Managing Organizational Crisis and Brand Trauma by Dennis W. Tafoya

Author:Dennis W. Tafoya
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Springer International Publishing, Cham

Affiliation as a Public Statement

While joining a union is a public expression of discontent or a need for change, so is staying or not joining. Early activity around the affiliation decision illustrates this. Given the proximity of the two organizations, activity is localized and reflects the private interactions between the candidate and the two organizations—all driven by an interest in satisfying personal needs, wants and desires. Importantly, too, ownership of the decision-making process is personal; it is directed by some higher authority. Likewise, the formation process itself reflects an absence of well-defined top-down control, a characteristic of dynamic systems and noted by most who examine complex systems, behavior or performance (Sole and Bascompte 2006, 14; Krugman 1996; Holland 1998; Johnson 2001; Camazine et al. 2001, 14). 1

In the United States, federal labor laws require a “hands-off” approach of those involved in the union-organizing effort and this frees the development process from the extraordinary influences of external agencies (Labor Management Relations Act 1947) The absence of well-defined, top-down controls implies that the emergent behavior is not a product of external direction or a blueprint prepared by others for execution at the local level to shape rules, processes or behavior toward a particular end. Those involved create their own direction within the constraints of the process as a whole.

As the process unfolds, personal objectives connect with those of others and the sense of a personal mission takes shape. Those engaged learn to rely on local information to guide them and their efforts. Indeed, local issues, local information and social communication phenomena such as rumors or information grapevines drive the process. These can be covert channel; if for no other reason than what’s emerging, a union membership, is typically counter to the expectations or desires of the parent organization. Indeed, the entire effort can be characterized as a giant work-around of the parent organization’s established structure, people, processes and procedures.

Issues, in the form of gripes or complaints, play an important role in the union formation process for involved stakeholders. Individuals use issues as part of a concept optimization process to identify the processes and, ultimately, the union’s significance and, of course, personal brand significance (Martin 2007; Eaton and Voos 2004). At the group level, issues materialize into observable themes or patterns from which those involved build consensus and unify the movement, again on their own and without external guidance; for the process to be successful, it must be meaningful to those involved.

Variability, and a conceivable loss of equilibrium in an organization’s operations and procedures, increases the opportunity for self-organizations to materialize (Sole and Bascompte 2006, 14). This new organization’s brand takes on a meaning of its own when the new leaders document deficiencies in the existing organization in contrast to what the union will offer. Now, as the union’s efforts begin to take shape, routine matters become ways to define the union as different from the employer or to construct opportunities to use existing resources to better the organizing effort. Shortcomings in existing

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.