complicated by the dearth of researchor theory on the cross-cultural applications of management theory andresearch.
This paper represents, then, a year and a half ofcollaboration and interaction in relatively unmapped terrain. We hopethe balance has been properly struck, recognizing that for some therewill be too much material; and for others, not enough. The need forguidance, however, is such that we feel the paper will be a usefulcontribution to the task of improving project management.
The authors acknowledge with gratitude the work of the manyauthors cited, and the continuing criticism and advice of ourcolleagues in and out of the World Bank. The paper represents, in theend, the views of the authors and not those of the World Bank or itsaffiliated institutions.
Wadi D. HaddadChief,
Education Policy DivisionEducation & Training Department
- vii -
Executive Summary
DESIGNING MANAGEMENT FORUNCERTAINTY AND INNOVATION
IN EDUCATION PROJECTS
This paper develops a conceptual framework for the design ofeducation project management arrangements that explicitly recognizesthe need for different approaches to management for different kinds ofprojects implemented in varying social and organizational contexts. Theframework has been developed in response to continuing problems in themanagement of education projects, problems which grow more pressing asthe level of innovation in these investments increases. It integratesthe results of analytical work on project management and educationalchange with relevant management theory, research and experience.
There are seven chapters. Chapter One reviews trends towardinnovation in World Bank education projects and identifies implicationsfor project design and management. Chapter Two provides an overviewof contingency management, a theory of management analysis and designthat guides the creation of management arrangements which meet theneeds of specific tasks in particular contexts. Chapters Three, FourFive and Six elaborate this overview, presenting the elements ofcontingency management as they can be applied in analysis and design.Chapter Three is concerned with the analysis of environments,innovation and values that leads to the choice of a generallyappropriate approach to management. Chapter Four reviews the ways inwhich the processes of management -- planning and decision-making,leadership and authority, communication, coordination, control andmonitoring, staffing -- should vary under different managementapproaches. Chapter Five reviews the different patterns oforganizational structure appropriate for different approaches andprocesses. Chapter Six reviews issues in the capacity of staffto manage under differing approaches. Chapter Seven presents anoperational model to guide the process of analysis and design,including action strategies for organizational development and designchange in response to the findings of analysis.
EDUCATIONAL CHANGE AND THE NEED FOR IMPROVEDPROJECT MANAGEMENT DESIGN
The education projects funded by the World Bank have changedsignificantly over the past two decades, with increasing levels ofinnovation and complexity. During the 1960s Bank projects sought toimprove education systems in developing countries primarily by
- viii -
increasing enrollments and providing the physical infrastructure andequipment needed to accommodate larger numbers of students. But sincethe 1970s, improving the quality of education has achieved higherpriority. The projects undertaken during the 1970s and 1980s have beenclosely related to the Bank's overall strategy of alleviating povertyand promoting social equity as well as economic growth. Innovation andchange have been at the core of these projects. The project emphasisof the Bank and of Borrower governments has shifted to qualitativegoals that are to be achieved by increasing the access of poorer groupsto basic education, developing science teaching, improving vocationaland technical training, and building national capacity for managementand research. While the implementation of these projects has beengood on the whole, performance has been hampered by inadequateinstitutional management performance.
The Bank's own evaluations suggest that project componentsthat promote innovation and change in the education systems ofdeveloping countries are far more complex, have substantially differentcharacteristics, and require different methods of planning andmanagement than those components concerned primarily with. physicalconstruction and procurement. Among the characteristics of projectspromoting innovation and change are: 1) a higher degree of uncertaintyabout the nature of education problems, the social and organizationalenvironments in which projects are carried out, and the mostappropriate interventions for achieving educational improvements;2) lower levels of knowledge about appropriate solutions to educationproblems; 3) more "people-centered" activities that depend heavily forsuccess on the attitudes and behavior of beneficiaries-andimplementors, increasing the need for participation in project designand management; 4) higher levels of risk in implementation because ofthe need to promote change and innovation within bureaucratic educationinstitutions with relatively low levels of administrative capacity; and5) more difficulty in measuring the impact of interventions andinnovations quantitatively, precisely and directly.
Not all project components undertaken by the Bank andBorrowers are innovative; most projects contain components withrelatively well-known and understood tasks. Both Bank experience and agrowing consensus in the fields of management and organization theoryrecognize the need for different management arrangements for "routine"and innovative tasks, the latter requiring a more adaptive, flexibleand responsive approach to planning and management than the former.Uncertain implementation environments also change the requirementsplaced on project management.
Evaluations of Bank-supported education projects indicatethat the appropriate design of tasks, management systems, andorganizational structures is contingent on the economic, social andorganizational conditions of the country, on the degree of innovationin the project and on the management style and capacity of implementingorganizations. Thus, if management is to be improved, Bank andBorrower staff need to use a wide range of management concepts todesign unique management arrangements for projects of differing levelsof innovation in different countries.
- ix -
The contingency approaches presented in this paper respond tothis need.
CONTINGENCY APPROACHES TO MANAGEMENT DESIGN
Contingency theory emphasizes that effective managementdepends on the fit between project design (strategy and tasks), theproject's management processes and organizational st'ructure, staffcapacity, and the environment in which projects must be carried out.The contingency approach is a process of adjusting project strategy andmanagement to fit the implementation environment, initially during thedesign phase and later during implementation. In the preparation anddesign phases the contingency approach involves a four stage processof:
1) assessment of the relative level of uncertainty in the projectenvironment and of the degree of innovation in project components.The results of this assessment lead to choice among a range ofmanagement approaches, establishing requirements for managementprocesses, organizational structures and staff capacity for projectcomponents; this assessment also includes an analysis of the valueorientations of staff required by the approach;
2) assessment of the staff capacity (including current values),organizational structures and management processes of implementingorganizations to identify current management style and capacity;
3) comparison of management requirements and capacity to determinethe feasibility of the project as designed, and to identify needsfor management development or design modification;
4) development of implementation strategies that guide managementdevelopment and design modification.
A set of contingency relationships are developed to guide analysis.These define the ways in which management approaches, processes,organizational structures and staff capacity vary under differentconditions of environmental uncertainty and task innovation.
Environmental uncertainty is a measure of the degree ofcomplexity and stability in the socio-economic and organizationalenvironments in which the project must be implemented. Complexenvironments are characterized by a relatively large number ofdiverse institutions and groups whose behavior affects or is affectedby the project. Stable environments show little change, and whatchange there is occurs slowly. Environments high in complexity and lowin stability are highly uncertain; low complexity and high stabilityincrease the level of certainty.
The degree to which a set of tasks are innovative depends onlevels of task variety and analyzability, on the scale (geographic orinstitutional) of the innovation, and on the degree to which the
V innovation deviates from current practice. Variety is a measure of thedegree to which tasks require diverse skills and varying time periods
- x -
for completion. Analyzability refers to the extent to which a task canbe expressed in precise objectives, placed in a linear sequence, andcontrolled by rules. The scale of an innovation refers to the numberof institutions involved in and/or extent of geographic coverage of theinnovation. The degree of deviation is a measure of the extent towhich a set of tasks are new, require new skills and have highrequirements for professional competence. Tasks which are high inanalyzability and low in variety, scale and deviation are relativelyroutine. Tasks low in analyzability, but high in variety, scale anddeviation are relatively innovative.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT APPROACHES, PROCESSES AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES
Two strongly contrasting management approaches are discussed.Mechanistic management is appropriate for relatively low levels ofinnovation and relatively certain environments. It is the classicbureaucratic management approach, as reflected in its managementprocesses. Planning is comprehensive and follows a blue-printapproach; decision-making is centralized; leadership is exercised fromthe top and is based on position in the administrative hierarchy;communication is largely top-down and one-way; coordination isaccomplished through commands; control emphasizes command andconformance to rules, and monitoring emphasizes conformance to targets;jobs are organized by function, and staff are motivated through acombination of monetary rewards and sanctions.
Adaptive management is appropriate for relatively highlevels of innovation and uncertain environments. It differs radicallyfrom mechanistic management. Planning is incremental, emphasizingconstant adjustment based on experience; decision-making isdecentralized and participatory; leadership is collegial and based ontrust between supervisors and subordinates; communication isinteractive; coordination is achieved through negotiation andfacilitation of goal accomplishment; control relies more on employeeself-control, emphasizes achievement of objectives not rules, andmonitoring aims at learning and adjustment; jobs are organized aroundobjectives, and staff are motivated by achievement, participation, andjob satisfaction as well as monetary rewards.
Few organizations use entirely mechanistic or adaptiveapproaches. Most must accomplish both routine and innovative tasks,and thus must employ both approaches. In addition, variations of thetwo generic approaches are most appropriate under differentcombinations of environmental uncertainty and task innovation. Twosuch variants are discussed throughout the paper.
Four forms of organizational structure with differentpotential to support different management approaches are discussed:functional, divisional, overlay and matrix. In functional structuresjobs are organized around specialized tasks, such as research,financial management, procurement, curriculum development, or textbookdistribution. Divisional structures organize jobs around products orclients, i.e. primary education, secondary education, teacher training.In overlay structures a product or client-oriented units is
- xi -
superimposed on a functional structure, such as when a projectimplementation unit is created for a primary school reform. Matrixstructures integrate fully both functional and divisional principles oforganization. This is a most complex structure, with high requirementsfor communication and coordination.
The paper argues that structures must be chosen to fitapproaches and processes in order to establish a workable level ofcongruence among the three. This leads to more consistent andeffective management action.
Different "ownership" patterns of organizations are alsoreviewed for their potential to support a given organizationalstructure. These include line ministries, autonomous organizations,and various forms of coordinating councils.
The role of project designers is to find the appropriatecombination of mechanistic and adaptive approaches for a given set ofproject components, and to identify the patters on management processesand organizational structures that make the approach possible. Theseare then compared with existing management practice to identifydiscrepancies and actions needed to bring project managementrequirements and project management capacity into congruence.
APPLIED CONTINGENCY DESIGN
The process of contingency analysis leads the projectdesigner to a clear set of choices regarding the management of bothroutine and innovative project tasks. Where management requirementsexceed capacity, a first strategic option is to strengtheninstitutional management capacity in discrepancy areas. Thus if aninnovative component requires a new management approach, and differentprocesses for planning, decision-making and communication, managementdevelopment efforts can be focused on these areas. A number ofstrategies and instruments -- training, incentives, participation,communication -- used for management development are reviewed.
If requirements so far exceed management capacity thatmanagement development is not likely to close the gap, the design ofthe project must be altered to change management requirements.Innovation can be reduced by changing the nature of project tasks.This involves modifying the components of innovation -- analyzability,variety, scale and deviation. In some circumstances actions may betaken to reduce environmental uncertainty by reducing complexity andincreasing stability in the organizational environment. These includereducing the number of institutions involved and mobilizing politicaland beneficiary support for the innovation.
- xii -
CONCLUSION
Finding new and more effective ways of designing and managinginnovative social projects in uncertain environments is one of the mostimportant challenges facing developing country institutions andinternational donor agencies. As the World Development Report for 1983concluded, "the implied rejection of blueprints in tackling thecomplexities of development is not a counsel of despair. The chieflesson to be drawn from the experience is the importance of buildinginto every strategy and program an effective learning process. This isas true for programs of structural adjustment and administrative reformas it is for new initiatives in rural development." Contingencymanagement provides a framework which assists project planners inidentifying the tasks for which these new approaches are appropriate,as well as those where strengthened forms of traditional management areneeded. By providing a range of alternative management arrangementsfor differing tasks in differing environments, it increases the abilityof project designers to respond flexibly to different and changingmanagement problems.
-1-
Chapter 1: Educational Change and the Need forImproved Project Management Design
Education development projects have addressed increasinglycomplex needs, and have grown progressively more innovative. In theoften uncertain social, economic and organizational environments ofdeveloping nations these projects have encountered significantmanagement problems. In his review of seventeen Bank educationprojects, Middleton (1986) found that a high degree of innovationincreased project complexity and management requirements, as did policyuncertainty. Verspoor's analysis of educational change in twenty-oneBank projects found that successful implementation rested on strategiesfor the initiation, implementation and institutionalization of changethat varied with the degree of uncertainty in the environment and thedegree of innovation required (1987, forthcoming). Both concluded thatmanagement design, as a component of Bank project development, neededto be strengthened.
These studies, and parallel research on developmentmanagement (Rondinelli, 1983, 1986a), demonstrate the need for projectmanagement designs that are appropriate to the degree of uncertainty inthe implementation environment and to the degree of innovation inproject tasks. Innovative tasks in uncertain environments must bemanaged differently than routine tasks in certain environments.Central to the strengthening of project management, then, areprinciples which guide the design of alternative management approachesto meet the requirements of different levels of innovation undervarying levels of uncertainty.
This paper addresses this need for management designprinciples to support the work of the Bank and its client agencies inimproving the implementation of education projects. In it we seek tocombine recent evaluations of Bank experience with educational changeprojects and project management with an extensive body of research onmanagement and organizations, first to identify principles relevant tothe design of education project management, and second to organize theminto an operational framework to guide their use in project preparationand appraisal.
This first chapter reviews Bank lending for educationprojects, identifies the characteristics of educational innovation andtraces their implications for project management design. Chapter Twoprovides an overview of contingency management theory, an approach toanalysis and design which emphasizes the creation of alternativeapproaches to management for different levels of innovation undervarying levels of uncertainty in the implementation environment.Chapters Three, Four and Five then expand the overview, providing amore thorough discussion of the main elements of management: theenvironment, task innovation, management processes, organizationalstructures and staff capacity. The final chapter presents anoperational model for the use of the principles to analyze the
management requirements of a given project design and the managementcapacity of intended implementing agencies, as well as for thedevelopment of institutional management capacity and the modificationof project designs to increase the chances for successfulimplementation.
EDUCATIONAL CHANGE IN WORLD BANK PROJECTS
The education projects funded by the World Bank during the19609 sought to improve educational systems in developing countriesprimarily by increasing enrollments and providing the physicalinfrastructure and equipment needed to accommodate larger numbers ofstudents. But since the 1970s, improving the quality of education hasachieved higher priority in the projects that the Bank sponsors. Theprojects undertaken during the 1970s and early 1980s were closelyrelated to the Bank's overall strategy of alleviating poverty andpromoting social equity, as well as economic growth. Innovation andchange have been at the core of these projects. The Bank's emphasishas shifted to qualitative goals that are to be achieved by increasingthe access of poorer groups in developing societies to educationalservices, developing science teaching, improving the relevance ofeducation to national needs, and building national capacity formanagement and research within Ministries of Education(World Bank 1980).
These investments have also sought to improve curricula andthe effectiveness of teachers; to upgrade instructional materials; andto use mass media and 'distance learning." Projects that sought toincrease training and improve the skills of young people and adultsworking in the urban informal and the agricultural sectors also becamean important part of the Bank's lending portfolio.
Of the 282 education projects financed by the Bank between1963 and 1984, 82 percent have included components aimed at promotingeducational change, that is, the implementation of planned improvementsin education systems aimed at teaching practice, learning resources,structure and organization, or supporting institutions, with a view toenhancing student achievement. Over 60 percent of the total cost ofBank-supported education projects -- nearly $6.4 billion -- wasearmarked for about 300 educational change components in these 282projects (Verspoor, 1987: ii).
The Bank's educational projects have generally sought threetypes of changes: (1) large-scale comprehensive changes aimed, forexample, at introducing a new nationwide primary curriculum;(2) enrichment, typically seeking to improve the quality of instructionthrough the provision of more or better resources, such as newtextbooks or radio programs; and (3) subiect-related changes thatintroduce a new subject, such as agriculture, into the curriculum orimprove an existing one, such as science at the secondary level.
Examples of the wide range of education changes that the Bankhas sought to support in developing countries include improving theadministration and curriculum of training programs for rural youth
-3-
clubs in Benin; creating a nationwide nonformal agricultural trainingsystem in El Salvador; increasing the access of the rural population toprimary and secondary schools through a curriculum attuned to the needsof rural households in Ethiopia; and improving the quality of primaryeducation, especially for girls from the poorest rural households inBangladesh. The Bank has funded projects for restructuring the entireeducation system, developing and introducing new curricula and teachingmethods, and providing training and incentives to teachers in Haiti;and for introducing multiple grade teaching systems in rural schools,recruiting female teachers, and changing the organization ofsupervision and support to rural schools in Pakistan(Verspoor, 1987 forthcoming).
In the late 1970s and 1980s the Bank and partner governmentsincreasingly turned, through policy dialogue, towards programs ofpolicy change and reform. In some of these investments projectdevelopment and funding approval have been passed to governments withinthe framework of agreed policy directions. Other investments, mostdriven by financial crisis have encompassed a wide-range of changes inthe structures and financing of education. Examples of policiesaffected by such programs include teacher force size, composition andcompensation; generation of non-governmental revenues through fees,tuitions and community construction of schools; and increased privatesector participation in education. These policy changes have alsoposed major management challenges; policy reform without the capacityfor implementation has little positive effect. Borrower capacity todevelop and appraise projects has had to increase. The institutionalbasis for education has been expanded, requiring new forms of qualitycontrol and much greater coordination among organizations. Changes inpatterns of education finance have increased the need to generatesupport within the education profession and the public.
CHARACTERISTICS OF EDUCATION CHANGE PROJECTS
Projects seeking to promote change require different, and insome respects, more difficult management approaches than does theadministration of an existing system. A principal reason is thatinnovation requires changes in the behavior of many people in theeducation system: students, parents, teachers, administrators andspecialists. They also require a higher degree of coordination amongdifferent agencies engaged in a wide variety of tasks.
Achieving change of this type is difficult under anycircumstances; it is especially challenging in the uncertain andunstable environments that are often found in developing countries.
Multi-component projects, which lump together a number ofmore-or-less unrelated tasks to create a viable financial package,place further strain on management capacity. To the extent that thenature of tasks (and the degree of innovation) varies within and acrossproject components, different management designs may be required for asingle project.
- 4 -
In this situation project managers must contend withtraditional management practices that have often been inadequate forrelatively simple projects, and which are even less successful forcomplex and innovative projects.
The situation is even more complex from the point of view ofBank staff, who typically are engaged, over time, with severalcountries and several agencies within a country. Bank staff mustcontend not only with the variability and difficulty of complex changeprojects, but also with a variety of social, cultural andorganizational contexts. What is innovative in one country or agencyis less so for others with differing approaches to management anddifferent histories of success in managing change. Thus a managementapproach which works in one place may not work well in another. It maynot work in the same country if different agencies are involved; it maynot work in the same country and agencies for projects or componentswith differing levels of innovation.
The Bank's evaluations suggest that projects promotinginnovation and change in the education systems of developing countriesare far more complex, have substantially different characteristics, andrequire different methods of planning and management thaninfrastructure projects (Middleton, 1986). Among the characteristicsof projects promoting innovation and change are:
(a) A higher degree of uncertainty about the nature ofeducation problems, the conditions under whichprojects must be carried out, and the mostappropriate interventions for achieving educationalimprovements.
(b) Lower levels of knowledge about appropriatesolutions to education problems. These projectsoften deal with complex, diverse, and rapidlychanging conditions. The effectiveness ofsolutions depends on their "fit" with thesocio-cultural environment in which they areapplied, and their responsiveness to beneficiarieswith widely varying characteristics and needs.
(c) More "people-centered" activities, dependingheavily for their success on the attitudes andbehavior of intended beneficiaries and on theireffective participation in project design andmanagement.
(d) Higher degrees of risk in implementation because ofthe need to promote change and innovation, oftenwithin bureaucratically structured educationalinstitutions with relatively low levels ofadministrative capacity.
(e) More difficulty in measuring the impact ofinterventions, innovations and changesquantitatively, precisely, and directly.
-5-
Education projects in developing countries often haveambitious objectives in terms of their scale and the degree to whichtheir objectives deviate from current practice. Nearly 38 percent ofthe change components in Bank education projects have been aimed atlarge-scale curriculum reform; and 60 percent of those large-scaleoperations had three or four different change elements. Moreover, manyof the change components introduced in more recent Bank-sponsorededucation projects were untested. Nearly half of the large-scalecurriculum reform projects, therefore, contained experimentalcomponents (Verspoor, 1987).
Such large-scale operations generally have a low degree ofpredictability in both developed and developing countries (Adams andChen, 1981). Moreover, it cannot simply be assumed that interventionstested in Western countries will have the same effects in lessdeveloped countries, where environments are less certain andmanagement capacity less developed. Fuller and his associates(1986: 17) report that "findings from research on achievement andeconomic effects of school investments within industrial nations shouldnot be generalized to developing countries, nor even applied to allhistorical periods within any country." Other studies have foundsignificant differences among developing nations in the relationshipsbetween school attainment and quality and family background, teachertraining, and physical quality of the schoolroom (Heyneman and White,1986; Heyneman, Jamison and Montenegro, 1984). Moreover, as Beeby(1986: 37) has found, "there is no such thing as a general definitionof educational quality, since the concept of quality depends on one'sconcept of the ultimate purpose and objectives of education. Thisvaries from country to country, from group to group, and even amongindividuals." He notes that quantitative changes are usually easy todiscern and measure, but that "there are frequently strong differencesof opinion on what constitutes improvement in quality."
The World Bank recognizes that weak or inappropriatemanagement systems undermine the success of development projects, notonly in the education sector but in other fields as well. In its NinthAnnual Review of Project Performance Audit Results, World Bank(1983a: 27) evaluators found that the majority of the 127 projects theyreviewed experienced cost overruns or serious completion delays, dueprimarily to 'ineffective management." These problems arose from weakinstitutional development, lack of Borrower support, inability torecruit and retain qualified staff, inappropriate managementprocedures, inadequate coordination, and insufficient Bank supervisionand follow-up. "All or some of these factors affected the majority ofprojects with less than satisfactory outcomes, often resulting inreductions in project scope and benefit streams," the Bank's auditorsdiscovered. "... Bank staff and Borrower representatives weresometimes slow to react to such problems and failed to focus onimportant implementation issues."
IMPLICATIONS FOR PROJECT DESIGN
Planners and managers of education change projectshave limited ability to predict the future, and thus need to designprojects and their management systems which enable them to learn from
-6-
experience. Most development agencies have found that whilestraightforward solutions can be developed for well-structuredproblems, this is frequently not possible in the education sector,where problems are complex and unstructured, and environments arecontinuously changing. Furthermore, knowledge of which educationalmethods are being used, how they are applied in schools, and theirresults, is often limited, as is the understanding of howadministrative arrangements actually function. Many of the changes incurriculum, teaching styles, and methods are idiosyncratic in theirapplication: different teachers with different capabilities andapproaches use them in different ways with widely varying results.Thus, the ability of educational administrators to predict or controlthe impact of innovations on student performance is constrained anduncertain no matter how well the projects are designed.
In this context project planners must be able to use awell-defined set of analytical principles to work with Borrowers todesign project intervention strategies and management approaches whichfit the tasks of a given set of project components in a given social,cultural and organizational environment.
The purpose of design is to establish a project's majorobjectives, and to describe the strategy of intervention and the tasksby which the objectives will be achieved. Design aims at developing animplementation strategy. A project proposal should include adescription of how resources will be used in the project to deliver itsoutputs, organize decision-making, deal with uncertainty, mobilizedemand, and promote and sustain commitment (Paul 1982). In order toaccomplish this, project designers must identify the tasks andfunctions to be performed, designate the organizational structure tocarry out the tasks, and create the most appropriate managerial systemsfor moving the organization toward its objectives.
Many of the management problems that arise during a project'simplementation are, in fact, problems of design. Selecting projectobjectives that are feasible and sustainable within the constraints ofavailable human and financial resources is the first step towardimproving management performance. Evaluations by the Bank have foundthat successful project implementation requires designs that fit bothenvironmental conditions and the organizational and managerialcapabilities of the borrowing government. 'Past experience has shownthat the success or failure of a project is often critically determinedby the responsiveness of its design to prevailing local conditions,'World Bank (1983a: 30) audits conclude. "Overly ambitious projectswhich try to introduce new processes and technologies in countries withlittle or no experience in this field, often run into seriousimplementation problems and may not generate the benefits that had beenexpected at the time of project approval."
When project designs are unrealistic or overambitious, scarceresources are directed toward unattainable goals and projectimplementation becomes an exercise in futility. This danger isespecially acute in those developing countries where managerialcapacity is weak because of shortages of experienced staff and budgetresources, but where educational needs are great and political
-7-
pressures for generating quick results are strong. In these cases,project design must be an iterative process of setting priorities andselecting tasks that strike an appropriate balance between the needs ofthe borrowing country and the means available to meet them.
World Bank evaluations highlight the fact that the successfulimplementation of education projects depends in large part on fiveissues that should be dealt with in the design phase: first, thedegree of consensus between the Bank and the borrowing government onthe goals and strategies of the project; second, the complexity of theproject and the degree to which its implementation depends on effectivecoordination; third, the degree of innovation sought by the projectorganization; fourth, the degree to which demand exists or can becreated for changes; and finally, the level of institutionaldevelopment required to implement the project effectively(Middleton, 1986).
