To what extent is managerialism evident within an organisation

Answer

Introduction

Social workers work for some agencies, departments or organizations. Whether they are public, governmental, NGOs or voluntary, these organizations or employment agencies are generally referred to as human service organizations. One such organizations is the Australian Red Cross (ARC). Drawing from current practices in this organization, this paper discusses managerialism, leadership approaches and ethical tensions in today’s human services organizations.

Overview of the Organization

Australian Red Cross (ARC, hereafter) is an Australian-based human service organization that seeks to save, empower and support people and communities in times of disasters and vulnerabilities. The ultimate aim of reduce suffering among people both in Australia and in the overseas countries by mobilizing humanity power. The organization strives to achieve this by working to “alleviate suffering during wars and conflict and promote the laws of war as well as assisting the most vulnerable community members – no matter their circumstances” (Australian Red Cross 2019). This commitment is reflected in the organization’s vision of ensuring “Human dignity, peace, safety and wellbeing for all”. Like other human service organizations, ARC works with politicians, other organizations and policy-makers to improve the situation and lives of vulnerable people and communities in Australia and across the world. Thus, the organization’s core values are humanity, neutrality, voluntary service, impartiality, unity, independence and universality (Australian Red Cross 2019).

Organizational Structure

ARC is governed and managed by the Council of the Australian Red Cross Society and the ARC Board as shown in figure 1 below. Responsibilities of the council include receiving and reviewing annual financial statements and reports and electing additional board members and office bearers (Australian Red Cross 2016). As the governing body, the Board comprises of 16 board members who oversee the duty and role of the CEO. The CEO on the other hand manages the organization’s day-to-day activities, new strategy implementation and other operations.

Figure 1: ARC Organizational (Governance, Leadership and Management) Structure (Australian Red Cross 2016).

Additionally, the CEO is responsible for managing the National Leadership Team that “provides high-level advice to the CEO on key strategic and operational matters” (Australian Red Cross 2012). The Blood Service Board reports to the ARC Board and oversees management of various aspects of the Blood Service including strategic direction, risk management, finances and operational activities. Lastly, the legal and policy unit is responsible for providing independent representation and in-house legal advice on legal aspects of ARC’s policies, governance and operational issues.

Managerialism in the ARC

ARC’s organizational structure shows characteristics of managerialism. Tsui and Cheung (2004) refer to managerialism as a “a set of beliefs and practices that assumes better management will revolve a wide range of economic and social problems”, by facilitating effective and efficient accomplishment of tasks and roles (p. 437). In other words, managerialism involves putting more focus on an empowered and management role in a social welfare organization, and adopting the business management approaches and market values of conventional for-profit organizations. At ARC, staff members and volunteers report to the CEO, who in turn report to the Board as a governing body overseen by the Council of the ARC society.

Social welfare and management scholars hold differing views regarding whether adopting such a line management supervision model is effective in enhancing performance of human service organizations or whether the practice is detrimental to social work practice among practitioners. For Bradley and Hojer (2009), managerialism provides opportunities for supervisors and managers to practice their educative and supportive roles by helping social workers to acquire and develop competent knowledge in the theories and methods of social work. In contrast, Tsui and Cheung (2004) contends that managerialism such as that practiced at ARC can force social workers to focus on meeting managerial objectives, thereby, compromising their “human services values of care and concern” and their overall professional stance.

Tensions between Social Workers and Managers within ARC

Introduction of managerialism at ARC, as evidenced in its organizational and governance structure, has led to tensions between the organization’s social worker practitioners and the management. According to Lai (2016), this business-oriented practice creates an organizational climate where; “management that is originally supposed to be an auxiliary servant to facilitate the delivery of services has eventually become the master to be served” (p. 8). As such, many staff members and volunteers in the organizations find it difficult and overwhelming to perform their professional functions and duties effectively. For instance, the growing demand to fulfill managerial duties causes them to lose their professional viewpoint of upholding humanity care and wellbeing, and instead focus on improving the organization’s brand name, records, financial performance, productivity and other managerial objectives. These tensions between ARC’s social workers and its leadership can be understood adequately in light of three key organizational theories; namely, the Weber’s bureaucratic approach, the administrative theory and the systems theory.

Weber’s bureaucratic theory posits that positions in an organization should arranged hierarchically, with each hierarchy having a specified amount of authority and responsibility. The approach also requires organizations to specialize their tasks on a functional basis, and separate them according to specialization, with each specialty having its own chain of command. ARC’s organizational structure aligns with this requirement. It consists of a top-town hierarchy where the CEO reporting to the Board directs managers and supervisors to oversee social work practitioners and other staff members in completing their tasks. Additionally, the organizational structure features high specialization with three main functional divisions; the state and territory divisional advisory board, the ARC board, legal and policy unit and the blood service board (Australian Red Cross 2016). This structure is also consistent with the principles of the administrative theory, which looks at organizations from the perspectives of task accomplishment, management approaches, line and staff, and the functions of committees and management (Fao.org 2015).

Leadership Roles for Social Workers in ARC

ARC is an impartial organization when it comes to membership and employment. This implies that leadership positions are open to all eligible social workers, regardless of their social, ethnic and social backgrounds. To be eligible, one will be required possess six key attributes, which are also must-have values for social workers according to the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics. Goldberg (2015) highlights these values in the order of their importance as; “service, social justice, dignity and worth of a person, the importance of human relationships, integrity and competence” (para 3 line 3). Once a qualified social worker ascends to leadership at ARC, his/ her leadership roles will include facilitating communication, empowering staff members, increasing organizational longevity, advocating for change, and strengthening collective partnerships.