While these factors largely determine the feasibility ofproject designs, too much emphasis on current feasibility can result inthe Bank and Borrower only undertaking those tasks that are known towork. Since innovation and change are at the heart of the developmentprocess and have high priority for Bank support, education projects tosme degree should push the education system beyond existingcapabilities. But implementing educational innovations in developingcountries and changing the behavior of administrators, teachers, andpupils is a process fraught with uncertainty. In many cases,strategies of intervention must remain tentative at the outset of theproject and be tested and adapted in local environments. Designing aproject with tentative and testable objectives, and managing theuncertain process of implementation--as distinct from simply carryingout a comprehensive plan or 'blueprint' design--is the principalchallenge in managing innovative education projects.
DesigninR for Innovation
Innovative projects required a different concept of planningand design that is usually found in "blueprint" approaches or in thepreparation of most conventional World Bank projects (Baum and Tolbert,1985). The nature of such projects often precludes formulating adetailed prospectus to which managers will faithfully adhere. Whileany project design should give some description of the basic strategicissues such as objectives, size, scale, location, timing, the technicalpackage, cost estimates, and a desired implementation schedule, inhighly innovative projects details of the strategy, and of most of thetactics for implementation, must be left to those who will beresponsible for management.
Adaptive administration (Rondinelli: 1983) is an approach toproject design and management that seeks to create an appropriate fitamong project tasks and organizational structure, management systems,and the environment to meet the needs of specific groups ofbeneficiaries. It recognizes that highly innovative projects cannotusually be planned in advance in great detail using standardprocedures. The level of detail in which an education project can bedesigned prior to approval will depend on the complexity of the tasks
- 8 -
involved, the degree of innovation and change that will be required,the degree of environmental stability, the level of existing knowledgeabout the needs and behavior patterns of beneficiaries, and the levelof management capacity in the organization that will implement theproject.
The adaptive approach to planning recognizes that eachcountry's socio-economic environment is different and that, often,adjustments in tasks, organizational structure, and management systemsmust evolve incrementally from learning and experimentation. It viewstrial and error as a common, and legitimate, form of learning thatshould be used in designing education projects. Adaptiveadministration attempts to join learning with action to moveincrementally toward effective and efficient implementation, based onknowledge and experience gained through interaction with participantsand beneficiaries (Rondinelli 1983a).
Differences in the perception of problems in blueprint' andadaptive approaches to design have been concisely described by Johnstonand Clark (1982: 11), who point out that conventional planning anddesign procedures often assume that development problems arewell-structured and unambiguous, that solutions involve mutuallyexclusive choices, that choices are made by a single set ofauthoritative decision-makers, and that decisions are carried out by awilling and dutiful group of subordinates. In reality, they argue,'development actually involves a staggering variety of people andorganizations all pulling and pushing and otherwise interacting witheach other in pursuit of their various interests. Since each actor inthis process has a more or less unique perspective on 'the developmentproblem,' the policy process invariably deals with numerous overlappingproblems...
The inherently "messy" nature of most development problemsprecludes comprehensive and systematic design of solutions prior toapproval. Majone and Wildavsky (1978: 106) point out that theconventional "blueprint" approach to project planning and design"recognizes that implementation may fail because the original plan wasinfeasible. But it does not recognize the important point that many --perhaps most -- constraints remain hidden in the planning stage, andare only discovered in the implementation process." The underlyingassumptions of adaptive administration reflect Hirschman's (1967: 35)observation that "the term 'implementation' understates the complexityof the task of carrying out projects that are affected by a high degreeof initial ignorance and uncertainty. Here project implementation maymean in fact a long voyage of discovery in the most varied domains,from technology to politics."
In routine construction or service delivery projects designand management are often separate functions that result in designtaking place and being completed before implementation begins, andmanagement being merely the application of techniques and proceduresthat allow the implementors to conform to preconceived plans. But ininnovative projects, design and management should be mutuallyreinforcing activities that refine and improve each other over time.An adaptive approach recognizes that both design and management must be
-9-
guided by an incremental process of learning and experimentation.Learning, in the broad sense that it is used here, is defined as"change in behavior resulting from experience." As Goldstein (1984:236-237) points out, "learning occurs when a person's response to asituation produces a new or changed kind of performance which thenbecomes a part of his repertoire of behavior."
Selecting Appropriate Strategies, Interventions and Tasks
The choice of appropriate organizational structures andmanagement systems for project implementation will depend in part onthe degree of innovation involved in the project and the degree ofenvironmental uncertainty in which tasks will be carried out.Decisions on appropriate objectives, tasks and interventions will, to alarge extent, be contingent on the magnitude or size of the educationalchanges that are needed, and the geographical coverage or scope of theprogram required to achieve them. The larger the size and the greaterthe scope of changes, the more attention project designers and managersmust pay to mobilizing demand, establishing decentralizedorganizational structures and flexible decision-making procedures,dealing with uncertainty, and generating and sustaining commitment onthe part of political leaders and local implementors.
The Bank's experience with education projects leads to anumber of lessons that must be taken into consideration in designingthem more effectively in the future. These include the merits ofsimplicity, the need to balance feasibility with change, and theimportance of mobilizing demAnd for change.
1. The Merits of Simplicity
Although the educational problems and needs of mostdeveloping countries are large and complex, overly ambitiousdesigns -- manifested in multiple objectives, rapid change, excessiverequirements for human and financial resources, and complicatedprocesses of coordination -- are at the root of many of the managementproblems experienced in Bank-supported education projects. Theseproblems are exacerbated by conditions of policy and organizationalinstability (Middleton, 1986). Many Bank-financed projects appraisedin the 1970s suffered from problems of complexity. These loans becameknown as "Christmas tree projects:" they typically had a large numberof tasks and components, each representing relatively small investmentsaimed at addressing a large variety of educational needs. Theattention of project managers had to shift continuously from onecomponent to another. Most project managers recognized the futility ofattempting to deal with numerous educational issues at the same time,and focused their attention instead on construction and equipmentprocurement, usually the easiest and most certain tasks.
The World Bank has found that the complexity of theseprojects was compounded by the paucity of experienced managers in theeducation sector of most borrowing countries. Education is not a"glamor" sector that easily attracts highly qualified staff, and thereis little effort made in most countries to develop educators intomanagers. Nearly all educational administrators working in the sector
- 10 -
are or have been teachers who were promoted to an administrativeposition without adequate managerial training. Inexperienced staff areoften put in charge of large and complex projects, resulting in delays,cost overruns, and ineffective management. Low levels of managerialcapacity in Education Ministries have often led to an inability toabsorb available donor grants or loans.
The Bank's long experience in the education sector suggeststhat ensuring simplicity in project design by choosing a dominantproject objective is an essential first step toward successfulimplementation, particularly where the policy and organizationalenvironment is unstable. Such an objective should be clearly definedand operationally feasible, that is, progress toward it should bemeasurable. Although in practice it is not always possible to limit aproject to a single objective, narrowing the focus to those tasks thatcan reasonably be achieved with existing or easily obtainable resourcesraises the probabilities of successful implementation. When complex .issues must be addressed, projects can be designed as a series of tasksthat allow managers to focus first on less complex problems beforetackling more difficult ones.
2. Balancing Feasibility with the Need for Change
Although project designers must bring ambitious goals in linewith available resources, the objectives of an education project shouldnot always be limited to what is known to work. Doing only whatdemonstrably works may reduce uncertainty and risk, but it also limitsthe prospects for change. It can have a negative effect onexperimenting with solutions that may be educationally and economicallymore attractive. For example, the Bank's emphasis on the provision oftextbooks is often justified, but there is a danger that once thisroutine provision of inputs appears to work well, other potentiallyhigher yielding -- albeit more uncertain and risky alternatives -- suchas teacher training or radio instruction, may be neglected.
This danger is also reflected in recurring proposals forconstruction of prefabricated school buildings. Prefabrication mayease managerial requirements in building schools in rural areas, butthe adoption of this well-known, capital-intensive approach isfrequently expensive and technically sub-optimal. It may also inhibitthe search for less expensive, labor-intensive construction techniquesthat make use of local materials and that are better adapted to localconditions.
3. Mobilizing Demand for Innovation and Change
An essential element of project design is to chooseobjectives, tasks, and interventions for which there is politicalcommitment and beneficiary support. Often, however, when projects aimat promoting change, provisions must be made in the design of theproject for mobilizing demand. Evaluations of Bank-supported projectsindicate that many have been designed by Ministry bureaucrats,university professors, or foreign consultants who use standard
- 11 -
professional solutions to educational problems. Often, however, theirproposals do not reflect a realistic understanding of what teachers,parents, or students actually need or want.
Needs identification and demand mobilization are crucialfunctions affecting project implementation that are often neglected byplanners and managers. Yet provisions for demand mobilization must bemade early in the planning process if the project is to be implementedeffectively. Depending on the type of project under consideration,demand mobilization would focus on the potential beneficiaries such asstudents or employers, or on local implementors such as teachers andadministrators. But demand mobilization cannot stop with convincingthe ultimate beneficiaries, the students, of the advantages of change.Teachers must always be convinced of the feasibility and usefulness ofinnovations, especially when changes require deviations from existingclassroom practices or extra, uncompensated, work (Sarason, 1972;Fullan, 1982). Mobilizing demand among potential implementors isespecially difficult in poorer developing countries where teachers areoften under-qualified, underpaid, and demoralized. Where demand isweak, special attention must be given in the design of a project toeliciting widespread participation. It may be necessary to involvelocal teachers, administrators, and community and political leaders inthe design process to assure that the proposed innovations fit withlocal conditions and to motivate teachers to try new approaches.Information about proposed changes must also be disseminated to parentsand students before and during the project.
Assessing the structure of demand for educational innovationsand designing strategies for mobilizing demand are not easy tasks.When demand for change is weak, the project must be designed to allowlearning by doing and modification during implementation.
Designing Prolects for Learning
Proposals for highly innovative projects should provide broadobjectives and guidelines for implementation rather than a blueprintfor action. The design should establish a strategy of intervention,but leave options for structuring and managing the project to those whowill be responsible for implementing it. Management design shouldemphasize mechanisms for learning from implementation experience andadaptation of the project to changing circumstances.
Broad participation of individuals and groups whose actionscould seriously affect implementation, or who could be seriouslyaffected by the project, is an important mechanism. Thisparticipation should begin in the process of project design, andcontinue through implementation. Each group can be expected to have adifferent perspective on the problems and issues that the project willaddress, and on the most effective means of solving, alleviating orcoping with them. Moreover, each group can be expected to bringcomplementary knowledge, experience, understanding and resources to theachievement of project objectives.
- 12 -
A second mechanism is monitoring and evaluation. Both thedesign of the intervention and of project management should emphasizeorganized, yet flexible systems for collecting, analyzing and usinginformation for enroute learning and decisions. The need forinformation for management, always present, increases significantlywith innovation and uncertainty.
When problems are ambiguous, conditions are uncertain, andoutcomes are risky, projects can be designed as a sequential series oftasks to facilitate learning and to generate experience throughexperiments and testing (Rondinelli, 1983).
Using the format depicted in Figure 1.1, education programscould be designed as a series of projects, or as a project with fourphases:
1. The experimental phase is needed when little is knownabout the nature and characteristics of the problem to be addressed bythe project or about the most effective means of setting objectives orselecting tasks. Experimental phases would test alternative methods ofanalysis, different types of technology or technological packages,ascertain the acceptability of alternatives to different groups ofbeneficiaries, and draw conclusions about which interventions are mostpromising.
2. A pilot phase would test the experiments under a widervariety of specific conditions, or adapt and refine methods,techniques, and interventions that have proven to be effective in othercountries to local conditions and needs.
3. Demonstration projects would follow the pilot phases toshow the effectiveness of tested interventions, to increase or mobilizedemand for new methods gnd approaches, and to increase theacceptability of new me hods, techniques or forms of social interactionon a broader scale.
4. Widespread replication or production projects would beundertaken only when many of the unknowns or uncertainties areresolved. Even in this phase, however, many education projects aresomewhat experimental; seemingly routine replications often meetunanticipated difficulties when projects are transferred from onecultural setting to another.
The pace at which projects can go through this incrementalprocess, and the degree to which each stage must be a discrete set ofactivities, depends largely on the complexity and innovativeness oftheir tasks and on the degree of uncertainty in the project'senvironment. The design of highly innovative, complex projects mustoften evolve slowly through each stage as a distinct but related set ofactivities. Relatively simple and routine projects may proceed quicklythrough these stages with experimentation and testing focused on a fewaspects where understanding is weakest. Higher levels of environmentaluncertainty tend to reduce the pace of implementation for all levels ofinnovation.
- 13 -
w_ tylo pe wor
arw*,wnObmCd o swgae imn
L*'Ao&wm PrOSSM)ISoord_py ob~uctiw
-wu arMuhod of WstOWs Of
Ou4i,um or anhivuim or-O ie hiwdlson
Ipiou or
TrwuwabUIy" Tuu9wsItyor-be -
yIocwWf cw" cotbt
or ddwvy or dsitwa or dhihur o rdeiuwy
rfetom eyeft V in m
~~~nova* ~ ~ ~ Lvv-Ctmg~~~msmgunhntouft
a~~~~~~~~~~~~U
NoforflubMtyofrgtIzatl, anbuuc% -- ---
Figure 1.1: Adaptive Approach to Project Design(Source: Rondinelli, 1983)
- 14 -
IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGEMENT DESIGN
The design of a project establishes the nature of the tasksto be managed, including the degree of innovation. This in turn setsbasic requirements for managing the project. Increasing innovation,and increasingly adaptive approaches to project design, pose challengesfor management. While relatively routine projects may be managedfollowing a "blueprint" approach, this type of management is much lesslikely to be effective for designs which emphasize learning andincremental adjustment to meet complex problems in specific social andcultural environments, especially those with uncertain policy andorganizational contexts.
Management design is further complicated by the fact thatdeveloping country and assistance agency staff will have to contendwith both routine and innovative projects -- and with projects thatcombine routine and innovative tasks. Thus a variety of managementapproaches are needed, each suited to the nature of the work to becarried out and the degree of uncertainty in the environment.
Project designers must thus be able to assess the degree ofuncertainty in the implementation environment and identify the varyinglevels of innovation across project tasks in order to designappropriate management systems. Moreover, these management designsmust then be assessed for their feasibility given the capacities ofexisting organizations and staff. This is a complex task. At the sametime, much has been learned from research and experience about how itcan be accomplished.
The central concept in the chapters that follow is that ofcontingency. That is, that the design of the elements of managementmost susceptible to planning and action (overall approach, managementprocesses, organizational structures and staff capacity) is contingenton environment and tasks. As environments and tasks change, theseelements of management need to change as well in order to achieve aworkable level of congruence among the various parts. To the extentthat these changes require new behaviors from the staff of theorganization, their values -- regarding power, uncertainty,individualism, and social roles -- become critical factors in theeffectiveness of any management design.
_ 15 -
Chapter 2: Contintgency Theory and Management Approaches:An Overview
Management is generally defined as the "... art of gettingthings done through other people" (Hellriegel and Slocum, 1982). Inpractical terms, this definition focuses management science onorganizations created to enable people to accomplish specific taskswithin a particular environment. Project design can be improvedthrough the application of concepts and frameworks which help plannersassess all three -- environments, tasks and people -- both tounderstand the management requirements of a given set of projectactivities and to assess the management capacity of implementingorganizations.
This chapter first defines key management concepts. Itthen provides an overview of the contingency theory of management, aframework for management design which takes variation inenvironments and tasks into explicit account, leading towards consciouschoice among alternative approaches to management.
There are five fundamental components of management design:the environment, tasks, management processes, organizationalstructures, and the capacities of staff. The first two of these-- environment and tasks -- define the context of action and the workto be done to achieve objectives. The latter three are the elements ofmanagement that are amenable to influence or control, and hence are theaspects of management that can be "designed." Different patterns ofthese three factors are known as management approaches. Theseapproaches represent coherent and consistent combinations of process,structure and staff capacity appropriate for differing environments andtasks. The central task of management design is to analyze therequirements of varying environments and tasks to identify anappropriate management approach.
The environment may be defined as "those factors outside of agiven system to which the system seeks to adapt in order to achieve itsgoals and survive" (Middleton, 1985a, 45). Although the externalenvironment can be influenced, and in some case modified,* it isgenerally taken as given for project management design.
Tasks are clusters of activities that must be carried outsuccessfully to accomplish objectives. Objectives, in turn, arestatements of the products or services that the organization providesto the environment in return for resources. Thus the nature of tasksis fundamentally determined by objectives, and these are heavilyinfluenced by the nature of demand from the environment. When demand(in education projects, demand is often referred to as "educationalneeds") changes and becomes more complex, the nature of tasks follows.'Innovation" enters the organization through this relationship. Taskscan thus be "managed" only in relation to external demand.
- 16 -
Management processes are the dynamic patterns of action whichenable the organization to determine and achieve is objectives bycarrying out tasks. They include: planning and decision-making;leadership and authority; commnication; coordination; control andmonitoring; and staffing.
Orzanizational structures establish predictable relationshipsamong people and tasks, and between the organization and itsenvironment. They are designed to serve, and are thus made dynamic by,management processes.
Staff capacity is critical to management effectiveness. Bothvalues and skills are involved, and values are the more important ofthe two. Values held by the members of an organization reflect thoseof the wider society. Different management approaches requiredifferent sets of values, for example, with respect to authority.Changes in management can thus require changes in values, a processoften overlooked in project management development, which has tended tofocus on more easily acquired skills and techniques.
The general conceptual relationships between the environment,tasks, management approaches, management processes, organizationalstructures and staff capacity are shown in Figure 2.1.
Fjw I rcnmnt
Taks|
MYagumt Aproach
Orpgizatianal
Strwtturaev-IX
F Igure 2.1: Elmmts of aMangement Awproach
- 17 -
Traditional management science emphasized the analysis anddivision of tasks by specialized function, as well as the structures ofauthority and control through which staff worked. This approach servedreasonably well in relatively stable environments with little change indemand. The pace of change in most societies has accelerated, however,leading to complex and rapidly changing environments, changing demandsand increasingly complex and innovative tasks. Management science hashad to recognize that different environments, changing demands anddifferent tasks require different management approaches; that is,different ways to arrange management processes, organizationalstructures and staff capacity to accomplish tasks in differentenvironments. This way of thinking about management is known underseveral names, the most common of which is contingency management.
CONTINGENCY THEORY
Efforts to improve the management of development projects andprograms have a history of evolution from simple attempts to transferwestern administrative approaches and techniques, to complex models ofinstitutional development and adaptive administration that recognizethe interplay of environments, tasks, processes, structures and people(Rondinelli, 1985). New conceptual and theoretical frameworkshave emerged as earlier ones proved inadequate in theory or practice,and have reflected increasing recognition of the complexity andunpredictability of the development process itself -- that is, in thegoals with which development management is concerned.
Much of the criticism of early models, which were heavilyoriented towards the transfer of western administrative practice andmanagement techniques, rested on two points: first, that they presumeda single correct approach or technique for management; second, thatthey gave insufficient attention to the contextual and human elementsin development management.
Contingency theory responds to these weaknesses byrecognizing a range of appropriate management approaches and thecentral position of people in the process. It increases the complexityof the management design process, but seeks to make this complexitymanageable by making explicit the range of possible relationshipsbetween environments and tasks on the one hand, and themanagement approaches (staff, processes and structures) through whichwork is accomplished on the other. These relationships -- orcontingencies -- structure management analysis and design, leadingtowards actions to improve management.
The contingency theory of management rests fundamentally onthe idea that management processes, organizational structures and staffcapacity must be created to fit a particular organization and its tasksto a given environment. Contingency theory draws on the full range ofmanagement theories, approaches and techniques in seeking uniquesolutions to specific management situations. It thus stands in starkcontrast to traditional bureaucratic theories of organization, andindeed leads towards forms of organization and management which differin significant ways from past and present practice.
- 18 -
Three key variables are recognized in contingency theory: thetask environment, the nature of tasks, and the staff involved. Thedimensions of these variables are shown in Table 2.1 (adapted fromHellriegel and Slocum, 1982, 27):
Table 2.1: Three Contingeny Variables
EXTERNAL Stable/ Urktable/ENVIRO4T Certain ... ..... Uertain
TASKS Routine ... ..... Imovative
Low Tolerarce Hli ToleranceSTAFF for Ambiguity .... ... for AmbigultyCAPACITY
Contingency theory holds that the management approaches --
and hence management processes and organizational structures -- oforganizations operating in stable environments and performing routinetasks, will differ from those of organizations performing innovativetasks in uncertain environments. Values are held to be the key tostaff capacity. In particular, as organizations adapt processes andstructures to deal with increased environmental instability andinnovation, the staff will be required to deal with increasing levelsof ambiguity.
Effective organizations are those that attain a significantlevel of congruence among management processes, organizationalstructures, and staff values on the one hand, and the degree of taskinnovation and environmental uncertainty on the other. Thus managementprocesses, organizational structures and staff capacity are contingenton environments and tasks.
Importantly, the theory does not hold that one approach isbetter than another. It emphasizes rather that a management approachmust be designed to fit with environment, tasks and people, and thatorganizations and their members can change over time to acquire thecharacteristics necessary to adapt to differing levels of uncertaintyand innovation.
MECHANISTIC AND ADAPTIVE APPROACHES TO MANAGEMENT
Management processes and organizational structures are theelements of organizations that can be designed to fit different levelsof uncertainty and innovation. Two strongly contrasting patterns ofprocesses and structures typify either end of the three contingencydimensions. These are known as mechanistic and adaptive approaches tomanagement. The ways in which these approaches differ on selected
- 19 -
dimensions can be seen in Table 2.2 (adapted from Hellriegel andSlocum, 1982; Burns and Stalker, 1961; Zaltman, et al., 1973).
Though abstract and simplified, these differences indicatethe fundamental ways in which these two management approaches differ,and the changes that need to take place as an organization moves from amechanistic towards an adaptive approach.
Table 2.2: Contlngemcles In Mechanisticand Adaptive Managent
Hanatement Approach
Mechanistic Adaptive
ENVIRONMENT certain uncertainTASKS routine inrnvative
STAFF CAPACITY low tolerance hlh tolerancefor Ablguity for mbigulty
- 20 -
The management process variables shown in Table 2.2 becomemore dynamic and flexible, reflecting increasing uncertainty in theenvironment and in the ways in which innovative tasks can best beaccomplished. All adjust toward uncertainty by increasing the abilityof the organization to get and use information. Planning becomesincremental, emphasizing constant adjustment. Leadership becomesparticipatory and authority is decentralized and professionalized,moving decisions closer to sources of information. The pace ofcommunication is increased by relaxing formality. Coordination is lessconcerned with direct control of activities, and more with findingflexible ways to help organizations and units cooperate inaccomplishing mutual objectives. Control relies much less on formalrules and emphasizes ex ante measures. The work of employees alsobecomes tied to performance against objectives rather than ofprescribed functions.
The form of organizational structure varies to supportdifferent pattern of management systems. Hierarchical organizationshave been shown to be most effective for mechanistic management(Hellriegel and Slocum, 1982: 296). Adaptive approaches, however,require organic structures. The characteristics and forms of thesestructures are principally determined by their process components.In brief, hierarchical structures tend to be simple and organized byfunctional departments; organic structures are more complex, and tendto be organized around products and beneficiaries (in private sectororganizations, around "markets").
As processes and structures change, staff capacity must alsochange to meet the requirements of both. Complex structures andflexible and dynamic processes do not work well withoutappropriate staff values and skills. As will be discussed, there are anumber of value dimensions of importance to management in the range ofcultures in which education development projects are implemented.
Mechanistic and adaptive approaches define the poles of acontinuum, along which are located other approaches. These havecharacteristics which allow them to cope with moderate levels ofuncertainty and innovation. Four approaches will be discussed in thispaper.
Again, it must be emphasized that one approach is notinherently "better' than another, just more appropriate for given tasksin a given environment. Moreover, a single organization (or a single"project") may need to employ both approaches, or variants of them, fordifferent tasks. In education projects, for example, the procurementof goods and services may require a mechanistic approach, given therelatively routine nature of tasks, the high use of formal rules andneed for formal communication and comprehensive planning. Curriculumreform in the same project, however, may require an adaptive approachto cope with task innovation and uncertainty.
- 21 -
Characteristics of Mechanistic Management
Public sector institutions tend to use mechanistic approachesto management. The administration of routine services underlegislative or other legal mandate continues to be an importantfunction in all public organizations.
The mechanistic approach has the following characteristics(Hellriegel and Slocum, 1982, 296):
"1. Organizational problems and tasks are broken downaccording to specified functions;
2. Coordination occurs through the formal hierarchy;
3. The job duties and responsibilities assigned to eachperson are defined krecisely;
4. The structure of control, authority and communication ishierarchical;
5. Interaction between members of the (organization] followsthe chain of command;
6. Greater importance and prestige are attached to internalrules and regulations than to general knowledge, expertise andskill;
7. The behavior of all workers and managers tends to begoverned by rules and regulations.'
These characteristics are common to education ministries in thedeveloping world, and reflect an appropriate approach to theadministration of many of the tasks necessary to an effectiveeducational system. Indeed, strengthening the capacity of ministriesto manage effectively in a mechanistic fashion has been and continuesto be an important goal for education projects. But while appropriatefor paying teacher salaries, distributing textbooks and collectingenrollment statistics, this approach is less effective for the tasksinvolved in managing change in those systems.
Characteristics of Adaptive Management
The increasing focus of Bank projects on educationalinnovation and change indicates the need for adaptive management inprojects with innovative tasks.
-The proposition that innovative projects promotingeducational reform or enrichment must be planned and managed indifferent ways than those building physical infrastructure or providingroutine services is now widely accepted in the management field, and isgenerally recognized in the World Bank. The Bank's World DevelopmentReport for 1983 notes explicitly that "management techniquesappropriate for physical projects ... differ significantly from those
- 22 -
needed in people-centered development" (World Bank, 1983: 88). Thisseems to be true not only in the education sector, but in most othersectors as well. Different methods are needed to promote social changebecause of the high levels of uncertainty and ignorance about what islikely to work best in any given country for different groups ofpeople, and about how they will react to innovations. "Less is knownabout how to change patterns of behavior so that people adopt newfarming methods or birth control, because cultural influencespredominate," the World Development Report emphasized. "Theseuncertainties about people-centered development are combined with lessmanagement control, since success depends on stimulating people'svoluntary participation." The Report concluded that "managementtherefore requires experimentation, flexibility, and a willingness towork closely with program beneficiaries to learn about, and respond to,local needs."
Studies of education projects in both Western and developingcountries conclude that reforms are most successfully implemented inan adaptive manner: that is, when broad guidelines from centralgovernments are refined and modified at the local level afterdiscussion, bargaining and compromise before and during implementation(Berman and McLaughlin, 1978; Crandall, et. al., 1983; Miles, 1984;Verspoor, forthcoming, 1987). In this approach, national ministriesdesign and promote programs for change, and implementors react withideas and proposals for adaptation and refinement, which they considerin light of specific loca.l conditions, existing classroom routines, andearly implementation experience. The result is an approach to projectmanagement that supports implementation of a continuously evolving setof tasks requiring considerable monitoring, supervision, and redesignthroughout the life of the project.
The concept of adaptive administration* draws heavily ontheories that have been explored in the management literature and thatare used in the private sector under the labels "strategic management,""open-systems management," and "organization development" (Lawrence andLorsch, 1967; Ansoff, 1965; Burke, 1982; French, et al., 1983). It hasbeen less widely applied in the public sector or in internationaldevelopment projects until recently. In the field of internationaldevelopment, the approach, draws upon aspects of "institution-building"(Esman 1972), "strategic management" (Paul 1982), 'transactiveplanning' (Friedmann 1973), and the "learning process approach" (Korten1980; Rondinelli 1983).
*The terms "adaptive administration" and "adaptivemanagement" are used interchangeably in this paper.
_ 23 -
All of these theories agree, however, that the planning andmanagement of innovative social projects should be flexible andresponsive. An adaptive approach to planning and management:
1. Is learning-based and "experimental" -- it seeks to joinlearning with action and to move incrementally towardeffectiveness and efficiency through the accumulation ofknowledge about and experience with the environment in whichthe project will be implemented and the people who willbenefit from it.
2. Is interactive and participative -- major tasks andfunctions are defined through a process of interaction amongprimary actors and interested groups who will be involved inor affected by the project.
3. Is flexible and responsive to changing environmentalconditions and unanticipated consequences and needs duringimplementation.
4. Is facilitative rather than control-oriented -- it seeksto create incentives for participants to change behavior or tointeract effectively to achieve mutually beneficialobjectives.
5. Uses incremental rather than comprehensive planning.
6. Emphasizes adaptive rather than bureaucratic managementprocedures.
7. Requires "orRanic" structures that facilitate creativity,responsiveness, learning, and adjustment rather than simplyapplying bureaucratic rules and standard operating procedures.
8. Depends on strong and committed leadership by projectmanagers and staff rather than just technical and managerialskills.
9. Requires coordination through exchange and mutualadiustment rather than central control and direction.
10. Seeks to build local institutions and administrativecapacity to sustain the beneficial impacts of change and tostrengthen the beneficiaries' ability to solve problems ontheir own after international funding ends.
Planners and managers using an adaptive approach toadministration do not view educational development problems asnecessarily having the same direct cause and effect relationships ineach borrowing country, as having a single set of solutions that wouldproduce the same results everywhere, or as being amenable to solutionthrough preconceived and comprehensively designed interventions.
- 24 -
SUMMARY
The tasks of education projects in developing countries areincreasingly innovative, and the political and economic environments inwhich they are carried out are often uncertain. The managementprocesses and organizational structures of implementing agencies,however, tend to be mechanistic, appropriate for routine tasks instable environments. Staff values.'and skills may not be appropriatefor the management approaches required by increased levels ofinnovation and environmental uncertainty. All this indicates thatinnovative tasks are not likely to be managed well by traditionalorganizations.
Thus organizations and management approaches must change andgrow to meet the challenges of innovation, or the level of innovationin projects must be reduced. International agency staff play key rolesin working with government counterparts to design project tasks andmanagement systems. Contingency theory provides a conceptual frameworkfor analysis of the environment and tasks, and mechanistic and adaptivemanagement approaches offer principles for the design of managementsystems and organizational structures and to meet the challenges bothof improved routine administration and of innovation and change.
- 25 -
Chapter 3: Uncertainty and Innovation:The Determinants of Management Approach
Different levels of uncertainty in the environment anddifferent degrees of task innovation call for different managementapproaches. Hence knowledge of the environment and of the degree ofinnovative behavior required for task implementation is important tothe design of effective management systems (World Bank, 1984;Middleton, 1986; Verspoor, 1987 forthcoming).
ENVIRONMENTAL UNCERTAINTY
The environment of a development project is shaped by thoseconditions or forces that are external to it and "which createopportunities for its survival and expansion. The political, economicand social forces in the country, and attitudes of the beneficiarygroups and key actors external to the program are part of theenvironment." (Paul, 1982).
Two environments for education projects can be identified:the socio-economic environment and the organizational environment.These are somewhat arbitrary labels for inter-dependent sets of keyfactors; nevertheless, the complexity of the general environmentrequires some initial categories to clarify the discussion and,eventually, the application of concepts in management design.
The Socio-economic Environment
The socio-economic environment consists of economic, social,political and physical conditions and forces that are likely to affectthe level of uncertainty, and therefore the success of projectimplementation.
In designing project strategies, planners seek to understandthe relationships among these factors: for instance, how nationaleconomic policies determine the resources that will be available foreducational purposes, how different types of educational programscontribute to economic development in a country, and how occupationalstructures and employment opportunities influence educationalrequirements. Project designers are concerned about how changes inmacro-economic policies and trends are likely to affect educationalprograms in the near future, and to understand how social and culturaltraditions affect beneficiary perceptions of and attitudes towardeducation and change. They further assess various aspects of theeducation system itself: enrollment patterns, system efficiency,geographic dispersion and student access, and costs.
- 26 -
The World Bank's procedures for project development give agreat deal of attention to economic and physical analysis at theprefeasibility, feasibility, and appraisal stages of the project cycle.Bank staff analyze macro-economic trends, changes in demand and prices,financial performance, transfer payments, inflation patterns, andpotential costs, benefits, and financial returns in great detail(Baum and Tolbert, 1985). Moreover, Bank staff are supposed to analyzethe social and demographic characteristics of the projecrtsbeneficiaries and their patterns of social organization, the project'scultural acceptability, and the potential for sustained participationby beneficiaries.
But in reality, social factors often receive much lessattention in appraisals than do economic and financial factors, andrelatively little attention is given to political and socialconditions. These latter have profound effect on economic andfinancial factors, and on other dimensions of environmentalcertainty. Their assessment, while necessarily imprecise, is centralto good management design.
Politics and Economics
For purposes of management design, planners need to givespecial attention to the relative degree of uncertainty in Borrowerpolitical/administrative systems and economic systems.
Assessment of the political environment is critical at thedesign stage because the success of development projects requires ahigh level of political commitment and administrative support.Projects that are in conflict with domestic political priorities orconstraints, dominant political interests, the perspectives of powerfuladministrative agencies, or the thrust of past or current governmentpolicies, are difficult to implement effectively (Cohen, Grindle andWalker, 1985; Middleton, 1986). A country's project proposals areoften reflections of policies that have evolved from bureaucraticconflicts, and that sometimes engender strong political opposition.Cohen and his associates (1985: 1218) point out that the staff ofinternational agencies who are involved in project planning and designshould at least be aware of '(1) the patterns of political penetrationof the bureaucracy; (2) the presence and effects of highly polarizedinterest groups on bureaucrats; (3) the amount of political risk facedby administrators seeking to perform their legal functions; and (4) thedegree to which responsibility is fragmented among other agencies andparastatals...." Unless the political environment is well understood,designers may include tasks in a project for which there is littlepolitical support or administrative commitment, and for which there islittle hope for successful implementation.
The economic environment provides the underpinnings forprojects in significant ways: the stability of counterpart funding,the degree of change in technology and employment, the complexity ofthe private/public sector institutional mix, the capacity of theeconomy to absorb increases in recurrent costs as innovations becomeinstitutionalized.
- 27 -
The Organizational Environment
The organizational environment consists of sectoralconditions and forces that affect directly the ability of projectmanagement to carry out its tasks and to achieve its objectives. Ineducation projects these may include: (i) education sector policies,education system characteristics, and expectation and traditions thatinfluence people's behavior towards education; (ii) the managementapproaches, administrative capacity and managerial skills within theEducation Ministry and other government agencies and privateorganizations that provide educational services; and, (iii) thecharacteristics, needs, motivations and resources of the intendedbeneficiaries of the project.
Every organization operates in a dynamic environment thatconstitutes its 'power setting" (Downs 1967). This environmentencompasses other organizations whose activities directly affect andare influenced by the project organization: higher level authorities;suppliers of financial and other resources; allies whose interests areadvanced by the success of the project or that jointly provide servicesto beneficiaries; and beneficiaries and sufferers, that is, groups andorganizations whose interests are enhanced or adversely affected by theproject's activities. It also includes functional and allocationalrivals that compete with the project organization either for resourcesor in performing similar tasks, and "regulatees," or the otherorganizations over which the project has control. (See Figure 3.1)
The organizational environment and power setting of a projectcan be quite complex. These may involve the Ministry of Education as ahigher authority, or the Prime Minister's Office if the Ministry ofEducation is the implementing unit; the Ministry of Finance from whicha project's resources are obtained; other Ministries such as Health,Public Works, Agriculture, or Rural Development as allies or jointproviders of services, or as allocational rivals. Other importantorganizations could include private educational institutions, educationcomissions, universities, teachers organizations, and parents' groups.If a project attempts to extend educational services through nonformalprograms, its organizational environment may include mass media such asradio, television and newspapers; community development groups; privatevoluntary organizations; and farmers' associations, cooperatives, andyouth clubs.
Figure 3.1: Organizational Power Setting(Source: Downs, 1967)
_ 29 -
These factors in the organization of the sector can changedrastically over the life of a project. Project designers must knowenough about the environment to be able to decide which tasks arelikely to be needed by and appropriate for beneficiaries, and arelikely to be feasible under existing political conditions. They mustalso understand the environment sufficiently to identify aspects of itthat must be changed if educational reforms are to work effectively.Project managers must be able to monitor and adjust to changes in theorganizational environment during implementation.
Of course, not all of the environmental conditions and forcesthat affect a project can be identified accurately, assessedeffectively, or changed during its design and implementation. Smith,Lethem and Thoolen (1980) point out that some elements of theenvironment are controllable in the sense that project managers candirect, guide or change them. But others are only influenceable:although project managers cannot directly control them, they can affecttheir direction and behavior. Other elements of the environment canonly be appreciated: project managers cannot control or influence themdirectly, but they must understand and monitor them in order toimplement the project effectively.
Clearly, the international assistance agencies have littlecontrol over the complexity of the organizational environments in whicheducation projects will be carried out, and virtually no short-terminfluence over the stability of socio-economic and politicalenvironments. The challenge is to obtain reasonable assessments of thecomplexity and stability of the environment and to design projectmanagement systems and organizational structures.
Complexity and Stability: Measures of Environmental Uncertainty
Assessing uncertainty in socio-economic and organizationalenvironments requires considerable knowledge of both and the exerciseof good judgement. The process is strengthened by the use ofthe concepts of complexity and stability in assessing environmentalfactors. Table 3.1 presents a selection of such factors together withcriteria for judging complexity and stability (adapted fromDuncan, 1979).
For the socio-economic environment, complexity refers to thenumber of economic and political factors that affect the design andimplementation of the project. For example, a highly diversifiedeconomy with an intricate institutional structure of economic planningand management provides a less certain environment than a simplereconomy with few institutions. More power groups (formal andinformal), and greater ideological differences, also contribute tocomplexity and thus uncertainty.
The stability of these factors -- the pace and degree ofchange -- further affects the level of uncertainty. Complexsocio-economic environments, with complex economies, large numbers ofinstitutions and groups, and ideological diversity are less certainthan simpler ones, and this uncertainty increases to the extent thatthese factors are changing --and changing rapidly.
- 30 -
Table 3.1: Factors in EnilronmentalAssessment
Complexity Stability
Sorio-eoxoic
Erylrrmment
1. Polltical/ s Nunber of power a Nature and pace ofAdmlnistrative growps political changeSystems
e Degree of Ideo- e impact of politicallogical differences change on aduini-
stratlun
* Degree of policysaw.ort for pro-ject
2. Econoeic e Degree of diversi- e Degree of techno-Systus fIcation of economy logical change
m Extent of free- e Degree economyarket oPen to Interna-
tional Influence
Oraanizatonal. e Ntu ber of beneficlary e Degree/pace of changeEnw ir rmmnt growvs In beneficlary growp
relations withgovernment
e Diversity of beneficiarygroups
* Nu ber/ diversity of a Freowrcy/degreeagerEles Involved In of change Inthe project lmplementing agencles
* Number/ diversity e ProbabIllty ofof funding sources stable funding
a Nusber of admlnistra-tive levels In proposedproject
- 31 -
Complexity and stability also characterize the organizationalenvironment. The number of institutions and groups whose behaviorimnediately affect project management in the short-term is significant,as is the extent and pace of change within them. These includeadministrative agencies, beneficiary groups, teachers unions and otherstakeholders operating in the project's power setting. The larger thenumber of interest groups and institutions, the larger the number ofadministrative levels at which the project operates, and the greaterthe degree and pace of change, the more environmental uncertaintyincreases.
Complexity and stability interact to determine the level ofuncertainty in the environment. This relationship is shown in Figure3.2.
bimplexity
High
HighLow ModerateUncertalnty Uncertalnty
Stability
Moderate High
Low Uncertainty Uncertainty
Figure 3.2: Degree of Uncertaintyin the Project Enviroruent
Stable environments that are low in complexity are also lowin uncertainty. Well-established schools that have stable funding, fewrelationships with external organizations, and little politicalinterference operate in relatively certain environments. As stabilitydecreases, because of unstable funding or political controversy,uncertainty increases. It also increases with complexity, such as whena new community advisory group is created to provide guidance to schooladministrators. Either a decrease in stability or an increase incomplexity can lead to moderate levels of uncertainty.
- 32 -
When both factors change at the same time, uncertaintybecomes high. Unstable funding, political controversy, and increasedparticipation of community groups in school governance have acumulative and reinforcing effect.
TASK INNOVATION
New tasks or new kinds of work require new patternsof behavior from an organization's members. As innovation increases,these requirements increase as well. Innovation is also relative.What is new for one organization and environment may not be for anotherin different circumstances. Hence innovation needs to be assessed bothabsolutely and in relationship to the current practice of theorganization.
Predictability and Demandingness: Measures of Task Innovation
Table 3.2 sumarizes factors and criteria useful in assessingthe level of task innovation (adapted from Perrow, 1968).
The predictability of the outcomes of new tasks is the keymeasure of the absolute degree of innovation. If the outcomes areknown by virtue of past experience, innovation is relatively low. Ifthey are unknown, innovation is high. For example, paying teachers ontime under current procedures is highly predictable; the only issue iswhether the funds will be available. Introducing new curricula andteaching practice is less so.
Predictability rests on two fundamental aspects of tasks.One is the degree to which a task can be reduced to routine steps to befollowed by implementors, referred to as the analyzability of tasks.The second is task variety -- the sheer number of tasks to beaccomplished which differ in terms of their skill requirements and thekinds of problems they address. Salary payment is done through a clearsequence of administrative steps requiring routine administrativeskills; relatively few problems are encountered. Curriculum reformrequires a much larger number of steps, many of which are iterative,that require many more skills and which deal with more complexproblems.
The relative degree of innovation is measured by thedemandingness of the tasks compared to current practice. This measurein turn rests on two factors. One is the degree of deviation fromcurrent practice, the extent to which a task differs from the waythings are now done. The second is the scale of change, the extent ofgeographic coverage and the number of institutions involved. Adding anextra day to regularly scheduled in-service training for teachers in afew schools is much less demanding than creating new in-servicetraining programs nationwide.
- 33 -
Table 3.2: Criteria for JudgingCoponents of I movat Ion
negree of InmovationInnovat IonCoav,onet Low. High
Ia=Varifta Functionally Functionally
Silelar Diverse
Sillar DiverseTime required for Tlme required forCompletlon Completion
Drea of Mostly known tasks Mostly urknown tasksDeviatZan InIJoatln Mostly current skilIs Mostly new sklils
Low professional skill Hlgh professlonal skillRequirements Requirements
- 34 -
Predictability and demandingness of tasks together determinethe level of task innovation, as reflected in Figure 3.3.
PredIctab 1I ty of Outcaes
High L
Routinre ModeratelyImovative
Ir .Demand-
Moderately HighlyRoutine lmovative
High I I I V
Filre 3.3: Degree of Imovation InProject Tasks
Four prototypical situations with respect to innovation areshown in the cells of the matrix, each defined by a differentcombination of extreme values of predictability and demandingness.These situations, of course, do not cover all of the possiblecombinations of values, but they do illustrate four clearlydistinguishable cases.
Routine tasks, as defined in cell I, are characterized byhigh levels of predictability and low levels of demandingness. Thusthe tasks are highly analyzable and low in variety. They deviatelittle from current practice and are to be carried out on a relativelysmall scale. A small building project managed by an experiencedconstruction unit would be an example.
Moderately routine tasks (cell II), are highly predictable.They are easily analyzed and of low variety, but are highly demandingbecause they require considerable deviation from current practice, areto be carried out on a large scale, or both. Experimentation in a fewschools with a new teaching program that has been well developed andtested elsewhere, or nationwide distribution of textbooks generally fitthis situation. In the first example prior experimentation has madethe relatively few tasks involved analyzable. However, the tasksrequire considerable deviation for implementors in the schools, raisingthe level of innovation. In the second, the sequential nature of thedistribution task enhances analyzability, but the extensive geographiccoverage of the effort increase demandingness, and thus relativeinnovation.
- 35 -
Moderately innovative tasks (cell III) have outcomes that arehard to predict, but are generally within current practice andrestricted in geographic or institutional scale. An example would bethe introduction, on a pilot basis, of a new system of achievementtesting as the basis for promotion between levels of schooling in asituation where test administration is a well-established part ofschool practice. A relatively wide variety of tasks are involved intest construction and validation. These are moderately difficult toanalyze, particularly in terms of the time required, yielding amoderate predictability level. Practices for test administration wouldchange little at the school level; most change would be restricted tothe test development and management agency. The outcomes, however,would be relatively difficult to predict because they could generatenegative reactions from parents and other influential constituencies tothe use of tests in a novel way -- that is, as a hurdle to be passed inorder to gain admission to a higher level of education.
Highly innovative tasks (cell IV) are highly demanding andlow in predictability. Comprehensive educational reforms whichencompass changes in classroom practice and management procedures on alarge scale exemplify high levels of innovation, with a wide variety ofnew practices that are difficult to analyze, and involving a relativelylarge number of organizations and levels of administration reachingfrom schools to the central ministry.
TOWARDS MANAGEMENT APPROACHES
Effective management approaches are congruent with the levelof uncertainty in the environment and the degree of innovation intasks.
The relationship between environmental uncertainty and taskinnovation defines the suitability of a management approach for a givenset of tasks in a given environment. The relationship is shown inFigure 3.4, which begins to illustrate some of the hybrid versions ofmechanistic and adaptive approaches. In reality, of course, even thesefour prototypes are too simple. But they do provide an indication ofthe ways in which mechanistic and adaptive approaches can be modifiedto4meet the requirements of different tasks and environments.
- 36 -
Irmcvativenesa of Tasks
Routine Hlghly Innovative
Mechn istic ProfessIonal/Adaptive
ULerta IntyIn ProJectFw Irwiunt
(/V AdaptiveMechanistic
High
FIgLre 3.4: Alternative ManagementAwroaches
Mechanistic Approach: Projects or project components thathave routine tasks to be carried out in a relatively certainenvironment can often be implemented by following a detailed project
design through a mechanistic approach using bureaucratic management
practices. Relatively high levels of certainty enable the organizationto operate in a relatively "closed" fashion. Many of the routineadministrative tasks of ministries fit well with this approach.
Adaptive Approach: But those projects with highly innovativetasks that must be performed in an uncertain environment require ahighly adaptive management approach. A wide variety of projectcomponents fit this description: nation-wide school reform, or theintroduction of a new form of non-formal education, implemented inunstable political environments by organizations with little or nosuccessful experience in the management of change.
Professional/Adaptive Approach: Projects with highly
innovative components to be carried out in relatively certainenvironments occur frequently in Bank education work. The politicaland organizational environments are relatively stable. The project isto be implemented through a relatively simple organizational unit withdemonstrated competence to handle routine tasks. The high degree of
innovation implies a significant increase in the use of new practicesand technologies, increasing the need for information and pushing
- 37 -
authority and decision-making away from the center. This increasescoordination and managerial requirements and the need for technical andprofessional skills (Bedeian, 1984, 300). The management approachmust move from mechanistic towards adaptive characteristics. A commonmodel for this approach is to implement through highly concentratedgroups of professionals to deal with the technical issues ofinnovation, operating with at least some of the characteristic ofadaptive management (sucI as an incremental approach to planning):hence the term "professionally adaptive."
Open/Mechanistic Approach: Routine projects in highlyuncertain environments are also common, such as school construction inorganizationally complex environments (i.e., with multipleorganizational jurisdictions) with low levels of political stability.These situations call for increased attention to monitoring changes inthe environment, while maintaining a mechanistic approach. This 'open"mechanistic approach maintains hierarchical authority anddecision-making systems, while increasing the flow of information.
SUMMARY
Environmental uncertainty and task innovation determine whichmanagement approach is most likely to be effective in givencircumstances. The approach in turn establishes the requirements forthe management processes, organizational structures and staff capacitynecessary for its implementation. These are the topics of the nextthree chapters.
I
- 39 -
Chapter 4: Management Processes
Effective management processes must be congruent with therequirements of environments and tasks. The nature of eachmanagement process is fundamentally determined by the broad approachappropriate to the level of environmental uncertainty and the degree oftask innovation. Thus the management approach identifiedthrough analysis of environments and tasks provides atemplate for the design of individual management processes.
The most important management processes are:(a) planning and decision-making; (b) leadership; (c) communication,(d) coordination; (e) monitoring, control and evaluation; and (f)staffing (including personnel management and human resourcesdevelopment).
Characteristics of management processes for mechanistic andadaptive approaches are discussed in this chapter. More emphasis isgiven to adaptive processes, as these represent the directions in whichmanagement of education change projects must move.
PLANNING AND DECISION-MAKING
Planning and decision-making are the principal processesthrough which authority is brought to bear on organizationalstrategies, objectives and problems. Informed by and using otherprocesses (such as leadership and authority, communication, control,coordination), both have significant influence on the others -- andthus on the way in which organizations function.
Planning is a formalized structure for decision-making. Thelatter, however, extends far beyond planning to cover a range ofchoices inherent in operational management.
Organizations engage in two forms of planning: strategic andoperational. Strategic planning is concerned with decisions about howthe organization can achieve its objectives most effectively within itssocio-economic and organizational environments. It is used to adjustto different degrees of environmental turbulence and to position theorganization favorably to achieve its goals. In the private sector,firms cope with uncertainty through strategic planning and managementby investing in good environmental forecasts; by creating contingencyplans to limit exposure to adverse risks and losses; by the progressiverevision of strategy; and through "prepared opportunism," that is, bycreating capacity within the organization to react rapidly to newopportunities generated by environmental changes (Yavitz and Newmanm1984). In the public sector, organizations engage in strategic
- 40 -
planning by attempting to discern changes in policies and politicalpriorities and to adapt their programs accordingly.
Under conditions of relative certainty and low innovation,strategic planning tends to focus on means to improve productivity andefficiency in the provision of goods or services. This can take theform of long-term contracting for inputs, of investments ininstitutional research aimed at productivity improvement, orinvestments in training and other improvements in the work force.
Operational planning is closely related to, and flows from,strategic planning. Operational planning focuses on the details andprocedures for implementing strategies, involving decisions aboutcommunications, coordination, budgeting, resource allocation,programming, procurement, contracting, maintenance and monitoring.Under mechanistic approaches, operational plans seek efficiency andeffectiveness in carrying out the project's tasks; adaptive approachesadd to this greater responsiveness to changes in the project'senvironment and to information about the implementation of innovation.
The variations in planning and decision-making for fourgeneric management approaches are shown in Table 4.1.
Planning and decision-making under a mechanistic approachrest firmly on low levels of task innovation and of uncertainty in theproject environment. Well-understood and predictable tasks and highlevels of confidence that things are not going to change very muchpermit comprehensive, long-term planning. Objectives can be set, meansdetermined, and orders issued. Top leaders can exert more control overthe activities at lower levels, and information flow can be primarilyfrom the top to the bottom of the organization. The lack ofuncertainty reduces the need for upward flow of information and fordecentralized decision-making. In short, under these conditionsplanning and decision-making systems can assume the characteristics ofthe far left-hand column on Table 4.1.
As innovation and uncertainty increase, management processesneed to become more adaptive. Problems are often open-ended(Lloyd, 1978) and cannot be solved using routine, systematic methods ofanalysis because the boundaries of the problems may change as they arestudied and analyzed. Solving such problems may require creativethinking, which is basically uncontrollable through deliberate means(Rickards, 1974). Moreover, the problems may not have unique ordefinitive solutions in the conventional sense, or the solutions may beoutside of the bounds of logic, that is, their efficacy can neither beproved nor disproved a priori. Formulating solutions to open-endedproblems depends more on learning, interaction and discovery than onsystematic analysis and planning. It often requires sustained trialand error, and informal, incremental and qualitative observation ratherthan quantitative, formal, and detailed analysis.
- 41 -
TW 4.1: Ft_ _ "1IIq 1
Trs I Twe II Tynj III Type ivlmiustia nl indmiatIc Prfmleaml/Adotti AdtInv
ShATMIC PLAMIIN
CGmulsw CvnMtlrn4W Iemntwai Increotai
Itwratlon TOO OM: ObJmtIw rap Mi IOJ.ctntw lntewtIVO tltwtiveFlo I 1 Flaxbl e_
Tin Frf Lowr Tin fr_ lortar Tile Fran
WMTIOW. PRUIUI
Bis for Fwicti0u/rgps- FW=t.mcl1uq- Objatim objetClvuUpt Al la- lzatlaj wits /DlZeelu Wit
catlam
5st r,TOP4. rTap.a. it kttUd. lntUeative.PlIrni MOWnfJbl f luible fl iWx flexiblePro
Because projects promoting chlnge are usually complex anduncertain, adaptive management substitutes incremental planning forcomprehensive analysis. Incremental planning focuses attention onsolving remediable asp-cts of known problems by identifying courses ofaction that move away from unsatisfactory conditions, even when"optimal or ideal goals cannot be agreed upon, and by exploringalternatives on which diverse interests can act jointly. It focuses on
courses of action that produce gradual changes in existing conditions.This makes the task of analysis and planning more managiable incomplex, uncertain, or rapidly changing environments. Incrementalplanning seeks interventions that will set other changes in motion, andit focuses on the examination of goals in close connection with valuesand means to achieve them (Lindblom, 1975).
- 42 -
Under adaptive management the authority and responsibilityfor decision-making are delegated to the lowest possible level becausethe people performing the work usually have the most knowledge abouthow to do it most effectively. For the same reasons, participation oflower level staff in planning and decision-making is higher.Objectives are set by top-management, but staff participate in theprocess and are given the freedom to reach those objectives in theirown ways. In such organizations, management has a high tolerance fortrial and error. Thus, decision-making is spread throughout theorganization and staff are expected to take the initiative inidentifying and correcting problems (Gold, 1982).
LEADERSHIP AND AUTHORITY
Effective management depends on strong and committedleadership from project managers and staff. Leadership, in turn,depends heavily on the effective and appropriate use of authority.Patterns of leadership and authority differ significantly betweenmechanistic and adaptive approaches, as shown in Table 4.2.
Project managers must perform a wide variety of leadershiptasks involving interpersonal interaction. Among them aredisseminating information about the project, decision-making,entrepreneurship, conflict resolution and negotiation, resourceallocation, problem solving, and technical review of projectactivities. How and in what combination managers perform theseleadership roles depends on the nature of the tasks to be accomplished,organizational characteristics, influences from the externalenvironment, and the individual characteristics of the manager(Mintzburg 1980; Brinkerhoff and Klauss, 1985).
Adaptive management requires managers who view their majorfunction as facilitating the interaction and learning that will allowthe project staff to act efficiently and effectively to achieve desiredobjectives, and that will bring about the necessary adjustments toenvironmental turbulence during implementation. The most effectivelydesigned and efficiently organized projects can founder on weakleadership, but the adverse effects of poor design and weakorganization can often be overcome by strong leaders during a project'simplementation. The legitimacy, acceptance and support for projects bybeneficiaries often depends on their perception of the motivation,commitment and responsiveness of project leaders (Rondinelli, 1986).
In adaptive management, leadership is often based on adifferent source of authority than in mechanistic management.Authority has been defined as "the power to make decisions which guidethe actions of another. It is a relationship between two individuals,one superior and the other subordinate" (Simon, 1957: 125). There arefive bases of such authority (French and Raven, 1959): (1) rewardpower, which is the possession of benefits or rewards that others wantand are willing to do something to attain; (2) coercive power, which isthe possession of resources that can be used to punish or depriveothers of benefits and that others are willing to do something toavoid; (3) expert power, which is the possession of information or
- 43 -
TUbe 4.2: LUIpDwi E Ity Cutlic3ln
Y a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TypI I Type iI TYVe III Typ IV Iletlc OuV$dmlatIc Profmlaul/Atlivs Adtlve
M*lqrIty Cnrallmd Dawetrallad
Bils of PoItlIa Ex.rtlmAUtturltY
UN at forni NI1 LOW
Lmsareo Cuww PuticipatoryStyle
knowledge that others wish for themselves or wish to benefit from, andthat they will do something to acquire; (4) legitimate power, which isthe possession of authority associated with a position or role thatothers accept as the person's right by virtue of holding the position,and others will do something in obedience to this power because ofvalues they deem to be important; and (5) referent Rower, which is thepossesaion of personal attraction or charisma that inspires others todo something in order to please or gain favor with the charismaticperson.
In mechanistic approaches, authority is seen primarily as theproperty or attribute of the position held by top administrators and isperceived to be formal, rationalistic, impersonal and emanating fromthe legitimacy of control at the top. In such an organization,leadership is exercised through formal authority. There is heavy useof formal rules and regulations. Top level managers make decisions andannounce them through orders passed down through the hierarchy, andsubordinates are expected to conform to these decisions(Tannenb-um and Schmidt, 1958). (See Figure 4.1)
In adaptive management, houever, authority is seen as acollegial relationship, based on interaction, discussion, andacceptance by the organization's members. It usually has an informalbase, and is subjective rather than rationalistic (Peabody, 1964).This type of authority and leadership is 'subordinate centered' ratherthan 'boss centered," and leaves a great deal of freedom to members ofthe organization to participate in decision-making, or discretion tomake docisions within broad limits set by higher levels of authority.
Manager makes Manager Manager Manager Manager Manager Manager penmitsdecision and "sells' presents presents presents problem, defines subordinate toannounces it decision ideas and tentative gets suggestions, limits, function within
invites decision makes decision asks group limits definedreactions subject to to make by superior
change decision
Source: Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1958)
- 45 -
Ickis (1981) contends that the most critical functions ofmanagement processes in people-centered development projects are tofacilitate continuous adjustment to changing conditions, manageinstitutional conflicts, and maintain commitments to participatinggroups and organizations, all of which require leadership based onreward, expert, or referent power, rather than merely on coercion orlegitimacy. The performance of these managerial functions ininnovative projects requires leaders who can join learning with action.In order to manage a project adaptively, leaders must help theorganization's staff to engage in learning that will allow them torevise strategic and operational plans throughout the life of theproject in order to adjust to changing conditions and needs.
The orientation of managers as leaders of innovative socialdevelopment projects is summarized concisely by Brinkerhoff and Klauss(1985), who contrast it with the view of managerial functions inroutine development projects. Managers of innovative, people-centeredprojects must have leadership skills that are conducive to using anexperimental, process-oriented approach to management, to eliciting andusing beneficiary participation, to accepting and using trial and errormethods of learning, to testing alternatives, to seeking opportunitiesfor making innovative improvements, to encouraging open communicationand lateral flows of information, and to adjusting to and modifying theenvironment in which the project is carried out. They must have or beable to develop the capacity to seek and use information constantly tolearn and adjust. These leaders use management procedures as flexibleinstruments for attaining goals rather than as ends in themselves. (SeeFigure 4.2).
Finally, an important element of leadership is the ability togain and maintain access to higher levels of administrative authorityand to obtain political commitment and support. Middleton (1986) foundin his review of World Bank-funded education projects that access seemsto be strengthened by arrangements that provide project managers withdirect contact at high levels to several key agencies; allow theproject manager to be promoted to a high civil service position,thereby increasing access through personal advancement; or provide theproject manager with direct access to either the Minister of Educationor the permanent secretary. Establishing and maintaining effectiverelationships with World Bank staff throughout the life of the projectis also an important leadership function.
- 46 -
Orienttion Manager of social Manager of conventionaltoward: development project development project
Goal Takes an experimental, process emphasizes production oforientation emphasizing particular outputs.beneficiary capacity-building.
Beneficiaries Seeks beneficiary involvement Possible input to planning,in all phases of projects. but generally quite limited.
Error Embraces, builds into Factors in fine tuningimplementation process; but generally triesre-examines basic assumptions to minimize or ignore errorsin light of error.
Change Seeks opportunities internal Minimizes change: emphasizesand external to stable routines.orgaunization for experimentalimprovement.
Communication Emphasizes high lateral Concentrates largely onflow between organizations; top-down vertical. moreparticipatory within and inwardly focused communication.between organizations.
Environment Sees environment as dominant Seeks to react to andforce: attempts to modify, anticipate environmentalmanage environment. ractors.
Information Constantly acquiring. Selectively acquiresreassessing information information for predeterminedflows, purpose. categories by pre-planned
monitoring system.Procedurs/ Sees them as useful on Seeks to establishroutines interim basis; is prepared routines quickly, but
to modify, eliminate, less inclined to modifyunlearn as necessary. them once established.
The fundamental purpose of communication in educationprojects is to create effective relationships between the projectand relevant organizations in its operating environment, and amongimplementors at various organizational levels. Such relationships areusually based on exchanges of resources and information.
Coamnnication in mechanistic management, consistent withmechanistic planning, decision-making and leadership, emphasizestop-down flow of information. Managers give lower priority tocommunication because of the relative stability of the organization andthe environment. Communication is formal, aimed at control throughdirections. The organization, needing little from the externalenvironment, is relatively 'closed' to outside information.
As organizations move toward adaptive management, thecharacteristics of communication systems change, as noted in Table 4.3.The structures become more complex to handle a wider variety ofpurposes. The process becomes learning-oriented, more important tomanagers, and more open to the environment. In short, comnunicationbecomes a high priority and consumes considerable management time andresources.
- 48 -
Typically, communication in the education sector takes placevertically among three levels. First, the teachers, who are thefrontline implementors, need to be trained to use new teaching methods,content and techniques, and then to apply what they have learned in theclassroom. They report to the next organizational level (often theirtrainers or supervisors) on how an innovation is faring in theclassroom, how pupils react, and the problems they encounter; and theyadapt and adjust the innovation to local conditions. The second levelof organization usually consists of district inspectors, supervisors,and pedagogical counselors, who support and train the teachers andreport to the central Ministry of Education on progress in implementingan innovation at the local level. Inspectors and counselors should beable to resolve many of the problems that teachers encounter with theapplication of new methods and monitor activities so that adaptationsdo not unduly weaken or undermine the innovations. Finally,central-level staff play a similar role in providing policy guidancefor the entire system, as well as training, support, and supervisionfor district-level staff.
Open communications aimed at learning from experience,safeguarding the core of innovation while allowing for localadaptation, and creating capacity for helping teachers to use theinnovations, are main ingredients for successfully implementingeducational change projects.
Channels of horizontal communication must also be created andmaintained with other organizations in the project unit's powersetting: higher level authorities, beneficiaries, bureaucratic allies,and functional and allocational rivals. Attention must be given tochoosing methods of coordination and interaction that are most likelyto elicit their cooperation and participation. In innovative projects,participation by interested groups is essential for successfulimplementation.
One of the most important managerial tasks in educationprojects, for example, is to mobilize demand and support forinnovations through communication and interaction. Evaluations ofWorld Bank education projects uncover many that ran into difficultiesbecause of insufficient beneficiary demand for the program to beimplemented (Middleton, 1986). For economic, cultural or religiousreasons, parents have often been reluctant to send their children toschool. Nonformal education projects are usually unfamiliar to theintended audience and the benefits are not obvious. In many developingcountries, employers are often extremely skeptical about the ability offormal technical education or vocational training institutions todeliver practical training of good quality. Secondary school studentshave often balked at entering programs offering them practical skillsin agricultural or industrial arts as an alternative to academiccourses, and white collar jobs.
Thus, communication systems are the primary means by whichmanagers interact with units of their own organization and with otherorganizations and groups in their environment. Communication,coordination and interaction are, therefore, closely related managerialfunctions.
_ 49 -
Experience with Bank-funded education projects suggests thatarrangements must be made for more adaptive communication processes insituations where there is:
1. A high degree of decentralization -- the greater thedecentralization of authority in the project, the greater theneed for effective and efficient vertical communications forsupervision and control;
2. A broad scope of coordination -- the larger the number ofunits in the organizational setting, the greater the need forhorizontal communications between the project implementing unitand other agencies and institutions that can affect theproject's outcome; and
3. Wide geographical dispersion -- the greater thegeographical dispersion of implementors the more difficultcommunication and coordination become and the greater the needfor systems that keep participants in contact with each other.
COORDINATION
The ultimate purpose of communication is to facilitatecoordination and cooperation. In conventional construction and routineservice delivery projects, managed under a mechanistic approach,scheduling and programming techniques are often used to plan andcontrol the coordination of people and organizational unitsparticipating in the project.
Several forms of coordination are used under differentmanagement approaches (Lindblom, 1975; Rondinelli, 1976; Beal andValbuena, 1985). The characteristics of these forms make them more orless "adaptive," but the demarcations between them are often imprecise,requiring considerable judgement in choosing among them.
As indicated in Table 4.4, these forms of coordination rangefrom command to facilitative and mutual adjustment as organizationsmove from mechanistic to adaptive management. The characteristics ofeach form are summarized briefly below.
1. Command is a form of coordination in which oneorganization or individual "uses the threat of severe deprivation toinduce other people or groups either to carry out actions that theydesire not to perform or, in the normal course of events would notperform' (Kelman and Warwick, 1980: 56).
Command usually involves threats of punishment to inducechanges in behavior, authoritative prescription of desired behavior,
- 50 -
Tale 4.4: CarUimtlm Cmti tcles
TM I1 Type I xII mIlIstic gicruniettc Profulbi/Aditlv AdbeVlw
Fwu of COd d MSWltA MatY MNtWiuO Auttclty atl ata AUthl/tyWdiutlcn Pm Pii PPn
Fsc:liltstl0 Fwllitalt^.tuS AdJtwitlt
Instrutsr AllOutd BOt NaptltUd opt NOWptIQt Mot NeWtlated &dgtof ud" GM Attb/7art GMa Attaji,t Ga AttairUt
Iw itirjlCt lWcrf tleAI I riormIIo'
Nu fr LO NltW
1 d Pwn
UMm of Imritw Lowmw
tinrtam Of LOWH%2
preemption of decisions by others, and in extreme cases the use offorce to obtain compliance. While coordination by comuand can beeffective for mechanistic approaches under appropriate conditions ofenvironmental certainty and low innovation, it is usually lesseffective as uncertainty and innovation increase -- and more adaptiveforms of management are needed.
2. Negotiated Authorita is a form of coordination where anumber of organizations surrender a defined amount of authority to acoordinating organization in return for specified benefits. Thisauthority enables the coordinating body to 'comnand' otherorganizations to perform specified tasks. A common pattern is for aset of organizations to agree to carry out specified tasks or functionswithin a broad program, under the authority of the coordinating unit,in return for funding or other resources, such as staff training. Thereis usually a legal basis for the arrangement, which tends to make itmore permanent and withdrawal more difficult. These arrangements canlead to division of tasks and responsibilities by geographic area, suchas when a coordinating body implements a non-formal education programthrough private voluntary organizations in different regions of acountry. Or they can lead to division of tasks by specialized function-- such as when curriculum development, teacher training, and programevaluation are done by different organizations.
- 51 -
Establishing coordination of this type generally requiresconsiderable top-level authority. Few organizations willinglysurrender authority. and this type of coordination tends to take placein centralized systems, most of which use a mechanistic managementapproach. However, by encouraging formal cooperation, it tends to openthe mechanistic system significantly, increasing the flow ofinformation and improving the ability of the entire system to deal withenvironmental uncertainty.
3. Coordination by Plan is a less permanent form ofnegotiated authority. Organizations agree to perform specificfunctions according to a mutually developed plan in return forresources. The 'instruments of exchange' in such relationship caninclude funding, the opportunity for a participating organization tostrengthen achievement of its own goals, information, and the prestigeof participation. There is less central authority, and coordinationrests more on the strength of incentives and the commitment oforganizations. Boundary spanners -- individuals who serve bothformally and informally as links between coordinated organizations --
become important. Tasks can be divided by geographic area or byfunction. Organizations can withdraw from the arrangement with nopenalty other than loss of resources. A consortium of agenciesoperating pieces of a project is a common example of this form ofcoordination, as is an inter-agency task force with defined authorityand responsibility. Contract relationships also fall into thiscategory, although with the potential, at least, for greater penaltiesfor withdrawal.
Coordination by plan also opens management to greater flowsof information. It is often a desirable model when organizations withdifferent objectives and styles agree to cooperate -- such as a lineministry and a university research center.
4. Facilitation is a strategy of coordination designed to"make it easier for individuals to implement their own choices orsatisfy their own desires. An underlying assumption is that peoplehave some sense of what they want to do and lack only the means to doit' (Kelman and Warwick, 1980: 63). Facilitation may be direct orindirect. Through direct facilitation organizations intervene toassist other organizations and groups to achieve their objectives byproviding resources, technical assistance, or advice. An organizationengages in indirect facilitation by adapting its decisions to those ofother organizations in order to obtain mutually beneficial goals, or byavoiding adverse effects for other organizations in seeking its ownobjectives.
Facilitation provides the opportunity for cooperation withoutnecessarily making explicit agreements to do so. The decision tochange behavior within each organization is based on the exchange ofinformation, but each is free to make its own adjustments. Thusfacilitation is usually not a strong instrument of control, but it cancreate relationships that later lead to formal coordinatingarrangements (Beal and Valbuena, 1985). Common models include advisorycomittees and inter-agency councils.
- 52 -
This form of coordination depends heavily on mutual perceivedadvantages. Boundary spanners are very important and, indeed, suchcoordination is often most successful when based on strong personalrelationships between leaders of the organizations involved. Whenthese prerequisites are in place, facilitation can provide a veryflexible and responsive means of coordination, and can thereforesupport adaptive management approaches.
5. Mutual Adjustment is a form of coordination in which oneorganization or individual seeks to enlist a desired response fromanother organization or individual through interactions that move bothparties towards reconciliation or agreement on decisions, if not onvalues (Lindblom, 1975). These methods often involve some form ofexchange such as negotiation and bargaining, provision of rewards orincentives, coalition building, reciprocity, compensation orsubsidization.
Informal communication and personal relationships areimportant to this form of coordination (Beal and Valbuena, 1975).Persuasion holds a key place. Mutual adjustment is at once the weakestand most adaptable form of coordination. It generally does not workwell under more mechanistic management systems, but can serve importantpurposes in uncertain environments with high levels of innovation.
CONTROL AND MONITORING
In mechanistic systemS staff performance is constrained byextensive and rigid controls (see Table 4.5). Rules and regulationsassure top management or external authorities that activities are beingcarried out according to plan, and that tasks are being accomplishedaccording to a preconceived design. All organizations must have somesystem of controls in order to assure minimum levels of performance,protect the organization's assets, standardize the quality of its goodsand services, limit authority, and measure and direct employeeperformance. But in mechanistic management systems control isexercised primarily by determining the adherence to rules andregulations and by preventing discrepancies from arising betweenplanned and actual activities. In stable environments and for routinetasks, control of activities to preconceived plans is possible andoften appropriate.
Most bureaucracies use ex ante controls -- that is, rules andregulations that attempt to prevent or minimize deviations fromprescribed courses of action. The use of these rigid controls isjustified as the only way of avoiding corruption and inefficient use ofresources, and reflects the hierarchical nature of authority. Ex antecontrols are used most often for budgeting and expenditure functions.They are concerned primarily with assuring that staff adhere toregulations and procedures, and they give relatively little attentionto other aspects of performance. As a result, when ex ante controlsare the primary means of monitoring and evaluating activities, staffoften give highest priority to adhering to regulations rather than toperforming their substantive tasks effectively.
- 53 -
rale 4.5: Mnlitwng uM Ctrol Citlr:mlu
T1I TIe11 TyM slI Tym IVnh-etle Ogwactw t Profmlel1a/A/*v Aoteve
Pur Centrol prforw AJdust strateg &Vto pla /Apia station
Data ati! =Witxtlvo kmitltative &alliltatfte
Fre4m dof I.nr
ILm EX-ate t
Focu w Prowiw. outwaT rgets Perforwaw
tM at to-da Higl rdI & cntrola
U. of dtatlfd High Lruie L replattla
UN Of Job btalad, z Gwrai, eauize*ug'ptlau g tivitim * jhetives
UN Of Pwticlcg t Ln Highself-onrol
UN of awetlow. Lo H1i0pw1ml. lcvWA Informatli
Urn of sarwd gm)* Lo Highr erticlgtlat
in ascislM-4rng
UN at perforiw ro-i. little Interwtlos otntaLwsIr a prtlclvticjwuti xowvor ad surdinate
Use of budgta 0etulld, to- Sat detailef, Inter-little f exibilIty active. more flexible
Use of tranlng Llimted Extesivefcr accalizatlm
- 54 -
Moreover, ex ante expenditure controls, combined with lengthyapproval procedures, frequently make rapid responses to changingcircumstances practically impossible. This hampers the implementationof projects aimed at promoting change, especially those that requiresubstantial amounts of contingency funds to be deployed on short noticeas the project progresses. Perhaps even more constraining than thesefinancial rigidities are the organizational limitations that suchcontrols create, especially for personnel recruitment. They makehiring new staff or redeploying personnel geographically an arduousprocess. They inhibit delegating authority and transferring budgetaryresources to district-level staff.
Thus, in innovative projects -- in which ideal or desiredresults cannot always be specified in advance -- ex ante controls willusually impose stifling constraints on staff behavior, reducing theirmotivation and capacity to respond to changing conditions. In projectsrequiring adaptive management the concept of control must be perceiveddifferently. David Korten (1984: 344) notes that organizationsimplementing innovative social projects must create and maintain goodmanagement information and control systems, but that in innovativeprojects 'these systems are used as tools to guide action, not asweapons to force compliance." In social change projects, controlsystems would 'provide rich and rapid performance feedback to allorganizational levels in support of self-corrective action, while theinstitutional culture nurtures individual initiative in the pursuit ofideas and responses appropriate to new circumstances." Kortenconcludes that "involved people, not rigid controls, are viewed as thekey to both productivity and to strategic response.'
In an adaptive management system, managers rarely usetop-down orders and detailed rules and regulations as instruments ofcontrol. They keep job descriptions general and emphasize objectivesrather than activities. Managers depend on staff professionalism andself-control in performing functions, use suggestions, persuasion,advice or information-sharing to guide behavior, and encourageparticipation in decision-making. They employ performance appraisalsas means for superiors and subordinates to assess collaboratively staffeffectiveness. They use training extensively to socialize staff, andboth monetary and non-monetary rewards to reinforce effectiveperformance (Hellriegel and Slocum, 1982).
The effective implementation of innovative education projectsrequires a shift from ex ante to ex post control techniques. Thisrepresents a substantial change from usual bureaucratic systems and canonly be expected to take place gradually. It requires top-levelmanagers to begin to trust local implementors and to establish withthem clearly defined performance goals that are periodically reviewedand adjusted. While fears of abuse are real, there is no alternativeto shifting resource allocation authority once the decision has beenmade to place more responsibility for implementation with localimplementors. Ex post expenditure controls should be thorough, and thepenalties for abuse severe. Local implementors will also have to learn
- 55 -
to handle responsibility for taking the initiative and actingcreatively. The function of central-level staff then moves away fromregulating and controlling to providing support (Elmore and McLaughlin,1982).
Monitoring is an essential component of all managementapproaches. However, its purpose and content differ significantlybetween mechanistic and adaptive management approaches.
In mechanistic' approaches, stability and low levels ofinnovation reduce the need for information, a condition reinforcedby the use of strong ex ante controls. Since things are likely togo as planned, assessments can be made relatively infrequently, ona rather routine basis. Much emphasis is given to statisticalindicators that capture the broad, slow swings of task administration.The focus is on the internal operations of the organization -- oncontrolling performance to conform with plans. Collection ofenrollment statistics is an example of mechanistic monitoring.
Adaptive management, on the other hand, requires not only theinternal monitoring of progress on project tasks, but also continuousmonitoring of the environment in which the project is being carriedout. Monitoring is especially important in innovative projects thatattempt to influence or bring about changes in public policy, for thisform of environmental manipulation requires careful timing. Oftenproject implementation units are capable of dealing seriously withproblems and introducing significant changes only sporadically and forshort periods of time when the environment is conducive for doing so,that is, when problems are widely recognized, political conditions arefavorable, and acceptable policy proposals can be formulated. When allthree conditions prevail opportunities appear for significant change(Kingdon, 1984: 21). Careful monitoring can allow a projectorganization to seize such opportunities for introducing innovations orproposing strategic changes.
Internal monitoring is also essential because theopportunities for change within organizations come about mostfrequently through the recognition of performance gaps, that is, byidentifying significant discrepancies between what an organization isactually doing and what it should be doing (Downs, 1967). Ineducation, achievement testing is the foundation of effectivemonitoring (and evaluation). However, to be effective in guidingimprovements in system effectiveness it must provide data over time,and on the variation in effectiveness of individual schools or otherteaching/learning centers. Periodic assessments over time arenecessary to capture changes. Averages across a large number of unitsare less useful than data on variations among units susceptible tomanagement action. Managers can use data on differential performanceof schools to identify performance gaps and institute remedial actions.National averages are not helpful in this respect.
Innovative projects require information systems that providerapid feedback on key program elements. Time is of the essence forproject managers, and receiving information rapidly is often moreimportant than having comprehensive and scientifically rigorous
- 56 -
assessments. To obtain a good understanding of causal relationships inthe application of innovations, classroom observations and qualitativedata are needed to complement quantitative studies. Experiencesuggests that qualitative data should be collected selectively duringthe entire project. Keeping monitoring and evaluation systems simpleand focused only on a few key program variables, which are selectedcarefully by project designers and managers in consultation with localimplementors, allows them to provide rapid feedback.
STAFFING
Acquiring and developing a competent staff is a crucialfunction in all organizations, and an important aspect of projectdesign and management. Projects, as temporary systems in existingorganizations, are often constrained by existing personnel practice.In designing staffing for projects planners confront difficult, andoften insurmountable difficulties in establishing staffing patterns andprocesses that are consistent with the requirements of more adaptiveforms of management.
At the same time, personnel systems are crucial to effectivemanagement under any approach. Despite inherent constraints, projectdesigners must seek to develop systems that work, if not for theeducation system as a whole, at least for the project itself. While itis generally impossible to establish a completely appropriate personnelsystem, knowledge of the elements which need to be considered in thedesign process can at least alert planners to areas where action isneeded -- and may be possible.
Well-developed personnel systems usually have the followingelements;
1. Position Design and Classification -- the arrangement ofintegrated sets of tasks or objectives into positions based ondivision of labor, authority and responsibility, the structureof the organization, skill requirements, and ranking based onappropriate compensation criteria;
2. Manpower Planning -- projections of staffing needs byposition, category, or skill requirements;
l
3. Recruitment and Placement Systems -- for attractingqualified staff to appropriate positions, including a systemfor delegating hiring decisions to immediate supervisors withappropriate review by top management;
4. Motivation Systems -- incentive programs that include anappropriate mix of monetary and non-monetary incentives;
5. Performance Appraisal Systems -- standards and proceduresfor assessing employee performance that are, ideally, linked tolevels of compensation;
- 57 -
6. Staff Development Programs -- a combination of careerpaths and training and development opportunities that supportemployee retention and growth; and
7. Personnel Information Systems -- procedures that provideaccess to the data necessary to and generated by elements ofthe personnel management system as a whole.
Both mechanistic and adaptive management -- and the variantsof both -- need strong personnel systems which perform these functions.However, the way in which these functions are performed differs(see Table 4.6).
Consistent with other management systems -- decision-making,leadership, and control -- mechanistic personnel practices emphasizecontrol of employee performance through detailed job descriptions thatemphasize functions. There is little job-enrichment; rewards areprimarily financial; promotion is slow and based on seniority. Inshort, employees are given job to do and are expected to do it inreturn for a salary. This type of personnel practice (if well done)can be effective where tasks are routine, requiring little employeeinitiative, and where the environment is stable, requiring littleadjustmont to changing circumstances. If poorly done, it candegenerate into rigid civil service systems where performance haslittle to do with advancement, and where personal and political tiesinfluence personnel decisions.
"Jmm t A
TYa I Ty" 11 TM uIt Type IVm'SiIsttG IQunAhuoistio Pr01umiaut/Mwitlv. AdmOt[ve
Buis of Jdab Fwalcnai Fiwtimra Object NM ObjectivesSiaiilzation Suializat10t
EmplaV Laoyity ServIce totitletin to cw8ggatiai ft icaries
UN of mw1 LC Hig*it-caftrol
CMMAl to Pwftryerun mW4rty
- 58 -
Such practices do not work well in adaptive management.Uncertainty and the increased need for information push decision-makingand initiative to lower levels. Employees are expected to takeinitiative, solve problems, find appropriate ways to meet broadobjectives, and provide critical feedback on project effectiveness.This kind of job behavior is much more likely to occur with adaptivepersonnel practices. As shown in Table 4.6, these include job designbased on performance not function, use of job enrichment, and jobdescriptions that emphasize accomplishment of objectives. Rewards areboth monetary and non-monetary, and employee self-control is muchhigher. Importantly, the performance appraisal and promotion systemsbecome much more dynamic: employees participate in the former, and seepromotion based on achievement along a known career ladder as animportant source of motivation.
The importance of achieving congruence between managementapproach and management process is nowhere more important than inpersonnel practice. Mechanistic personnel practices fail to rewardemployees for the very behaviors adaptive management requires. Adaptivepersonnel systems in a mechanistic organization may punish employees byencouraging adaptive behavior that is inconsistent with mechanisticleadership, decision-making and control.
Choosing appropriate personnel systems is perhaps the mostchallenging aspect of the development of adaptive managementcapability. Often it involves a struggle with entrenched civil servicesystems that are impervious to the needs for new personnel practice fora given project. A number of strategies are available for the task,however, and these will be discussed in the context of implementingcontingency theory in Chapter 7.
SUMMARY
The characteristics of management processes reviewed hereindicate the ways in which the patterns of management action should bedesigned to meet the requirements of differing management approaches.These patterns are summarized in Table 4.7.
- 59 -
Table 4.7: Sumry of Wugn nt Proem ContinprCtU
UNCKRTAINTT Los r atu mrata High
INNOVATION R&tIiU ruately tra I atgly a rIntivt Hilgly imative
M IIAGEM l tlC q l vK itlC Proflo#lt/Alotlvw Adlttv
APfOcI
NANEKT PROCZSStS
planningAWQn ef-ve Ct*lnpnt livemil too ntb
Tiim Frms Lm'W g'aItv
Decision- Centraiiz br*ntaIiz
Authority HMirarhicai CaidetqiPsitlal Exrrti
Leadersip C'i PWtJci et rr
cmanication YwtIca/, forml. Inrtatle, forul/riforni.for ntroi for f eA
CoOrdia-tion Gmd* iaoDttad Altharity MagItattPd bXilty egptiatad haitrityPln Pla pie
Fciiltation Fatilittlain0it Adjstmnt
mofnitoring CWtroi wforE AdJust strategy edto pisn oI A t7atiton
Controls Es-mto E s-pt
UN of Rules High Law
Pwforut CcfW a to AChiovemt of_n d by-: nAina Objectives
StaffingIrlmtlws 1lwy tmtrtMy a ^ -tWtMV
Motivatln Loyalty Service
Buls of Jbe F -ctIol Citiva
0'0
- 61 -
Chapter 5: Organizational Structure
Organizational structures establish predictable relationshipsamong people engaged in carrying out tasks in a given environment, andthus establish the framework within which management processesoperate. They divide the work of the organization into distinct tasksand coordinate task accomplishment (Mintzberg, 1979: 2). Structuresexert strong indirect influence on members of an organization. Theyboth emerge in response to environmental factors and are consciouslydesigned to enable an organization to achieve goals in a givenenvironment.
Structures are reflected in the organizational chart which is"D.. a kind of skeleton of formal relationships among departments andindividuals.... (which] shows how the organization creates a divisionof labor to accomplish its tasks, how the power of authority isdistributed, what roles or job have general responsibility, and whatthe formal patterns of communication are." (Gibson, 1980: 97).
While the chart does not reflect the reality of informalinteraction and communication, it does establish the generalperspectives and expectations of managers in an organization. It thusserves as an integrative mechanism which relates the organization andits tasks to the environment and guides the operation of managementprocesses. And, as environments, tasks and management processes vary,so too do the forms of organizational structure.
Insight into alternative types of organizational structure isimportant in designing project management for two reasons. First,projects must find a home in an existing structure. Discrepanciesbetween the base structure and that required by the project are oftenencountered, such as when a highly innovative project is to beimplemented by an organization with a mechanistic structure. Thesediscrepancies can cause significant management problems duringimplementation. They can also make institutionalization difficult wheninnovations succeed under one structural form, only to be taken over inanother.
Second, alternative structures have varying potential tohandle the management process requirements of different managementapproaches. These differences must be taken into account in designingmanagement systems.
This chapter reviews alternative structural forms,issues in structural decentralization, and the implications ofalternative patterns of the ownership of organizations.
- 62 -
ALTERNATIVE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES*
Structures differ for a variety of reasons. One is thedegree of uncertainty in the environment and the corresponding need foran organization to acquire and use information quickly. A second isthe nature of the tasks an organization seeks to carry out, and the"production technology' employed. For example, tasks which can bebroken down into specialized functions demand different structures thanthose which require iterative and interactive effort. Textbookprinting and team research epitomize these differences. A third reasonis that strong individuals and groups may shape the structure of anorganization through bargaining and negotiation -- in short, throughorganizational politics. Thus the form of any given organizationresults from both objective and subjective factors, makingorganizational design or redesign a complex process.
Moreover, large organizations with complex tasks tend to havehybrid structures. For example, in every organization there is somedegree of tension between maintaining stability and promoting change.Leaders must find an appropriate balance between the efficientaccomplishment of routine tasks and responding quickly to thechallenges of environmental uncertainty and task innovation.
Organizational structures differ in the ways in which theyenable the organization of deal with uncertainty and with innovativetasks, as well as in the requirements they place on organizationalmembers. In short, their differences fit them differentially well asstructures to meet the requirements of different management approaches.
Four Structural Forms
The body of research on organizational structures is large,complex and difficult to summarize in a paper of this size. However,four basic forms of organizational structure emerge** from theliterature: functional, divisional, overlay and matrix. Asillustrated in Figure 5.1, the characteristics of these structuralforms give them different potential to support different managementapproaches and for the decentralization of operations and planning.
* Much of this discussion is drawn from Gibson (1980).
**In his synthesis of the research Mintzberg (1979) identifies nineforms; these are further elaborations of the basic four types.
- 63 -
myi_ w.d
- cmtrala IzdDIVISIOUL ULA
-UTRIX -
MM OF OW.A
nUM.nIZATIOI
0- -lmiumm" UPMO-
Functional: Functional structures are appropriate forrelatively routine s-quential tasks in stable environments. Tasks aredivided by sp.cialization, enabling the organization to concentratespecialized skills on and achieve efficiency in routine operations.Coordination is provided by a general zintegrative' management functionat the top. Figure 5.2 presents a typical functional structure foreducation administration.
- 64 -
As the size of the organization increases, this structureresponds by adding hierarchical levels below each functional unit,creating four separate chains of command reaching from the top to lowerorganizational and geographic levels.
This is the classic mechanistic structure. It is strong onspecialized task efficiency, but tends towards narrow specialization
and relative inflexibility in the face. of change. Centralizeddecision-making, hierarchical authority, leadership by command and exante controls can work well in stable environments with low levelsof innovation. Staff members need clear instructions and functionaljob descriptions.
As the size of the organization grows the coordinationand comunication burdens become vory heavy and are made even moredifficult by the narrowly specialized views of organization members.The management processes characteristic of a mechanistic approach leadto cumbersome procedures and delays in implemntation when environmentsbecome uncertain or when innovation increaes.
To IntW&twIFurtian
Plamirg riculue &VisIr1 uert Ackinistrat1Un
FigLre 5.2: Furtiwai Str'tlf
A limited degree of decentralization to cope withcoordination and comnnication needs is possible by increasing theauthority of lower level units within the functional divisions,particularly when these are geographically distant from the centralorganization. However, significant pressure on the organization fromgrowth, from increased environmental uncertainty, or from new tasks,tends to push towards a divisional structure.
- 65 -
Divisional: The organization is structured primarily aroundspecializations other than task: geography, clients and markets, orproducts. Each division tends to have functionally specialized units.Figure 5.3 presents two typical divisional structures for education.
These structures illustrate 'divisionalization" by clientgroup and type of product on the one hand, and by geographic locationon the other. Both effectively decentralize the integrative managementfunction one level. When functional units are replaced by integratedteams operating on a coherent set of tasks (such as project units),this type of structure can acquire further adaptive characteristics atlower levels to meet the requirements of non-linear tasks.
Divisionalization, by moving authority away from the top,increases the ability of the organization to acquire and useinformation by aligning responsibilities with elements in theenvironment. Unlike functional units, divisions organized aroundclients or geographic responsibilities have an immediate focus in theoutside environment for information gathering and for consultation andparticipation. Thus this structure can be appropriate foropen/mechanistic approaches. With greater decentralization toprofessional units (such as research and development centers) it canapproach the needs of professional/adaptive management.
Organizational members need increased ability to deal withuncertainty and willingness to increase individual responsibility andinformation seeking behavior. The need for increased levels ofcritical feedback increases the need for trust between lower andupper-level managers.
- 66 -
Top Intogrative
Ft.mt I on
lPrimly ElatlanI Ssaanry EduEat I angl Eduir lAtlcm
Furtltoi
| O erlay: | b overla| structur,both fficFui cy n an
Fuctlen ~ uctam
adaptivenssa by combining principles of functional and divisioUalorganization. As illustrated in Figure 5.4., this structure is basedon specialized functional units, but adds a focus on a sp-cialized setof tasks organized around clients, products or geographic areas.
- 67 -
Top IntagativeFiz=t I an
PIrmn O.rcuL Reea|Plannlrg mfiwu M3 fh
Pr ImaryDave intProject
Figl 5.4: OiW SWW1UU
The overlay structure is a weak form of matrix management, inwhich employees in functional units also have assignments in theproject unit. Unlike matrix management, the functional units retainprimacy and the project unit is considered temporary. This form is, infact, typical of some education project implementation units.
This structure can achieve the benefits of both functionaland divisional structures if staff assigned to dual responsibilities(and their managers) can cope with the ambiguity of reporting to twosupervisors. This can be difficult, even when staff are 'seconded'full time for a defined period, because of natural tendencies to wantto maintain a base in the 'permanent' functional department. Thus tobe effective, this structure requires legitimization from top-levelmanagers, training and socialization, and incentives and reinforcementfor continued success; in short, it requires value-orientations whichsupport relatively high acceptance of uncertainty and individualresponsibility.
A second problem is the need to replicate the structure atdifferent levels of the organi2ation. An overlay structure at the topthat is not supported at lower levels of the organization can encounterserious problems in the distribution of innovative services and theacquisition of feedback.
- 68 -
Given these inputs, the structure facilitates a definedmeasure of decentralized authority to the project unit, emphasizing itsseparation from formal functional authority as well as its scope offreedom to acquire resources from functional departments. It also hasthe further benefit of providing a means for the institutionalizationof the results of the project experienced staff with a degree ofownership in the results return to functional departments.
It has clear potential to serve both open/mechanistic andprofessional/adaptive approaches.
Matrix: A full matrix structure is at once the mostresponsive to environmental uncertainty and task innovation and themost difficult to manage. As reflected in Figure 5.4, functionaldepartments and project groups have equal weight and authority in thesystem.
Giving equal weight to functions and projects leads to thefurther complication of two integrative functions. The top integrativefunction is balanced by an integrative function oriented towards theorganizing principle for projects. In the example shown, projects havebeen organized by clients and products. In this case, the projectintegrating function would be concerned with coordination acrossclients groups and projects, and in negotiating on behalf of projectswith top management.
This structure can fully realize the efficiency of functionalorganization and the adaptability of project units. The equal weightof authority given project units facilitates decentralization,information acquisition and use, and thus flexible response toinnovative tasks and uncertain environments. It requires strong valueorientations towards the acceptance of uncertainty, individualinitiative and small power distance.
However, the coordination and communication requirements ofthis structure are great, as are the training and socialization needs.The overhead costs of management -- training, communication,coordination -- can be quite high.
_ 69 -
FtnctIan
PrIPrJ owl t
IProject WeZI VX /E
PrJects IntoWative
DECENTIALIZATION 0 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
The geographical dispersion of schools and the organizationaltraditioa of te-cher indopendence in the classroom give education allof the charactoristics of a decentralized anterpris-. Yet, in mostdeveloping countries the sanagment of education is highly structured,with most of the decisions taken at the center. This image ofcentralized administration is reinforced by organixation charts andcodified proe-dures issued by the Ministry of Education. But theorganization charts can be misleading because in many developingcountries the links between the Ministry of Education and the schoolsart weak. Interaction between central officials and local schoolsfrequently takes place only by sporadic visits by insp-etors and thedelivery of tcachors' paychecks. Under those circumstances, theability of centrLI officials to influence activities in the schools is
- 70 -
limited, and change strategies based on compliance with centralbureaucratic directives will almost always fail. The alternative forimplementing innovative projects more effectively is often to build themanagerial capacities of local institutions and to decentralizeeducational services delivery as much as possible.
Four major types of decentralization have been tried indeveloping countries (Rondinelli and Nellis, 1986). These have beenused singly, in combination and in phases.
Deconcentration has been the most frequent approach. Itinvolves the handing over of some administrative authority orresponsibility to lower levels of government. Often accompanied byfinancial grants, it can give local staff some discretion for planningand local adjustment of central directives.
Delegation transfers management responsibilities for specificfunctions to units outside the regular organizational structure, suchas public corporations, regional development authorities orsemi-autonomous project management units. Broad authority is grantedfor the achievement of general goals, but final responsibility restswith the sovereign authority.
Devolution involves the creation or strengthening ofsub-national units of government to handle a wide range of publicfunctions. State, provincial or local governments with broad authorityillustrate this approach.
Privatization occurs when governments divest themselves ofcertain functions by transferring them to private voluntaryorganizations or allowing them to be performed by the private sector.
Decentralization is not an end in itself, but rather astrategy for organizational structure (and management systems) whichfacilitates more effective and efficient task accomplishment. Anappropriate degree and type of decentralization is determined from thenature of tasks and environments. At one extreme, sequential routinetasks in a highly stable environment are often best managed in acentralized system. At the other extreme, innovative tasks with highrequirements for information and adaptive management in an uncertainenvironment may well require significant decentralization of authority,responsibility and resources for both effectiveness and efficiency.
Decentralization is important in innovative activitiesbecause the adoption of changes often depends on the ability of projectstaff to work closely with clients and beneficiaries. Asdecision-making responsibility is pushed down the organizationalhierarchy in any organization, decentralization encourages professionalstaff to become generalists rather than narrowly focused technicalspecialists, and to apply more creative and responsive approaches toproblem solving in order to advance within the organization.Decentralized structures lead to a more competitive climate and asmanagers are able to exercise more autonomy they tend to respond toproblems with greater ingenuity (Gibson et al., 1973).
- 71 -
Studies of development projects in many countries concludethat decentralization increases the speed with which non-routinedecisions are made and innovative technologies are introduced, andallows project organizations to be more productive and efficient(Hannah et al., 1984). Decentralization facilitatesinter-organizational cooperation by giving local implementors greaterauthority to make decisions and by allowing them to use multiplecommunications channels. It facilitates the pursuit of a wider rangeof goals, and can raise staff morale and initiative, generate newleadership, and facilLtate client participation.
Decentralization,can also foster flexibility,experimentation, learning, and responsiveness to beneficiaries. Inorder for decentralization to have the desired effects, however, anorganization must have reliable communications channels, sufficientfinancial resources and the authority to commit and disperse them,technically and managerially skilled staff at all levels, and theability to plan at lower as well as higher levels in the organization(Hannah et al., 1984). Where these attributes do not exist, or areweak, they must be strengthened before responsibilities can bedecentralized. Effective decentralization is thus not a low-costoption, but requires investment in both analysis and implementation.
The record of success for all forms of decentralization ismixed (Rondinelli and Nellis, 1986). However, successfulimplementation of any type seems to require strong political andbureaucratic support, conducive attitudes and values within theadministration, carefully designed programs implemented incrementally,and adequate investment of financial and human resources.
MIXED STRUCTURES AND DECENTRALIZATION
The placement of the four prototype structures in Figure 5.1attempts to show the potential range of each structure in fittingdifferent management approaches. Decentralization is shown as anoption to extend the range of both functional and divisional structuresBy combining structural forms and introducing appropriate degrees ofdecentralization it is possible for organizations to evolve hybridforms which are reasonably effective in adapting to changingenvironments and tasks.
Hybrid forms can offer alternatives to matrix managementwhich can be sufficient for management of change under conditions ofuncertainty. This is important for education projects in developingcountries where administrative capacity and the ability oforganizations to change radically are both limited.
While many combinations are possible, two are illustratedhere.
- 72 -
Functional/Divisional Structures
This hybrid form is common in education. Routine tasks,such as school construction, payroll, accounting, and maintenance ofstatistical data bases are handled by functional units. Tasksrequiring more adaptive management are divisionalized, either bygeographic location (province, state) or by client group and project(primary education, secondary education). Divisional units in turnmanage a combination of functional units, client-oriented divisions andproject teams.
This structure requires different management systems forfunctional and divisional units to meet different requirements ofinnovation and environmental uncertainty. If management systems andmanagers explicitly recognize these different patterns as legitimate(and not as aberrations from 'proper administration') a mix ofmechanistic and adaptive management is possible.
Differing patterns of decentralized authority and autonomyfurther strengthen the capacity of this structure for mixed managementapproaches. Centralized management of textbook printing anddistribution for the basic primary curriculum may be appropriate foreconomic and logistical reasons. In the same system, secondaryvocational schools may be granted considerable authority to developskills training curricula to meet local needs.
Divisional/Overlay
Overlay structures link functional departments with temporaryproject units implementing special projects or programs. These can becreated within divisions to achieve a relatively high degree ofdecentralization. For example a primary school reform can be managedthrough overlay structures in each of the provinces where the reform isbeing implemented, with the project unit drawing on the functionalresources of the province. Such a structure provides a relatively highdegree of decentralization of national authority. However, it presumesthat management and professional resources are available at theprovincial level, and that the central ministry is willing to letprovinces have considerable autonomy in the way in which the reform isimplemented. If these conditions are not present, they would need tobe established, either prior to project implementation or throughintensive investment early in the life of the project.
This example illustrates the critical importance of congruentmanagement systems. Effective provincial-level implementation throughoverlay units would require, among other things: 1) performance-basedplans, policies and position descriptions; 2) personnel systems whichprovided incentives and rewards for achievement and for the provisionof critical feedback; 3) monitoring and control systems whichemphasized adjustment of plans, as well as rapid and flexible datagathering and reporting; 4) use of ex-post controls; 5) coordination byplan; and 6) planning and decision-making systems which emphasizedincremental adjustment within broad policy goals.
- 73 -
PATT RNS OF OWNERSHIP
Projects are almost always implemented by existingorganizations; only in rare circumstances can designers create a neworganization with th- 'ideal' structural form. Experience withorganizations in developing countries suggests that organizations withdifferent legal bases have varying potential to adapt towards idealstructural forms.
Organizations with a wide variety of ownership patternsimplement dev-lopment projects (Rondinelli, 1983). A selected numberof these, placed by general potential to employ various structuretypes, are shown in Table 5.1.
6ESIP Ftltli Ministy Olvislual ministry Ministr h&tmin ProJectRN unit brgsntlan
o perutatal
Furetll Minlgstry Olvislaul Minigroacnrall am (anetr I I zd)
Uicad PIU
Intwsr.pyCoordinatingCinittK
- 74 -
Line Ministries
The largest number of Bank-financed education projects aremanaged by line ministries. Some are organized by function, and someby division. Under either form there may be some degree ofdecentralization. Organizations of this type are appropriate formechanistic and, as divisionalization and decentralization increase,open/mechanistic management approaches.
Ministries can also create structures to meet therequirements of professional/adaptive management approaches. One modelis the use of a research and development unit (university institute,curriculum development center) in the project through an overlaystructure, with defined levels of autonomy and sharing of staff betweenthe unit and the line ministry. A second is the 'classic' projectimplementation unit formed from line ministry staff as a temporaryorganization.
Many of the problems encountered with overlay structures inministries stem from the failure to extend the new structure deeplyenough into the lower levels of the organizations, building strongcommunication linkages. Equally prevalent has been failure either tolink the structure with higher authority so that access to decisioncenters is assured (Middleton, 1986) or to establish appropriate levelsof decision-making authority within the structure.
Autonomous Organizations
In some cases largely autonomous project organizations havebeen established, often with vertical structures than run parallel toline ministries. These may be government owned or, more rarely, benon-governmental organizations operating under government grants orcontracts.
The potential of such organizations to use overlay or evenmatrix structures, and thus follow adaptive management approaches, isrelatively high given their ownership pattern. Outside the civilservice, such organizations are relatively free to experiment withstructure, approach, and management systems, including staffcompensation. The actuality may be somewhat less, of course, as manyof these organizations are relatively weak in staff and resources.
Clear charters of authority and the ability to attract highquality staff who can manage adaptively are critical to theeffectiveness of such organizations.
Inter-agency Coordinating Committees
Coordinating committees or task forces are temporaryorganizations established by several agencies to carry out projects ofmutual interest. They tend to have overlay structures and have thepotential for matrix forms.
- 75 -
The success of this type of project management organizationdepends on the extent to which clear authority is granted by the owningagencies and legitimized by higher levels of government. Ideally acoordinating body is established through "negotiated authority," witheach participating agency surrendering defined authority to thecoordinating unit. Coordination by plan is a weaker form. Becausegrants of authority of this type are difficult for line ministries tomake, successful coordinating committees are relatively rare.
SUMMARY
Peter Drucker (1964: 216) has written that 'The rightstructure does not guarantee results. But the wrong structure abortsresults and smothers even the best directed efforts."
Organizational structures are designed to supportmanagement processes. The design of both rests on the requirements ofa management approach that is appropriate to the degree of uncertaintyin the envirorment and the degree of innovation in the tasks of theorganization. We would thus extend Drucker's statement, replacing theterm 'the right structure" with "the right congruent pattern ofapproach, processes and structure."
Effective project management is more likely when asignificant level of congruence has been established betweenenvironment and tasks on the one hand, and management approach,processes and organizational structure on the other. Congruence isachieved by mapping an appropriate pattern across the variouscontingent relationships discussed in this paper. These are summarizedin Table 5.2., the Management Assessment Profile (MAP).
The MAP provides a conceptual framework for projectmanagement analysis and design, laying out the varying relationshipsthat characterize the range of management approaches appropriate fordifferent combinations of uncertainty and innovation. It can be usedto identify the management requirements of a given project design andto analyze existing management capacity.
This assessment enables project designers to address the twoissues in structural design noted at the beginning of the chapter.
First, the management approaches and processes required bydifferent project components can be used to identify an "ideal"organizational structure, including the degree of decentralizationdesirable. Second, significant discrepancies between thestructure/management processes of the implementing agency and thoserequired by the proposed project can be identified. An common exampleis found with project components that need open/mechanistic orprofessional adaptive approaches when the implementing agency haseither a functional or divisional structure, and largely mechanisticmanagement processes. Here some form of overlay structure may be thosolution for the innovative components, while more routine tasks may bemanageable within existing structures. These issues are addressed insome detail in Chapter 7.
P1-4TlwOld atinulw owinpt irr tai ibataTim Frm LOW ou
D.tias- eatralizd lalizad
fteltiti Exwtlm
TAndazabip l PWtl Wy
Cin±c tL Ywtlml , fOral I Awttn. foruulirlom.for =*Mi for f -
Co.zdinatiAs 1tiam MIb t rtd b &tlataA kIty pWitu. *AIrty
Fuliltatil Failltationiltu AlAtMAnt
ft"torLng catgI xforf AdtMt strategr tto tim lwdwtatla
Controls Ex-vto Ex-oit
Pwfam lawaum to Aclimt of_Wnd by: ruim C OthYlt
Staffnghnoitiw butvy atry A i.utary
lltivstii Loentty $01viol
Swi0cm atFWEtLaTM ddt V ftl z,cd
gStIICSDU nl%TlOFL~~~~~~~~~~VELA
nnX - odraila Iz-
- eOlutratlad
- mmlx
'AUUSEP V~~~~~u'ctiwl Mi nistry Olviloual Hinlstry Mlnistry & P *in roJet
o wt luAItumnl Minlstry Olyislimi Minigtry a °(btral lad) (donitrailind)
Llnkd PIU
Inrt r gOiurdinctiqIdttm
77 -
Chapter 6: Staff Capacity
Management processes and organizational structures come tolife through the behavior of the individuals and groups involved in theproject. These include both staff and beneficiaries. Indeed, as hasben argued, innovative projects depend for success on widespreadchanges in behavior of both staff and clients.
Changes in the behavior of clients (such as learning on thepart of students) are the objective of project strategies. Projectmanagement design is more narrowly concerned with the capacities ofstaff to manage and deliver services to beneficiaries, and to buildinstitutional capacity in the process.
These capacities rest on cognitive skills and on values.Different management approaches require different skills and values ifthey are to be successfully followed. Mechanistic administration, forexample, calls for skills in applying various scheduling and controltechniques, such as PERT, and values which are consistent withcentralized authority based on position, ex ante controls, high use ofrules, and little employee initiative. Adaptive management requiresskills in such techniques as brainstorming and giving/receivingfeedback, and values which support dispersed authority, performancebased on achievement of objectives, and extensive employee initiative.
This chapter provides an overview* of issues in staffcapacity. Attention is focused on managers, recognizing that theskills and values of all staff engaged in the delivery of projectservices are important, and must be addressed in project design.Attention will also be focused on values, largely because they haveoften been neglected in the design of project management arrangements.The discussion first reviews of the characteristics of effectivemanagers under mechanistic and adaptive approaches, with a specialnote on expatriate staff, and then deals in some greater detail withthe issue of values in staff capacity.
* A comprehensive treatment of staff capacity exceeds both the intentand scope of this paper. We do note the complexity of the issue,particularly the fact that effective projects depend on goodperformance at all levels, beginning with the teacher and extendingupward through the first level of supervision, through district andregional office, to the central ministry. As will be discussed inChapter 7, the design of strategies which build appropriate skills andvalues at and between levels is crucial to management effectiveness.
- 78 -
These issues are important to management design for severalreasons. First, the viability of any management approach depends onthe availability of managers able to carry it through. Thuscomparison of the managerial requirements of the processes andstructures required for any project component with the capacities ofintended managers is crucial to judgements on projectmanagement feasibility. Second, the results of these comparisons leadto the identification of discrepancies between required and currentmanagerial style and performance, and thus establish objectives fororganizational and staff development programs as part of thedevelopment of institutional management capacity.
CHARACTERISTICS OF MECHANISTIC AND ADAPTIVE MANAGERS
The characteristics of effective mechanistic and adaptivemanagers were reviewed in the discussion of Leadership and Authority inChapter 4. In brief, a mechanistic approach requires managers who usecentralized authority based on their position in the hierarchy, dependheavily on formal rules, and who exercise their authority throughcommands. They concentrate on maintaining organizational stability andthe production of pre-determined outputs. They are generally lessconcerned with changes in the external environment, tending rather tofocus inward on the accomplishment of their organizational function.They are comfortable with relatively formal kinds of planning andprogramming, and with managing tasks to deadlines, and tend to havecognitive skills which useful in these processes -- PERT, programbudgeting, writing of formal instructions. They generally "know therules' very well, and are effective in teaching and enforcing thesewith staff.
Mechanistic managers generally seek to recruit and rewardstaff who are comfortable with this form of administration. They arerelatively reluctant to change procedures, preferring instead toconcentrate on incremental improvements in current practice.
For routine tasks in stable environments, this form ofmanagement can be very effective, provided (as will be discussed)managers and staff share values which support the approach.
Effective adaptive managers, in contrast, work well withdecentralized decision-making, authority based on expertise, low use offormal rules, and participatory leadership styles. They are open tonew information from the environment, and seek involvement andfeedback from staff and beneficiaries. They are skilled in informal,consensus-based planning, in giving and receiving feedback, and inseeing the project (and the larger organization) as a systemic whole.They are uncomfortable with rules, but very attentive to goals, asopposed to products. They tend to rely on staff for technical andprofessional skills.
A particular challenge to adaptive management is therecruitment or development of people who are comfortable with theprocesses of adaptive administration, and who are willing to learn andact at the same time. They must be professionals who are able to
- 79 -
operate flexibly without strong central control, assume responsibilityfor achieving results, engage in creative trial and error in order tosolve problems, and respond effectively to the needs of beneficiaries.These are characteristics not usually associated with bureaucrats ornarrowly specialized technicians. Rather, they are characteristics ofpeople who are entrepreneurial and developmental in their orientation,and who are strongly committed to achieving social change. Specialefforts must often be made early in the planning phase to find managersand staff who can apply adaptive management practices in highlyinnovative projects.
Where individuals of this type are hard to find, adaptivemanagement requires inculcating, through training and other humanresources development programs, the values and skills that are oftenthe most scarce among managers in developing countries. Especiallyimportant, as Frances Korten (1981: 185) points out, is recruiting andretaining personnel "who see knowledge as residing in bothprofessionals and beneficiaries with a combination likely to result inmore successful programs." Innovative projects require managers who"view beneficiaries as active partners in a joint process of programdevelopment and implementation." Such professionals must be able tointeract effectively with beneficiaries and communicate with them innontechnical language.
A Note on Expatriates: A particular problem forinternational development projects is the recruitment of expatriatetechnical assistance personnel. Considerable effort should be given tomatching the experience of the expatriate, not only to the technicalrequirements of the job, but also to the required management approach.Mechanistic advisors can hamper adaptive management and vice versa. Abenefit of conscious choice of appropriate management approaches in thedesign stage is the opportunity to establish a common sense ofmanagement directions among local managers and expatriate staff.
Experience with Bank-sponsored education projects also showsthat the use of expatriate experts works well when there is substantialagreement between the Bank and the Borrower on the objectives of theproject and on the weakness of indigenous implementation capacity.However, expatriate technical advisors are effective as line managersonly to the extent that they can adapt to the Borrower's culture andadministrative environment. Plans must be made to train localcounterparts and to shift responsibility from expatriate technicaladvisors to local personnel in order to contribute to a positive senseof autonomy and capability among the Borrower's staff, and tostrengthen both individual and institutional management capability.
STAFF VALUES
Organizational effectiveness depends in large measure on theability and willingness of staff to carry out tasks. The skills andvalue-orientations of staff are thus of central importance tomanagement.
- 80 -
Value-orientations are perhaps the most important and leastconsidered of the two factors. Skills can be learned quickly, butvalues change more slowly. Moreover, for the staff of internationalassistance agencies working with partners in a number of cultures,value differences play an important role in project management.National cultures differ in important ways, and hence the potential ofany management approach rests at least in part on how well it fits withthose cultural values which affect the behavior of people inorganizations.
These factors operate in two ways. First, they shape overtime the ways in which organizations work, conditioning the response ofpeople to patterns of communication, authority relationships,performance incentives, and working in teams.
Second, these variables further affect the ways in whichindividuals respond to change, either in the substance or in the formof their work. Thus organizational structures and managementprocesses should be compatible with cultural traditions and practices.If they are not, either the project must be re-designed to alterrequired management approaches in the direction of current values orsufficient resources must be provided to reorient and retrain managersand staff in the value orientations required by new managementpractices.
Cultural values in the project environment provide aframework for understanding important, if difficult to measure, humanfactors that must -- like management processes and organizationalstructures -- be considered in designing management arrangements thatare congruent with required approaches.
Hofstede's (1980: 43) studies have shown that managementpractices and organizational arrangements are strongly influenced bytheir culture, that is, by the "collective mental programming of thepeople in an environment." He found four dimensions of nationalculture.
1. Power distance is the extent to which a society acceptsand responds to the fact that power in institutions and organizationsis distributed unequally. In societies where power distance is small,management procedures and organizational arrangements tend to becollegial; superiors and subordinates consider each other to be peoplelike themselves; superiors are usually accessible; and people atdifferent levels tend to interact with each other on the basis ofmutual trust. In societies characterized by large power distances,organizations are usually hierarchical; management procedures arecodified in written rules and regulations that subordinates areexpected to follow unquestioningly; and people tend to interact witheach other primarily through formal procedures, some of which are basedon mutual distrust. In these cultures superiors are ofteninaccessible, have special privileges and powers based on the nature oftheir offices, and are judged on their ability to exercise power.Relationships among members of organizations in this type of cultureare usually characterized by latent conflict.
- 81 -
2. Uncertainty avoidance indicates the 'extent to which asociety feels threatened by uncertain and ambiguous situations andtries to avoid these situations by providing career stability,establishing more formal rules, not tolerating deviant ideas andbehaviors, and believing in absolute truths, and the attainment ofexpertise' (Hofstede 1980: 45). This dimension is similar to"tolerance for ambiguity' in contingency theory. In societies withweak uncertainty avoidance, the large amount of uncertainty in life ismore easily accepted; competition, conflict and dissent are toleratedand kept within the bounds of fair play; and people are more willing totake risks to achieve their goals. Most people believe thatunreasonable rules and regulations should be changed, and theyemphasize relativism and empiricism in making decisions. In societieswith strong uncertainty avoidance, there is a great need for consensus.Deviant persons and ideas are considered a threat to authority andstability, and there is a great concern for security and a strongreliance on rules and regulations as a basis for action. In thesecultures, there is a continuing search for absolute truths and valuesas defined by experts.
3. Individualism-collectivism describes the context whichsociety provides for the formation of individual identity and foreconomic and social welfare. In collectivist societies, identity isbased on the social system and on the families, clans or communitiesinto which individuals are born. In collective cultures there isemotional as well as economic dependence on organizations; strongbelief is placed in group decisions; value standards are determined bygroup membership and identity; and private life is subordinated togroup needs, duties and obligations. In individualistic societies,identity is based on individual standards and accomplishments. Theemphasis is on individual initiative and achievement, belief is placedin individual decisions, and people strive to achieve goals that theyset for themselves.
4. Role differentiation is the extent to which distinctionsare made between "masculine' and "feminine" roles within society. Insocieties with weak role differentiation, men need not always actassertive and aggressive; sex roles are more fluid in performing socialfunctions; quality of life is important; interdependence is the idealand work is motivated by service and empathy for fellow human beings.In societies with strong role differentiation, men are seen as moreassertive and women as more nurturing. Sex roles in such cultures areclearly differentiated and usually more constrained for women. In"masculine" cultures men believe they should dominate organizations andsociety. In these cultures, work is usually motivated by economicattainment and satisfaction of ambitions, and individual worth isjudged almost entirely by performance and achievement.
Clearly, the degree to which innovations can be introducedand accepted, and innovative tasks carried out, depends at least inpart on the unique combination of cultural characteristics defined bypower distance, uncertainty avoidance, individual-collectiveorientation, role differentiation and other relevant values.
- 82 -
Although the tasks, organizational structures and managementsystems chosen for education projects should be appropriate for thecultures in which will be carried out, this principle does not implythat project planners should avoid introducing all changes orinnovations. Many innovations can be adapted in form or content to fitdifferent cultures and value patterns. In other cases, the benefits ofchange may warrant adaptation of culture-bound management practices tofacilitate change management. Innovative tasks are legitimate if theyare crucial to educational improvement, but project designers andmanagers must understand the cultural characteristics of a country oran organization before they can reasonably expect either to adaptthe innovation or to change management practice.
These value-orientations, and their management implications,are shown in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1: CultLral Value Differences
POWer Distance Large Suall
Hierarchical Collegial authorityauthority based based an expertise;an position; hligh Suiperiors accessible;use of rules;
w erIors Inacces-sible
Uhcertalnty Hlgh LowAvoidance
Need for consensus Competitlon tolerated;and stabilIty; rlsks more easilyaversion to rlsk taken
lndivIdLallsas Collectlvlst Indlvlduallst
CollectivislGroup Identity; Indlvidual identity,loyalty to InitIative andorganizatlons achIevement
Role Masculine FeminineDIfferentiatlon
Economlc motivation; Service orientatlon;individual Interdependence;achievement; weak rolesale dominant differentiation
_ 83 -
While Hofstede's sample of countries and individuals waslarge, these value differences must be used cautiously, and only asindicators of the kinds of value orientations that affectorganizational behavior. Cross-cultural research on values is limited.
However, with the exception of the role differentiationdimension (which is set off from the other three in the chart), thesepatterns are largely consistent with the characteristics of mechanisticand adaptive management, reinforcing the idea that value-orientationsof organization members can vary in much the same way as thecharacteristics of different management approaches. This is notsurprising, because management approaches evolve in specific culturalcontexts. Different value-orientations offer different potential forvarious management approaches; changing an approach requires changingvalues as well.
Role differentiation does not correspond directly with theother three value dimensions. For example, the emphasis on individualachievement in masculine societies is not necessarily consistent withthe group orientation of collectivist cultures, nor is the orientationtowards interdependence in feminine societies consistent with anindividualist value orientation. This lack of consistency underscoresthe need to use such factors carefully in management design.
The identification of an approach congruent with definedlevels of uncertainty and innovation establishes an idealized patternof management for given tasks in given environments. This pattern ofmanagement in turn requires certain value orientations foreffectiveness. To take the most obvious example, adaptive managementrequires high levels of tolerance for uncertainty among managers andstaff. The general relationships between management approaches andvalues orientations are shown in Table 6.2
llerimtUtc ODnVdlnisttc ProteshsUa*lAaCtive Adt I veAPPROACH
VALUES
Pow WiSt Larp 1 ii
lfctwsinty Hih=Avol
IrdiVIOlil ls Hig
Rols Ins FeInineOlffemtlatlon
- 84 -
To the extent that value orientations of members aresupportive of the indicated approach, there is a high level ofcongruence and potential for effective action. To the extent thatthere are significant discrepancies, such as members with high levelsof uncertainty avoidance when innovation demands an adaptive approach,there are clear signals that an approach may not be effective withoutsignificant attention to value issues. The significance of thesecontingencies for the introduction of innovations requiring newmanagement approaches should not be underestimated -- and often is.
- 85 -
Chapter 7: Applied Contingency Design
The application of the contingency approach to projectmanagement design involves two linked processes. One is the use of anoperational model to guide the steps in the analysis of projectmanagement requirements and of the management capacity of implementingagencies. The second is the use of the results of analysis to designimplementation strategies which improve the chances of effectiveaction.
AN OPERATIONAL MODEL
The application of contingency design requires:
1. Management Recuirements Analysis: an analysis of aproposed project and its environment to identify theideal management approaches for its components;
2. Management Capacity Analysis: an assessment of themanagement approaches and capacity of intendedimplementing organizations;
3. Feasibility Analysis: a comparison of requirements andcapacity to assess the feasibility of the project asdesigned and to identify actions that are needed toadjust the project and existing management capacitytowards congruence.
4. Implementation Strategy Development: creation of astrategy for organizational change and for projectredesign that adjusts management capacity and managementrequirements toward congruence.
Figure 7.1 presents a model for contingency design proceduresin flow chart form.
A project design is taken as given at the beginning of theanalysis. The objectives and strategies of this design establish thetasks to be accomplished and thus, in conjunction with environmentalfactors, determine the management requirements of the project.
In Phase One the degree of uncertainty in the environment andthe level of innovation in the project are analyzed to determine theideal management approaches for the project as designed. Approachesare then used to design management processes and organizationalstructures, and to identify requirements for staff capacity. Theresult of Phase One is an idealized set of requirements for projectmanagement.
- 86 -
The management capacity of implementing agencies may or maynot be congruent with these requirements. In Phase Two the staffcapacity, organizational structures, management processes, andmanagement approaches of intended implementing organizations areanalyzed. The result is a profile of current management capacity.
Requirements and capacity are compared in Phase Three, andthe management feasibility of the project determined. The results ofthis comparative analysis are used in Phase Four, the development ofimplementation strategies. These strategies are made up of the actionsneeded to change existing capacity, or to adjust the project designtowards existing management capacity, or both.
The flow of analysis in the model is iterative, emphasizingthe need to reach congruence through adjustments in the project and inmanagement capacity through comparative analysis during projectdevelopment. Importantly, this process can and should continue duringimplementation -- especially when more adaptive management approachesare required.
Phase One: Management Requirements Analysis
The purpose of this phase of analysis is to use knowledge ofthe environment and the degree of innovation in project tasks todetermine the management approaches required for project components,and hence management processes, organizational structures and staffcapacity. The analysis is sequential and, as shown in Figure 7.2 leadsthe designer from the identification of task clusters within a projectthrough seven steps of analysis.
Step 1: Defining Task Clusters
Most projects incorporate a range of tasks with differinglevels of innovation. A result is the potential, at least, for a rangeof management approaches for effective implementation. Hence theproject design must be analyzed to identify clusters of tasks with, apriori, similar management requirements.
The design of the project often establishes what are called"components' by the Bank. Sometimes components are defined by thefunction involved: procurement, construction, teacher training.Sometimes they are defined by product or by client group: textbookproduction, university development, primary school reform. This lackof precision is complicated by the practice of combining severaldifferent 'projects" of relatively small size to create a viableinvestment package.
Projects that emphasize relatively routine functions, such asprocurement and school construction, are likely to be organized byfunctional components. Projects oriented towards significant levels ofchange are more likely to be organized by product or client group,often defined as "subsector" of the education system. Functional tasksare defined for each subsector; thus primary school reform withprocurement, construction and curriculum development, or theintroduction of polytechnics with similar functional components.
- 88 -
Ftase ore
managementRequirementsAnalysis
1 Task Clusters
Contingeng les
E 2 Lkiertalnty
3 Imovatlon
4 Approach
(5 Processes
(6 Structures
7 Staff Capacity
Flgre 7.2: Management Require.ents Analysis
- 89 -
The disaggregation of project designs into task clusters forthe purpose of identifying levels of innovation is not an obviousprocess. As a practical matter, most project designs establishobjectives and components with implementing organizations in mind.Thus the first criterion for task clustering is the intendeddistribution of components across implementing organizations.
However, at this stage of analysis such a distribution can betaken only as a general guide. A second level of analysis is required,in which the clusters of tasks are distinguished by the beneficiariesto be served, and then by the a priori levels of innovation they imply.The results of this analysis may or may not conform with the basicdistribution of tasks by intended implementing organization -- i.e.,with all the routine tasks in one organization and the innovative tasksin another. Moreover, the analysis will also lead to theidentification of task clusters with differing levels of innovation ina component serving a given beneficiary.
An example of a project task analysis is given in Table 7.1.
Table 7.1: Task Analysis Example
SUBSECTOR Prfmary Adult Tralning StudlesCIGENT Development Centers
OBJECTIVES e Expand access e Increase ruiral e Bulld researchemloyment capacity
e Improve quallty a Establish linkages a Prepare nextbetween centers project& employers
INVESMNT e 80 new schools 10 centers & * TechnicalCCWCMENTS & equIpment equipment Ass istarce
* curriculiu e curriculLm o Fellowshlpsdevelopment deveiopment
e teacher training a teacher tralnIng
BENEFICIARIES s Prlmary students e Rural adults a Prlmary & adulte Pr I mary teachers e Small enterprIse subsectors
omers Unliversity faculty
IIMPLEMENTING s DG Primary e Mlnistry of e LUniversityORGANIZATIONS Ed-caticn Rural Development
TASK CLUSTERS a Costruction & a Constructlon & a staff trainingprocurement procurement e Implement studles
e curriculu a curriculLs and evaluatlonsdevelopment & development &teacher tralning teacher training
e Organize employercounclls
- 90 -
In this example the project disaggregates into seven taskclusters: construction and procurement (2); curriculum development andteacher training (2); training of researchers; organization of employercouncils; and implementation of studies. These would each be subjectto a separate analysis to determine the level of innovation in each.
Step 2: Assessing Environmental Uncertainty
The level of environmental uncertainty is assessed for theproject as a whole and, if appropriate, for individual task clusters.This latter situation would arise when the organizational environmentsof different task clusters differed significantly.
A set of factors are chosen as representative of the degreeof complexity and stability in the environment, and judgements arereached on each. These may be qualitative or the factors can be scaledto yield numerical estimates. The judgements on complexity andstability are then combined to reach a single assessment ofuncertainty.
Data for Environmental Assessment: Effectiv-e environmentalanalysis requires good understanding of and some historical perspectiveon general country and specific education conditions. This requiresconsiderable time to develop. A detailed study of available backgrounddocumentation is an essential but by no means sufficient step.Discussions with staff in a cross-section of implementing agencies area necessary complement. Mapping the network of institutions concernedwith the project and various forms of stakeholder analysis are helpfulin understanding the organization's power setting.
Step 3: Defining Task Innovation
The level of innovation is then defined for each taskcluster. This requires judgements on the analyzability and variety ofeach cluster, leading to a measure of predictability; and on both thescale and degree of deviation of innovation, culminating in a measureof task demandingness.
The judgements on predictability and task demandingness arethen combined to reach a summary assessment of the level of innovation.
Step 4: Determining Management Approach
Choice of a management approach which fits the level ofenvironmental uncertainty and defined degrees of innovation for eachtask cluster is the next step. This is done by combining thejudgements reached in steps 3 and 4.
Step 5: Identifying Management Process Requirements
The chosen management approach is used, in conjunction withthe objectives and activities of project components, to reach decisionson the ideal configuration of the process elements of a managementsystem for each task cluster. For example, under a professional/
- 91 -
adaptive approach planning would be moderately incremental, leadershipconsultative, and so on.
This initial pattern of process elements is then reviewedagainst the specific requirements of each cluster, and adjustments madeas needed. This is a particularly judgmental process. For example,the general approach for a task cluster may indicate a consultativeleadership style. However, one of the objectives of the cluster mightbe to establish a high level of beneficiary participation inactivities. This objective goes beyond the level of participation thatthe activities would appear to require, but may be valid in its ownright. In this case a "participatory" leadership style would beselected. This selection would then lead the designer to review thedegree of participation of beneficiaries in planning anddecision-making, and perhaps adjust this towards high participation toachieve internal congruence between these two aspects of managementprocess.
Using the management process decisions from previous steps,the designer considers the range of options for types of organizationalstructure ideally suited to the patterns of processes for each cluster.The identification of an ideal type flows from prior decisions onapproach and processes. The selection of a structural form, or rangeof forms, then indicates generally the ownership pattern most likely tobe desirable.
Step 7: Identifying Staff Capacity Requirements
The patterns of management processes and organizationalstructure for each component are then examined to determineimplications for staff capacity. In addition to specifying the numberof managers and staff with direct and indirect responsibilities underthe project, designers identify both skills and values required. Formanagers, this involves particular attention to theleadership characteristics required under different approaches, and atdifferent levels of implementation. Requirements for headmasters,district officers and other intermediary managers as well as centralministry staff must be identified.
Congruence of Management Recuirements
Step 7 completes the sequence of analysis of managementrequirements. At this point designers need to review the outcomes offor congruence. How well do the results of the seven steps fittogether to form a logically coherent (though still abstract)management design? Inconsistencies -- such as the need for interactivecommunication processes for a task cluster which otherwise calls for amechanistic approach -- need to be considered. Are the othermanagement systems consistent with a mechanistic approach? If so, doesthe departure of a single management system from the expected patternindicate (at this preliminary stage of analysis) any significantdifficulties?
- 92 -
Phase Two: Management Capacity Analysis
Phase One results in the specification of the idealizedmanagement requirements of the project as designed. To find outwhether these requirements can be met by intended implementingorganizations, current management capacity must be analyzed.
As shown in Figure 7.3, this assessment involves five of theelements of requirements analysis: staff capacity, structures,processes and approach. Environmental uncertainty is taken as assessedin Step 2 of requirements analysis. However, the order of analysis isreversed. Instead of working deductively from a given project design,the analyst works inductively from staff capacity through structuresand processes to identify current approaches. Innovation isincorporated into the model via an assessment of the past experience oforganizations assessed with managing change.
This approach is empirical in that it seeks to generalizefrom observations about how things now get done.
Each element should, to the extent possible, be judgedindependently. One of the side-benefits of capacity analysis is theidentification of inconsistencies in current management practice, andthese emerge more clearly if judgements are made one element at atime.
Step 1: Capacity Assessment
The managerial style and capacity in intendedimplementing agencies is assessed, using the same skill and valuecriteria that served in identifying requirements for staff capacity inPhase One. Designers seek to establish the general set of skills andvalue orientations of the staff in the organizations.
Step 2: Structure Assessment
The ownership patterns and structural forms of existingorganizations are reviewed. This requires inspection of organizationcharts, an close look at organizational policies and at the ways inwhich authority is actually distributed. The latter factor is likelyto emerge only through extensive discussion and observation. Otherfactors to be reviewed include the technology of production and theways in which the organization seeks and uses information.
Analysis leads both to qualitative information on the natureand functioning of organizational structures and to the identificationof present structures and ownership patterns. The qualitativeinformation should be carefully organized and retained for future usein implementation strategy design. It is necessary to know not onlythe patterns of organization, but also why they are the way they are.
- 93 -
Phase Two
ManagementCapacityAnalysis
Cnt I ngwic Ies
|Uncrtai nty |
5 Inmvatlon
4 Approach
3 Processes
2 Str tures
1 Staff Capacity
Figure 7.3: Management Capacity Analysis
Step 3: Process Assessment
Management process elements are assessed drawing on the rangeof patterns for each. To the extent possible, each process should beassessed separately.
- 94 -
In many cases individual management processes will fallsomewhere between the poles defined by mechanistic and adaptivesystems. Placement along these dimensions requires analyticaljudgements as to whether a given process is more mechanistic _r moreadaptive.
Again, this review should develop qualitative information onthe nature of uaneagnt processes.
Step 4: Approach Assessment
Both organizational structure and management processassessment will yield patterns which are more or less closelyassociated with one of the four generic management approaches. Insituations where organizations have achieved well-integrated managementprocesses and structures these will point more clearly to a singleapproach, or set of approaches for organizations with diversified tasksand management. Such organizations are likely to function effectivelyfor tasks which carry levels of innovation appropriate to the approach.
In other situations, structure and process assessments maynot form clear patterns relating to management approaches. Thesesituations are likely to be characterized by management problems, duein part to lack of congruence among approaches, processes andstructures.
Step 5: Innovation Assessment
The final step in capacity analysis requires an assessment ofthe organization's past and current experience with innovative tasks.The current programs and projects of the organization are studied toidentify the kinds of tasks being carried out, and the effectivenesswith which they are being managed. The concepts of task predictabilityand task demandingness can be used in this analysis.
Data for Management Capacity Assessments: In assessing staff capacity,structures, processes and approaches, the analyst gathers a variety ofinformation helpful in reaching judgements as to where to place allfour on the contingency dimensions. Data are collected :hrough reviewof documents, interviews and observations of people at work.
This information can provide a relatively rich set ofinsights into the reasons why structures and processes operate as theydo. Combined with information on the environment of management, itestablishes a baseline of system understanding that can be extremelyuseful in subsequent stages of management design, most notably thecreation of strategies for organizational development and change.
Particularly important is insight into current or planaedactions to change or improve current processes and structures.Clearly, projects should take advantage of existing activities, goalsor interests related to management improvement.
- 95 -
Congruence in Management Capacity
Completion of the five steps of capacity analysis enables theproject designer to step back to examine the degree of congruence ofapproach, processes, structures and staff capacity in existingorganizations. Thus an immediate output of the analysis is diagnosisof the strength of current management practice. At an immediate level,this diagnosis is helpful in efforts to improve management for currenttask configurations. For new projects, the diagnosis establishes theextent to which eventual implementation strategies need to deal withimprovements in the management of current tasks of greater innovation.
Relatively few organizations will display perfect congruenceamong structures, processes and staff capacity. It is common to findan organizational structure which has been set up to operate under aprofessional/adaptive approach, but which retains a high use of formalauthority for decision-making and formalized communication. The resultis an organization that is more mechanistic than adaptive, one in whichinappropriate management systems prevent effective adaptive action.
Thus the analysis of management capacity serves two usefulpurposes. First, it identifies discrepancies in approach, structureand systems for implementing organizations. This diagnosis can beimmediately useful in addressing current management problems.
Second, it defines in some detail the way things currently do(or do not) get done, providing a profile of comparison against whichthe management requirements of the intended project can be judged.This process takes place in Phase Three.
Phase Three: Feasibility Analysis
Can the project, as designed, be successfully managed byexisting implementing agencies? The answer comes through comparativeanalysis of management requirements and management capacity.
Analyses of management requirements and management capacitywill have produced profiles in each category: approaches,processes, structures and staff capacity for each task cluster in theproject. Comparison of these profiles will identify discrepancies oneach factor. For example, if current management approaches (andprocesses and structures) are largely mechanistic, requirementsprofiles for highly innovative projects will reveal a relatively largenumber of discrepancies. The required approach is likely to beprofessional/adaptive or adaptive, and required structures andprocesses will differ correspondingly from current management practice.
The data gathered in assessing management capacity and thecultural environment of the project provide insight into the state ofexisting systems and structures, and the potential for change. Profilecomparison shows where change may be required; the data behind theprofiles helps analysts judge the potential for change, and identifyinvestments and actions likely to bring it about.
- 96 -
As shown in Figure 7.4, the analysis feeds a sequence of keydecisions:
1. Is the proiect feasible with currentmanagement capacity?
If the answer is yes, no specific actions arerequired beyond customary implementation planning. Ifthe answer is no, the second question must be asked.
2. Is the project feasible with managementdevelopment alone?
If the discrepancies identified through feasibilityanalysis can be can be addressed through training,strengthened procedures, and organizational changes, anorganizational development strategy is called for as acomponent of the project. Informed by contingency analysis,such a strategy can be phased in with other projectactivities in such a way that implementation capacitygrows as the project is carried out.
However, if the discrepancies are too large to beadequately addressed through organizationaldevelopment, then the intervention strategy of theproject must be re-considered, leading to the thirdquestion.
3. Is the project feasible with redesign alone?
Modifying the design of a project to reduceinnovation is often the simplest and lowest coststrategy when management requirements exceedcapacity. However, it is often difficult orundesirable to modify the project sufficiently whilecontinuing to meet important sector needs. In such cases, thefourth question must be asked.
4. Is the project feasible with both organizationaldevelopment and re-design of the interventionstrategy?
A positive answer points towards an implementationstrategy which combines a) organizational development toaddress selected discrepancies and b) re-design of theproject to modify management requirements. Project re-designrequires modifying the level of innovation, and in somecircumstances inclusion of activities to reduce the level ofenvironmental uncertainty.
A negative answer should lead to full reconsiderationof the most basic concepts of the project.
Yes fiFeaslble WIt Management Development - No Quit
.e 7.4:FeasbIityAn sand RedesIgn?
FigLre 7.4: Feaslbl I Ity Analysls
- 98 -
Phase Four: Implementation Strategy Development
There are two kinds of implementation strategies,organizational change and the modification of the project design toreduce innovation and possibly uncertainty. In this phase of theanalysis the cumulative results of phases one to three are used todevelop these strategies.
Because of the crucial importance of implementationstrategies to effective management, these are discussed in some detailbelow.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
The process of contingency analysis leads the designer tothis final stage with a clear set of choices regarding theimplementation of a project which, as designed, cannot be implementedby existing organizations with current management practice. In mostsituations the level of uncertainty in the environment is taken asgiven. While it may change during the life of the project, this changeis considered largely outside the influence of project management.This leaves staff capacity, management approaches and processes,organizational structures and task innovation as the elements of aproject that can be modified or changed in order to achieve a level ofcongruence sufficient for effective project management.
In some situations, action can be taken to increaseenvironmental certainty, thus expanding the range of choice availablein achieving congruence between project objectives and management.
When uncertainty is taken as given, the choices are to changemanagement practice toward approaches required by the proposed level ofinnovation, to change the level of innovation toward a currentlyfeasible management approach, or some combination of both. Foreducation project management, the combination of increasing levels ofproject innovation and generally mechanistic implementing organizationsmeans that these choices are most often to be made betweenorganizational development to build management capacity and reductionof the level of project innovation.
Orzanizational Development
Organizational development is generally the first optionconsidered when management capacity does not meet requirements. It ismore difficult than modifying project innovation during the designstage. Organizations are real; at this stage the project is abstract.On the other hand, increasing management's capacity to implement changeis central to development over the long term. Hence investment inorganizational development is justifiable not only in terms of theimmediate project, but also as a broader contribution to educationaldevelopment.
- 99 -
In the most simple sense, changing management capacity meanschanging management contingencies from their current pattern toward onecongruent with the approach required by the project. The ManagementAssessment Profile (Table 5.2) thus establishes the parameters ofaction.
Contingency analysis will lead to two kinds of profiles onthe MAP. One will reflect the management approach, managementprocesses, structural form and ownership patterns, and staff capacityof the current implementing organizations. A second will model therequirements of project task clusters. Differences between current andrequired management approaches define the scope of organizationalchange required.
The challenge to project designers is to devisea set of management development interventions that will enableorganizations to narrow these discrepancies and move toward requiredpatterns over time. In projects with task clusters that requiredifferent management approaches, the development of coordinationprocesses are crucially important. Taken together, these interventionscomprise an organizational change strategy.
Orzanizational Change
Organizational change is required when an organizationestablishes a new pattern of relationships with its environment, aswhen it seeks to accomplish tasks with new and higher levels ofinnovation (Bedeian, 1980: 467; Hellriegel and Slocum, 1982: 687).This response can be reactive and incremental, or proactive and plannedmore comprehensively. Hence the process of organizational change canmirror the management approach of the organization (current orrequired) by being more or less adaptive.
Change requires new work behavior on the part of members ofthe organization to adapt effectively to new management systems andstructures -- and thus new or modified jobs. These new behaviorsinclude new skills that may be required, but these skills can extendbeyond cognitive mastery of techniques to encompass new ways ofrelating with others and new perspectives on the organization andindividual roles. Skills of this latter type impinge directly on thevalues of organizational members. Changes in work behavior thusrequire not only new cognitive skills but also, depending on the degreeof change, new values.
Resistances to Change: Resistance to change is common in allorganizations. It originates from many sources: lack of understandingof the reasons for and implications of change; lack of trust inorganizational leadership; different personal perspectives on the goalsand processes of the organization; lack of clarity as to the personalbenefits of change. The basic values held in the society may lead tolow tolerance for the uncertainty inherent in change. In short,acceptance of change on the part of members of the organization isconditioned by their understanding of its purposes and how it willaffect them personally, as well as by fundamental social and culturalvalues. (3edeian, 1980: 468-470).
- 100 -
Organizations face additional constraints on change. Set upto establish a level of stability necessary to accomplish goals,organizations can find that change threatens the organization's powerand influence. Resources for change may not be available. And thenetwork of legal and informal inter-organizational relationships (suchas civil service regulations, or contractual relationships) withinwhich the organization functions may make change difficult(Hellriegel and Slocum, 1982: 700-702).
The extent of potential obstacles to change makes itdifficult to achieve significant organizational development with a fewtraining programs. A comprehensive strategy of interventions isneeded.
Stratexies of Organizational Change: Both the 'how' and'what' of change strategies are important (Gibson, 1980: 169). The'how' is the process through which change is introduced. The 'what' iscomprised of the "instruments," or set of interventions, that are usedto bring change about.
The process of organizational change, like all managementprocesses, is contingent on context and task: that is, on theenvironment of the organization and on the degree of change to beattempted. These relationships are shown in Table 7.2 (adapted fromGibson, 1980: 177).
The diagnostic variables in the table frame the context inwhich strategies for the implementation of change take place.Depending on the nature of these variables, effective changesstrategies will be fast or slow, flow from the top or from the bottomof the organizational hierarchy, and be directive or participative intheir leadership style.
Contingency analysis, augmented by investigation into suchvariables as clarity of crisis (the extent to which the reasons forchange are understood within the organization), concentration oforganizational knowledge, potential resistance and expectations forinvolvement should enable project designers to place intendedimplementing organizations along the dimensions of the diagnosticvariables. This in turn will indicate generally the most salientaspects of the overall change strategy.
These strategies can be checked against the managementapproaches of implementing organizations to ascertain the extent towhich a given strategy is consistent with predominant managementpractice. A rapid, top-down directive strategy is consistent withmechanistic management. To the extent that organizational change seeksto move from mechanistic toward more open or adaptive approaches, thedegree of change will be larger, and the values of diagnostic variableswill tend to fall toward the right-hand end of the contingencydimensions, indicating the need for a slower, more bottoms-up and moreparticipatory strategy. The extent of the discrepancy provides anoverall indicator of the likely difficulty of change, and therefore ofthe time and resources that will be required for its accomplishment.
- 101 -
Table 7.2: Cmtlnrmles In the lolemtatlinOf Org(nizatIami Qnm
Dl&U0stlC Tl nallable Short LwaVariable
Clarity of rlsisor nrd for wsp Cleo to all Clear to few
size of orguizatlmn SRII Large
Effets of lxatirg l=rae Initiative Ei=.rage foancnntrols ad inntlym
Orginiztatil contratim At tre tCp At the bxttsot rslvast kclseia
Ebwvctata of oasie be Exterivereprdlit Irwolwit Iniolitaticn
Potmtial realst Sul I Geat
Total 0r be of Grat salMop agct
IecieIntation Peas Fast SlostratovVatl aoues at dor Tqx-dcon Iot
LmadvsjiD Style Cc_" Particloatlve
.Stlt
Instruments of Orzanizational Chanse: A range of activitiescan be used to carry out an appropriate strategy of organizationalchange. These activities can be thought of as instruments which dealwith the internal forces that determine employee behavior, and with theexternal constraints on change.
Internal change is implemented by modifying the structures,systems and values of an organization, and by enabling employees toadapt successfully to these changes. Changes in organization charts,written rules and procedures, job descriptions and work resources(including technology, such as introduction of micro-computers)
- 102 -
establish the base for change. Communication, education, training,incentives and facilitation help employees adapt. Depending on thenature of the change strategy, employee participation in the designand management of change is yet another instrument. Reinforcement ofchange through the continued use of these instruments is critical, andrequires close monitoring of change interventions.
External constraints on change require, fundamentally,effective political action to mobilize support which protects theorganization's power base, mobilizes resources, and loosens the boundsof inter-organizational relationships. The political and legal contextwill determine the exact nature of instruments, but the range extendsfrom public information programs through seeking new legislation tomobilizing coalitions of political leadership. Obviously, the extentto which such change is possible, and such instruments usable, dependsa great deal on the organization's power base. For educationministries, weak political power bases often serve as a principalexternal constraint on change.
Action Strategies and Investments
Knowledge of the dimensions of change required fromcontingency analysis and of the strategies and instruments of changeare brought together to design action strategies and investments whichmeet the need to overcome both internal and external constraints. Theelements of action are summarized in Table 7.3.
All foci and instruments are potentially relevant if theunderlying management approach is to change. The extent of change andthe nature of the change strategy determine the range of instrumentsand the intensity of their use. Changing a mechanistic managementapproach with clear elements of professionalladaptive management inplace entails less change, and thus fewer instruments and resources,than does changing a purely mechanistic structure to full professionaladaptive management.
Chanzina Management Processes: Management processes areinter-related, and changes in one require changes in the others inorder to maintain congruence. Thus when planning becomes incremental,decision-making, authority, leadership style, communication patterns,coordination, monitoring and control, and staffing systems must allchange as well.
The nature of the changes are determined by the patterns foreach process and the degree of discrepancy between current and requiredpatterns.
- 103 -
Table 7.3: Elements of OrganIzationalChange Actlon Strategies
Olmensiens of Change Focus Instr.uents
Maunaement Systems Internal ProcedLres TrainingTechnoIologles. IncentivesJob Descriptions FacilitationWork Relationships Reinforcement
Instruments need to be used to help the organization and itsemployees bridge the gap. Work behavior is determined by formalprocedures and job descriptions, and by the skills and values ofemployees. Both need to change to match changes in a given managementprocess. For example, changes in monitoring systems to increase theirpotential to provide rapid, critical feedback on project implementationrequire interactive communication systems, clear delegation ofauthority, inclusion of new monitoring tasks in existing jobs, as wellas training in new monitoring skills. They also require consciouseffort to modify values within the organization to support those whogive critical feedback.
Changing management processes requires definition of newprocedures and rules, and extensive communication and training to helpemployees adapt to new requirements. Incentives and reinforcement ofnew behavior through coaching and use of feedback are criticallyimportant.
Because these changes involve new relationships among unitsand levels of the organization, training across administrative levelsis an essential activity. Teachers and headmasters, headmasters andsupervisors, district and central staff all need to learn together thefull implications of new procedures and tasks -- not only for their ownwork, but also for the work of those above and below them. Trainingacross organizational boundaries, where coordinated action is required,is equally important.
Training needs to incorporate the rationale for change,orientation to new tasks and procedures, skills required for both, andthe new relationships that system change entails. Employees need toknow why their roles and jobs have changed, how to perform the newroles, and how their relationships with others will change.
Thus training must be based on the concrete changes to beimplemented. In top-down strategies, this means training forpre-established new systems, roles and relationships. For bottom-upstrategies, the process should be more participatory, with trainingserving both as a structure of consultation and as a means foracquiring new knowledge, skills and values.
The legitimacy of change must be established. For top-downstrategies, this requires clear and continuing demonstration of supportfrom all levels of management. For more participatory strategies,legitimacy needs to be established not only from the top-down, but alsofrom the bottom-up through extensive participation and consultation.Training of the type described is essential under all strategies.
Changing Values: Significant changes in management processesrequire new work behavior. This can require changes in employee valuesand attitudes, particularly to the extent that current managementpractice is grounded in fundamental values regarding authority andpower, uncertainty, individualism and sex-role differences.
- 105 -
Movement from mechanistic to adaptive management inparticular entails re-orientation of the values of managers andemployees. Incremental planning, participatory leadership, interactivecommunication, and decentralized decision-making are exemplary ofadaptive management processes whose effectiveness depends heavily onvalue orientations.
Values are often the key barrier to change. Yet they can bemodified over time through training, socialization, incentives andreinforcement. A comprehensive approach is needed to alter of theforces operating on employee work behavior. Skills training withoutincentives, facilitation and reinforcement will not change values, norwill announcement of changes or the issuance of new job descriptions.
The changes and the instruments must also exhibit a highdegree of congruence if employees are to risk new behaviors.Decentralizing responsibilities without concomitant changes inperformance evaluations and monitoring and control systems willcorrectly be seen as not only inconsistent but dangerous by managersand staff. The level of effort in using instruments to facilitatechange must b2 seen as congruent with the degree of change required ifemployees are to accept the legitimacy of new requirements.
Finally, efforts to support change in values -- like allefforts to create change -- must be continuous. One-shot efforts willrarely be adequate. This factor alone justifies the need forcomprehensive strategies of organizational change.
Changing Structures: Structures, processes and values changetogether. Significant structural change often requires action to dealwith external constraints, especially for public organizations. Actionstrategies must anticipate the changes in regulations and legislationthat may be required. Public information and efforts to generatedemand for services may be required to mobilize public and politicalsupport for management reform, and to obtain needed resources.
Rigid civil service systems are often a principal constrainton system and structure change. Within an organization, employees maysee changes in personnel systems as threatening. External rules andregulations may make both structural change and personnel system changeextremely difficult.
While internal obstacles may be handled with an appropriatecombination of training, incentives and reinforcement, externalconstraints are more problematic for projects in a single sector.Ideally, generalized civil service reform will be part of a nation'sdevelopment program, providing a context within which the changesrequired by a given project can be developed. When this is notpossible, project designers must resort to other strategies.
A common one is the establishment of autonomous projectmanagement units through the use of overlay structures and temporarystaffing. This can permit flexibility in designing structures andpersonnel systems. At the same time, it makes institutionalization of
- 106 -
the project more difficult. Line agency personnel can resent thehigher salaries of project staff; and project staff may be reluctantto return to line agency salaries and work conditions.
A second alternative for personnel systems is creative use ofincentives that do not require large changes in civil service rules.If salaries cannot be changed, incentive bonuses, job enrichment,training opportunities and enhanced promotion prospects can often beused.
Action must be phased to deal with external constraints.With top-down strategies this may be sequential: external support ismobilized and external constraints dealt with first, with internalaction coming second. Under more participatory strategies, the phasesare likely to be iterative, requiring the mobilization of internalsupport before and during efforts to change external constraints. Thisis another reason why bottom-up strategies take more time.
Decentralization of Structure: Decentralization is aprincipal strategy for increasing the responsiveness of organizationsto uncertain environments and to innovation by increasing the abilityof the organization the obtain and use complex information quickly andeffectively. The distribution of power and authority within theorganization is changed significantly when responsibilities forplanning, management and resource generation are dece'ntralized tolower-level units, or delegated to other organizations(Rondinelli and Nellis, 1986).
Structural decentralization brings significant changes tomost management systems. In their assessment of decentralization indeveloping countries, Rondinelli, Nellis and Cheema (1984) found thatwhen decentralization itself is an innovation, it must be introducedinto organizations slowly and incrementally, allowing them time andproviding them with the resources to build their capacity to manage ona decentralized basis. They found that:
1. Small-scale decentralization programs designed forlimited impact can generate more positive and durable results thanlarge-scale sweeping organizational reforms. Decentralized programsshould, therefore, generally be planned small and expandedincrementally.
2. The introduction of abstract or complex procedures fordecentralized planning and management are unlikely to be implementedeffectively in most developing countries. Therefore, decentralizationprograms should be kept simple, flexible, and appropriate to thecapacities of the organizations or units to which responsibility isbeing transferred.
3. Decentralization often requires a lengthy period ofgestation before its benefits will be realized. It is oftenaccompanied by initial confusion, uncertainty, lack of confidence, orhesitation to take the initiative on the part of the officials to whomthe responsibility is being transferred.
- 107 -
4. Decentralized programs in which the first stages areclosely supervised efforts to teach lower-level officials andorganizations how to handle new responsibilities are likely to be moresuccessful than those that transfer large numbers of tasks or greatresponsibility all at once without sufficient technical assistance.ProgrAms should therefore be planned "tutorially."
5. Programs of decentralization can benefit from technicaland financial assistance from international donors, but over-relianceon international organizations can constrain impact after externalassistance ends. Programs planned with donor assistance should makeprovisions for the gradual phasing out of donor assistance and theshift of responsibilities to implementing agencies.
6. Decentralization programs that include a component fortraining both central administrators and lower-level implementors aremore likely to have a positive impact. In a decentralizedorganizational structure the role of high-level administrators is toprovidg guidance and assistance rather than to exercise stringentcontrols. Technical and managerial training must be provided not onlyfor those to whom responsibility is being transferred, but also toassist central officials in supporting local implementors moreeffectively.
7. Decentralization programs that transfer adequatefinancial resources as well as authority and responsibilities will bemore successful than those merely calling for consultation orparticipation in decision-making. Without the transfer of adequatefinancial resources -- or the authority to use locally generatedresources -- to lower levels, structural decentralization is usuallymeaningless.
Changing Management Approach: Changes in management approachare the sum of changes in processes, structures and staff capacity.However, both the intended approach and the changes it requires fromthe current approach need to be articulated to establish the goals andrationale for organizational change.
Changing Ownership: The ownership of an implementingorganization generally changes when contingency analysis indicates thatbecause of current ownership an intended implementing agency simplycannot adapt to a required management approach. In such circumstancesproject designers may reassign the project to an implementingorganization whose ownership patterns are more conducive to themanagement approach required.
In reality, changing the implementing organization is usuallyextremely difficult and unlikely. Thus if contingency analysis leadsto the conclusion that ownership change is necessary, designers arevery likely instead to modify the project design to change levels ofinnovation in order to change management requirements. Where suchadjustment is not possible, the viability of the project must bequestioned.
- 108 -
Modifvine Levels of Innovation
When organizational change strategies do not appear adequateto develop management capacity sufficiently for the requirements of theproject, the level of innovation inherent in the project design must bereconsidered.
As discussed in Chapter 3, the level of innovation isdetermined by two characteristics of tasks. One is predictability,determined by the extent to which tasks are analyzable and the degreeof task variety required by the innovation. The second isdemandingness, a measure of the degree to which tasks deviate fromcurrent practice and of the geographic and institutional scale ofintended implementation.
Changing the level of innovation in tasks entails changes inthese characteristics of the work to be accomplished, as summarized inTable 7.4.
Table 7.4: ModIfying Elements ofImovatlon
Elements ofImovatlon Types of Changs
Predict- MAalyzabillty a use krKnw and tested InterventIonabillty models
- reduce proportlon of Iterativetasks; Increase linear tasks
Varlety o reduice naber of disparateelements of Irnovatlon
Demand- Deviation a break Inovation Into phasesInVmess to permit Incremental change In
small steps wIth modest changeIn job behaviors
Scale o reduce geographic spread ornLuber of Institutions,
or both
Increasing analyzability, and reducing variety and deviationhave the effect of simplifying the innovation in different ways.Accomplishing all three makes the objectives and tasks of the projectincreasingly routine. Reducing scale has the effect of making a giveninnovation more manageable.
- 109 -
Alternative Change Strategies and Management Approaches
Change is accomplished when strategies of action expresslyrecognize the degree of environmental uncertainty and the managementcapacity of implementing organizations.
A Verspoor's analysis of change components in World Bankeducation projects demonstrates that the level of innovation interactswithin the degree of environmental uncertainty to form conditionsthat call for different strategies of change (1986, forthcoming). Thusdifferent levels of task innovation will point toward different changestrategies under different conditions of uncertainty. Notsurprisingly, as the dimensions of difference are the same, thesestrategies correspond closely to the four prototypical managementapproaches discussed in this paper, as illustrated in Figure 7.5:
Flgure 7.S: Chng Strategies and kianagementAPProaches
The correspondence between change strategies and managementapproaches means that modifying innovation has two dimensions.Changing the level of project innovation to change the indicatedmanagement approach also implies moving from one change strategy toanother.
Comprehensive Change: This strategy is required forlarge scale inaovations under conditions of high uncertainty.It requires effective adaptive management. It is a high-risk strategyin many developing country conitexts.
- 110 -
Experience indicates that this strategy is veryoften attempted when a fully effective adaptive management approach isnot possible. While the effectiveness of the innovation may bedemonstrated, environmental uncertainty prevents the program frommobilizing the political and financial support necessary forinstitutionalizing change. Middleton's analysis (1985b) of aBank-assisted pilot project in the Philippines provides a clear andinstructive example, as do cases cited by Verspoor (1987, forthcoming),whose research failed to turn up a case within Bank experience of ahighly innovative project component successfully implemented underconditions of high uncertainty with a full adaptive approach.
The highly innovative nature of project tasks requiresadaptive management in an uncertain environment. Existing managementsystems, if effective for current tasks, are likely to have evolvedtoward an open/mechanistic approach to cope with uncertainty.Management of the project can move toward an adaptive approach onlyby establishing a fully independent unit at the expense of increasingisolation from line organizations, weakening the possibility ofinstitutionalizing proj ect outcomes.
In this sense, a comprehensive change strategy represents thepotential for failure of innovative projects, managed by organizationsnot yet capable of adaptive management, in uncertain environments. Itthus a strategy from which project designers may seek to retreatthrough modifications in project innovation.
Incremental Expansion: This strategy is appropriate forintroducing change when there is a reasonably low level ofenvironmental uncertainty, most often expressed as strong andunambiguous support for project tasks from a stable government.Implementing organizations should have the potential to useprofessional/adaptive management, although it may be low at the outsetof the project. Thus simultaneous organizational development andproject implementation are needed, with strong capacity for learningand growth in both.
To meet this need, the level of innovation is modified byreducing the scale of the effort, restricting the innovation to alimited area or number of institutions. Small scale implementationleaves room for institutional development. It increases the timeavailable for full implementation of the innovation, permittinglearning about the innovation and new management approaches. Itfurther allows gradual development of a cadre of experienced andtrained professionals and managers as the basis for eventual expansionof the innovation and of professional/adaptive management.
Discrete Change: When political and economic turbulence inthe environment is high, change can be introduced only on alimited basis. Relatively routine tasks must be undertaken in alimited number of institutions. This permits managers to use anopen/mechanistic approach, monitoring the environment closely andadjusting the project incrementally as conditions change.
- ill -
Innovation is modified by increasing analyzability, andreducing variety, deviation and scale.
This strategy may be the "best that can be accomplished"under conditions of high uncertainty. It risks, of course, thepossibility that successful innovations will not spread throughout thesystem.
Progressive Innovation: This strategy is appropriate whenenvironmental uncertainty is low. Existing management is highlymechanistic and, though effective in operating the existingsystem, has relatively little immediate potential to move toward aprofessional/adaptive approach. Relatively high levels ofenvironmental certainty are reflected in strong support from acentralized government, which has mandated rapid, nationwide changes inthe education system. Thus there is little opportunity forexperimentation and learning, and implementation requirements are highin terms of the geographic and institutional scale of the project.
The scale of innovation must remain high, but the otherthree components of innovation are reduced. In early phases ofimplementation the analyzability of tasks is increased, and variety anddeviation are decreased. Breaking the innovation into a sequence ofsmall changes increases manageability and the probability of success.The behavior changes required of managers and employees are relativelysmall, facilitating learning during implementation. As implementationproceeds, and experience accumulates, the degree of innovation can beprogressively increased.
Progressive innovation leads to widespread, but low levels ofchange at the beginning, and requires long periods of time for fullimplementation of the innovation. Limiting the initial degree ofinnovation provides time to build professional/adaptive managementcapacity from a mechanistic base to match increasing levels ofinnovation.
Table 7.5 sumiarizes the relationships among fourimplementation strategies, and the level of environmental uncertaintyand degree of task innovation. Innovation is disaggregated into itsfour components to show the characteristics of different strategies.
Strategy Choice
When analysis indicates that innovation exceeds managementcapacity, project designers must consider the option of modifyinginnovation to improve implementation. This involves choosing animplementation strategy that is congruent with a feasible managementapproach, and adjusting the characteristics of the innovation to fitwith the strategy selected.
- 112 -
Choice With Given Levels of Uncertainty: If the level ofenvironmental uncertainty is taken as fixed in the analysis, movementcan only occur between incremental expansion and progressive innovationstrategies, or between comprehensive change and discrete changestrategies as levels of innovation are modified (as shown in Figure7.6). These limits establish the range of options available forredesign of project innovation to achieve congruence between managementrequirements and management capacity.
Table 7.5 lpleuentation StrategyContingencies
lopleuentatlon Strategy
progressive Increuental Dlscrete ComprehensiveIrrmation Epansion oane a
Environ ental Low Low Hlgh HighUhcertalnty
Innovatlon Loa LhM Moderate 2
e AnalyzabillIty Hlgh Low Moderate Low* Variety Low High Moderate Highe Deviation Low High Moderate Hlgh* Scale High Low LoW High
Managem ent Towards Professional/ Opervwcm anistic TowardsApproach Professional/ Adaptlve AdaptiveRequired Adaptive
Moving from incremental expansion to progressiveinnovation requires reducing the level of project innovation byincreasing the analyzability of tasks, and reducing variety anddeviation. At the same time, the scale of the innovation can beincreased where strong and effective mechanistic management is inplace. This shift changes the required management approach fromprofessional/adaptive to mechanistic.
Moving from comprehensive change to a discrete changestrategy requires moderate simplification of the innovation in terms ofanalyzability, variety and deviation, and more radical reduction in
- 113 -
scale. The required management approach changes from adaptive toopen/mechanistic.
Figure 7.6 also illustrates the limits on the alternative tomodifying project innovation -- changing management capacity. Whenenvironmental uncertainty is low, a project requiring incrementalexpansion strategy is feasible if intended implementing organizationshave the potential to follow a professional/adaptive approach. Whenenvironmental uncertainty is high, a project with high levels ofinnovation demands adaptive management. This is difficult under mostcircumstances, and should be attempted only when implementingorganizations have established effective open/mechanistic managementand shown potential to development more strongly adaptivecharacteristics.
Degree of Inmovatlon
low Increase Malyzabi I Ity HighDecrease Variety and Deviatlon
high Increase Analyzab I IItyDecrease Varlety and DevlationDecrease Scale
Flgure 7.6: Modifying InnovatlonUnder Fixed Levels of Uncertainty -
- 114 -
Choice With Changing Levels of Certainty: The effect ofholding constant the level of environmental uncertainty is to restrictstrategic re-design of project innovation to one dimension. Theintuitively attractive options, for example, of moving from adaptivetowards professional/adaptive approaches, or open/mechanistic towardsmechanistic, are not possible conceptually.
However, a moderate level of uncertainty can be decreased byreducing complexity and increasing stability within the organizationalenvironment, as shown in Figure 7.7. This can be achieved bydeveloping strong policy, programmatic and funding support from thegovernment, by mobilizing support from interest groups in the project'spower setting, and by reducing to a minimum the number of institutionsinvolved.
Degree of InmovatlIon
low Iincrease Analyzability highl Decrease Variety and Deviation
high Increase Analyzabilty tyDecrease Variety and DevlatlonDecrease Scale
Flgure 7.7: Modifying InnovatIonUnder Changing Levels of Uncertainty
- 115 _
If uncertainty can be modified, a highly innovative projectcan be implemented with an incremental expansion strategy and aprofessional/adaptive management approach. Innovation is modified byreducing the scale of the effort (which in itself can contribute tosimplification of the organizational environment). The innovation isestablished as a pilot project. This strategy is viable if theexisting management system shows potential for an adaptive/professionalapproach to management.
Similarly, decreasing environmental uncertainty permits aproject of moderate innovation appropriate initially foropen/mechanistic management to be expanded to full scale implementationthrough progressive innovation -- again, if existing mechanisticmanagement systems are strong.
Finally, Figure 7.7 illustrates the distance betweenmechanistic management and the requirements of a highly innovative taskcluster in an uncertain environment. To adapt the project to fit withexisting management approaches, both the level of environmentaluncertainty and the level of innovation must be changed. Change ofthis magnitude would usually mean that a new project -- or task cluster-- would have to be designed.
SUMMARY: INNOVATION AND ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
Modifying innovation and devising strategies and investmentsfor organizational change are iterative processes. The two processesare carried out together, with much looping back from one phase to theother as the implications of contingency requirements are translatedinto concrete and instruments for management development.
The end result is often a set of interventions and resourcesthat appear to be sufficient to bring about change soon enough for theproject, as designed and re-designed, to get started. The inherentlymessy nature of development -- it's non-linearity, its unexpectedoutcomes, its volatile environments -- always requires satisficing, notoptimizing, in any solution to any problem.
Contingency management, in recognizing the great variety ofenvironments in which management is done, the implications of differentlevels of innovation, and therefore the legitimacy of different kindsof management, seeks to take this complexity into account. Whereinternational assistance agencies and implementing organizations arewilling to invest the necessary time and resources, contingencymanagement offers a framework for analysis and design that can helpplanners better understand and respond to the management implicationsof projects.
- 116 -
- 117 -
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adams, R.S. and D. Chen (1981). The Process of EducationalInnovation: An International Perspective. London: Kogan Page.
Ansoff, H. Igor (1965). Corporate Strategy. New York:McGraw-Hill.
Baum, Warren C. and Stokes M. Tolbert (1985). Investing inDevelopment: Lessons of World Bank Experience. New York:Oxford University Press.
Beal, George and Victor T. Valbuena (1985). "Interorganiza-tional Coordination," in J. Middleton and D.J. Wedemeyer(eds.) Methods of Communication Planning. Paris: UNESCO:341-367.
Bedeian, Arthur G. (1984). Organizations: Theory andAnalysis. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Beeby, C.E. (1986). "The Stages of Growth in EducationalSystems," in S. Heyneman and D. White (eds.) The Quality ofEducation and Economic Development. Washington: World Bank:37-44.
Berman, P. and M.S. McLaughlin (1978). "Federal ProgramsSupporting Educational Change," Implementing and SustainingInnovations Vol. 8, Rand Report No. R-1589/8-HEW. SantaMonica: Rand Corporation.
Brinkerhoff, Derick W. and Rudi Klauss (1985). "ManagerialRoles for Social Development Management," Public Administra-tion and Development, Vol. 5, No. 2: 145-156.
Burns T. and G. Stalker (1961). The Management of Innova-tion. London: Tavistock.
Burke, W.W. (1982). Organization Development: Principlesand Practices. Boston: Little Brown.
Cohen, J.M., M.S. Grindle and S.T. Walker (1985). "ForeignAid and Conditions Precedent: Political and BureaucraticDimensions," World Development, Vol. 13, No. 12: 1211-1230.
Crandall, D.P. and Associates (1983). People, Policies andPractices: Examining the Chain of School Improvement.Andover: The Network Inc.
Downs, Anthony (1967). Inside Bureaucracy. Boston: LittleBrown.
Duncan, Robert B. (1979). "What Is the Right OrganizationalStructure? Decision Tree Analysis Provides the Answer."Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 7, Winter.
- 118 -
Elmore, R.F. and M.W. McLaughlin (1982). "Strategic Choicein Federal Education Policy: The Compliance-Assistance Tra-deoff," in A. Liebermann and M.W. McLaughlin (eds.) Policy-making in Education, 81st NSSE Yearbook. Chicago: Univer-sity of Chicago Press.
Esman, Milton J. (1967). "The Institution Building Concepts--An Interim Appraisal." Pittsburgh: University of Pitts-burgh Graduate School of Public and International Affairs.Mimeographed.
Fullan, M. (1982). The Meaning of Educational Change. NewYork: Columbia University Teachers College Press.
Fuller, B., K. Gorman, and J. Edwards (1986). "SchoolQuality and Economic Growth in Mexico," in S. Heyneman and D.White (eds.), The Quality of Education and Economic Develop-ment. Washington: World Bank: 17-33.
French, W.L., H. Bell Jr., and R.A. Zawacki (eds.) (1983).Organization Development: Theory, Practice and Research,Rev. Ed., Plano, Texas: Business Publications Inc.
French, J.R. and B.H. Raven (1959). "The Bases of SocialPower," in D. Cartwright (ed.), Studies in Social Power. AnnArbor: University of Michigan, Institute of Social Research:150-167.
Friedmann, John R. (1973). Retracking America: A Theory ofTransactive Planning. New York: Anchor Press.
Gibson, C.F. (1980). Managing Organizational Behavior.Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin.
Gibson, J., J. Ivancevich, and J. Donnelly (1973). Organiza-tions: Structures, Process and Behavior. Dallas: BusinessPublications Inc.
Gran, Guy (1983). "Learning from Development Success: SomeLessons from Contemporary Case Histories," Working Paper No.9. Washington: National Association of Schools of PublicAffairs and Administration.
Gold, Kenneth A. (1982). "Managing for Success: A Compari-son of Private and Public Sectors," Public AdministrationReview, Vol. 42, No. 6 (November-December): 568-575.
Goldstein, Howard (1984). Social Learning and Change. NewYork: Tavistock.
Gross, Bertram M. (1968). Organizations and Their Managing.New York: The Free Press.
- 119 -
Hannah, John P. with G. Honadle, T. Walker and A. Barclay,Jr. (1984). Sustaining Rural Development: A Guide for Pro-lect Planners, Managers, Evaluators and Trainers. Washing-ton: Development Alternatives Incorporated.
Hellriegal, D. and J.W. Slocum, Jr. (1982). Management, 3rdEd. Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley.
Herzberg, Frederick (1968). "One More Time: How Do YouMotivate Employees?" Harvard Business Review, Vol. 46. No.1: 53-62.
Heyneman, S., D.T. Jamison and X. Montenegro (1984). "Text-books in the Philippines: Evaluation of the PedagogicalImpact of a Nationwide Investment," Evaluation and PolicyAnalysis, Vol. 6, No. 2: 139-150.
Heyneman, Stephen P. and Daphne S. White (eds.) (1986). TheQuality of Education and Economic Development. Washington:World Bank.
Hirschman, Albert 0. (1967). Development Projects Observed.Washington: The Brookings Institution.
Hofstede, Geert (1980). "Motivation, Leaders, and Organiza-tion: Do American theories Apply Abroad?" OrganizationalDynamics (Silmmer): 42-62.
Ickis, John C. (1981). "Structural Responses to New RuralDevelopment Strategies," in D. Korten and F. Alfonso (eds.),Bureaucracy and the Poor: Closing the Gap. Singapore:McGraw-Hill: 4-32.
Johnston, B. and W. Clark (1982). Redesigning Rural Develop-ment: A Strategic Perspective. Baltimore: Johns HopkinsUniversity Press.
Kelman, Herbert C. and Donald P. Warwick (1980). "The Ethicsof Social Intervention: Goals, Means and Consequences," inB.H. Raven (ed.) Policy Studies Review Annual, 1980, Vol. 4.Beverly Hills: Sage Publications: 43-73.
Kingdon, John W. (1984). Agenda, Alternatives and PublicPolicies. Boston: Little Brown.
Klauss, Rudi (1979). "Interorganizational Relationships forProject Implementation," in G. Honadle and R. Klauss (eds.)International Development Administration. New York:Praeger: 146-167.
Korten, David C. (1980). "Community Organization and RuralDevelopment: A Learning Process Approach," Public Adminis-tration Review, Vol. 40, No. 5: 480-511.
- 120 -
Korten, David C. (1981). "The Management of Institutions inTransition," in D. Korten and F. Alfonso (eds.), Bureaucracyand the Poor. Singapore: McGraw-Hill: 221-237.
Korten, David C. (1984). "Strategic Organization for PeopleCentered Development," Public Administration Review, Vol. 44,No. 4 (July-August): 341-352.
Korten, Frances F. (1981). "Community Participation: AManagement Perspective on Obstacles and Options," in D. Kor-ten and F. Alfonso (eds.), Bureaucracy and the Poor: Closingthe Gap. Singapore: McGraw-Hill: 181-200.
Koteen, Jack and E. Edward Rizzo (1976). "Management Capac-ity in Host Country Institutions: Guidelines for AIDAppraisals." Washington: U.S. Agency for InternationalDevelopment. Mimeographed.
Lawler, E.E. III (1977). "Reward Systems" in J.R. Hackmanand J.L. Suttle (eds.), Improving Life at Work. SantaMonica. CA.: Goodyear Publishing: 163-226.
Lawrence, P.R. and J.W. Lorsch (1969). Developing Organiza-tions: Diagnosis and Action. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Likert, Rensis-(1967). The Human Organization. New York:McGraw-Hill.
Lindblom, C.E. (1975). "The Sociology of Planning: Thoughtand Social Interaction," in M. Bornstein (ed.), Planning:East and West. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger: 23-60.
Majone, G. and A. Wildavsky, "Implementation as Evolution,"in H. Freedman (ed.), Policy Studies Review Annual, BeverlyHills: Sage Publications: 103-117.
Middleton, John (1985a). "A Conceptual Framework forCommunication Planning," in J. Middleton and D.J. Wedemeyer(eds.), Methods of Communication Planning. Paris: UNESCO:37-76.
Middleton, John (1985b). "The Philippine Radio EducationProject: A Case Study of Decision, Design and Interactions,"in B. Searle (ed). Evaluation in World Bank EducationProjects: Lessons From Three Case Studies. Discussion PaperNo. EDT5. Washington: Education and Training Department,World Bank.
Middleton, John et. al. (1986). Management in World BankEducation Projects: Analysis of Experience. Discussion PaperNo. EDT 42. Washington, D.C.: Education and TrainingDepartment, World Bank.
- 121 -
Miles, M.B. (1984). "On Temporary Systems," in M.B. Miles(ed.), Innovation in Education. New York: Columbia UniversityTeachers College Press.
Mintzburg, H. (1979). The Structuring of Organizations.Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Mintzburg, H. (1980). The Nature of Managerial Work. 2nd Ed.New York: Harper and Row.
Muller, L. and A. Israel (1983). "Institutional DevelopmentTechnical Note No. 1: The Institutional Impact of ProjectUnits." Washington: World Bank.
Paul, Samuel (1982). Managing Development Programs: TheLessons of Success. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.
Peabody, Robert L. (1964). Organizational Authority. NewYork: Atherton.
Perrow, Charles (1968). "The Effect of Technological Change onthe Structure of Business Firms," in Benjamin C. Roberts (ed).Industrial Relations: Comtemporary Issues. London: MacMillllan.
Peters, Thomas J. and Robert H. Waterman, Jr. (1982). InSearch of Excellence: Lessons from America's Best Run Compa-nies. New York: Harper and Row.
Rickards, Tudor (1974). Problem solving Through CreativeAnalysis. New York: Wiley.
Rondinelli, Dennis A. (1976). "Public Planning and PoliticalStrategy," Long Range Planning, Vol. 9, No. 2: 75-82.
Rondinelli, Dennis A. (1983). Development Projects as Pro-ject Experiments: An Adaptive Approach to Development Admin-istration. New York: Methuen.
Rondinelli, Dennis A. (1983a). "Projects as Instruments ofDevelopment Administration: A Qualified Defense and Sugges-tions for Improvement," Public Administration and Develop-ment, Vol. 3: 307-327.
Rondinelli, Dennis A., John R. Nellis and G. Shabbir Cheema(1984). Decentralization in Developing Countries: A Reviewof Recent Experience, World Bank Staff Working Paper No. 581.Washington: World Bank.
Rondinelli, Dennis A. (1985). "Development Administrationand American Foreign Assistance Policy," Canadian Journal ofDevelopment Studies, Vol 6, No. 2: 211-239.
- 122 -
Rondinelli, Dennis A. (1986a). Practical Lessons forDeveloDment Management: Experience with ImplementingAgricultural Development Projects in Africa, AID EvaluationStudy No. 39. Washington: U.S. Agency for InternationalDevelopment.
Rondinelli, Dennis A. and John R. Nellis (1986b), "AssessingDecentralization Policies in Developing Countries: The Casefor Cautious Optimisim," Development Policy Review, Vol.4:3-23.
Sarason, S.B. (1972). The Culture of School and the Problemof Change. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Simon, Herbert A. (1957). Administrative Behavior, 2nd Edi-tion. New York: Macmillan.
Smith, W.E., Lethem, F.T and Thoolen, B.A. (1980). The Designof Organizations for Rural Development Projects: A ProgressReport. Staff Working Paper No. 375. Washington, D.C.: TheWorld Bank.
Steiner, Gary A. (1964). "The Creative Organization," Stan-ford University Graduate School of Business Bulletin, Vol.33: 12-16.
Tannenbaum, R. and W. Schmidt (1958), "How To Choose ALeadership Pattern," Harvard Business Review, Vol. 36.
Verspoor, Adriaan M. (1985). Project Management forEducational Change. Discussion Paper No. EDT12. Washington:Education and Training Department, World Bank.
Verspoor, Adriaan M. (1987, forthcoming). Pathways to Change:Improving the Quality of Education in Developing Countries.Washington: World Bank Education and Training Department.
World Bank (1980). Education Sector Policy Paper. Washing-ton: World Bank.
World Bank (1983), World Development Report, 1983. Washing-ton: World Bank.
World Bank (1983a), Ninth Annual Review of Project Perfor-mance Audit Results. Washington: World Bank.
Yin, R.K. (1979). Changing Urban Bureaucracies: How NewProjects Become Routinized. Santa Monica: The Rand Corpora-tion.
Zaltman, G., R. Duncan and J. Holbek (1973). Innovations andOrganizations. New York: Wiley.
![Combined parametric–nonparametric uncertainty ...engweb.swan.ac.uk/~adhikaris/fulltext/journal/ft178.pdfapproaches combined with system reduction methods [15–18] and algebraic](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5f64147c1c7e351a7b79abce/combined-parametricaaoenonparametric-uncertainty-adhikarisfulltextjournalft178pdf.jpg)
