Organizational Analysis and Leadership Evaluation of South Carolina Emergency Management Department

Abstract 

In public administration, the topics of leadership and organizational structure are two critical concepts. Theories on organizational structure and leadership determine the structure and leadership in the public sector. This research paper considers the current structure at the South Carolina Emergency Management Department to determine if it is the best structure for public service delivery. Part 1 of the research paper is concerned with the organizational structure as well as the processes in place. Part II examines leadership theories and practices at SCEMD and their effectiveness. Lastly, part III is an analysis of areas of concern related to leadership at SCEMD. The paper concludes with recommendations and a plan for improvement. 

Part I: Organizational Management Assessment 

The South Carolina Emergency Management Division (SCEMD) is a government-owned agency that was created to achieve specific goals which include, policy development, program management of events as regards to planning, disaster awareness, response, recovery, and to ensure continuity of operations. The organization employs over 150 employees responsible for handling different emergency operations in the state. 

SCEMD has a divisional structure. SCEMD is a division established under the Adjutant General, who is responsible for coordinating all the functions of the department (Haddow et al., 2017). The managing director is the leader of the department, and some of the responsibilities of the director include developing policies, designing state preparedness programs and maintain various operations for the division. The public manager also serves political roles such as building support for the Adjutant General, dealing with all the departmental interests, managing subdivisions and coordinating all policy matters. The manager also deals with external pressures such as dealing with the press and handling any conflicts in the organization. The divisional organizational structure is made up of several parallel teams working towards achieving a common goal. The divisions within SCEMD prepare for natural and manmade disasters to save lives and property of the residents of South Carolina. 

The divisional organizational structure has various benefits for the organization. The structure is a source of autonomy within the organization (Harrison & Lock, 2017). SCEMD was created to address the various phases of an emergency, including awareness, response, and mitigation. SCEMD has several branches (regions) under the leadership of the managing director. The divisional structure gives each department the autonomy to be in charge of its operations as the operations of the different divisional unit does not affect each other. Each divisional unit controls its resources and the projects it engages in. 

The divisional structure helps the organization in working towards achieving its mission. The mission statement for the organization is, “The South Carolina Emergency Management Division leads the state emergency management program by supporting local authorities to minimize the loss of life and property from all-hazard events.” SCEMD prepares for all emergency events and provides all the relevant information and support in case of an emergency. The divisional structure makes it possible for SCEMD to prepare for all emergencies as each department is responsible for a particular emergency and related activities. 

Divisional structure makes it possible to build a common culture and team spirit. In a divisional structure, employees together towards a common goal, unlike organizations that have different units (Burton & Obel, 2018). SCEMD employees work towards achieving a common goal; thus they share knowledge and experiences leading to improved employee morale. 

While the divisional structure is effective for SCEMD, there are significant challenges associated with the divisional organizational structure. A divisional structure does not work for organizations that have competing divisions, and it also gives room for office politics. Leaders or supervisors from different divisions might focus on their specific divisions rather than working with others to achieve a common goal (Gonos & Gallo, 2013). A divisional organizational structure can also lead to incompatibility, especially when each division focusses on its mandate and not the common organizational goal. The above challenges are not present at SCEMD; thus, the divisional organizational structure is appropriate for the organization. 

SCEMD operates under the principles of modern organizational theory. Organizational theory deals with the internal environment and human relations within the organization (Hatch, 2018). The modern organizational approach is unique from other approaches. The theory states that employees are complex and their needs are continually changing. Employees possess skills and abilities, but they are continually developing them; thus the organization should acknowledge the dynamic nature of human abilities, goals, and relationships and address them accordingly. The modern organizational theory emphasizes on an empirical examination of various organizational functions and the approaches adopted to guide day-to-day operations within an organization. The theory uses facts to analyze organizational actions empirically. 

The two main approaches to the modern organizational theory are system approach and contingency approach. The systems approach provides managers with a more natural way to view operations within the organization. The systems theory describes an organization as, “an organized collection of parts united by prescribed interactions and designed [at least ideally] for the accomplishment of a specific goal or general purpose.” (Milakovich & Gordon, 2013). The theory states that individuals behave according to inputs from the environment, the outputs obtained from the kind of inputs applied informs how the organization responds to those feedbacks. The feedback informs the further steps to take depending on the kind of results obtained. Also, the management is aware that change in one part affects other parts in the organization (Aldemir, 2018). Therefore, under the guidance of this theory, SCEMD has been able to address organizations demands most amicably. As a result, SCEMD has managed to make the company be the most trusted. 

The modern organizational theory is the right approach for SCEMD because it takes into accounts the several aspects affecting productivity and morale. Unlike other theories, the modern approach does not limit managers from using external rewards or a rigid structure; it gives managers the freedom to adjust their approaches as per organizational needs and goals. 

The chosen organizational structure and management theory help SCEMD to achieve its goals while meeting the demands of the public. The primary role of SCEMD is to provide emergency services to the public; this implies that SCEMD should be prepared all the time to handle an emergency situation as best as it can to minimize damage and loss of life (Chapman et al., 2016). SCEMD has to manage, train, and motivate employees to provide the best services. SCEMD chose the divisional structure and modern approach to create a system characterized by efficiency while maintaining flexibility regarding employee issues. 

Part 2: Leadership Evaluation 

Milakovich & Gordon (2013) give examples of the many challenges that face public administers from budgetary deficits, striking workers, bureaucracy and poor service delivery among others. Given the many challenges, public administration requires strong leaders who can manage resources well to meet all the problems. Public sector leaders rely on leadership theories to guide their actions and processes as they meet the challenges. Leadership theories provide the philosophical foundations of leadership, and it differentiates leaders from the followers. 

Leaders play a significant role in the success of the public sector, and only effective leaders will steer the organization in the right direction. Lambright & Quinn (2011) pose an essential question affecting public leadership- why do some public leaders fail and others succeed? Some public leaders are described as inept, corrupt and unable to command a following while others manage to inspire their teams and make a difference. Lambright & Quinn (2011) employ the “biographical approach” to understand what differentiates successful and unsuccessful leaders. The biographical approach explores individual leader, and the leader’s influence on others and the environment. A leader’s personality, abilities, skills, and processes affect the leader’s performance. Successful leaders have the skills, characters, and processes that attract and inspire followers. Consequently, leadership theories play an essential role in the creation of successful public administrators. 

The five types of leadership theories are great man theory, trait theory, behavioral, contingency, and transactional and transformational. Each leadership theory is unique from the other; for example, the great man theory states that leadership traits are intrinsic and that leaders are born not made. The great man theory was commonly used in19th century after influential leaders and heroes argued that they were born with traits that distinguished them from other members of the society (Guta, 2013). The great man theory is almost similar to the trait theory of leadership which argues that leaders are either born or made with certain qualities that make them good leaders (Tomazevic et al., 2015). Alternatively, behavioral leadership theory was created as a response to the trait theory. Behavioral theories offered a new perspective on leadership by focusing on the behavior of leaders as opposed to their mental, physical, and social characteristics. Behavioral theories imply that anyone is capable of being a leader as long as they adopt the right behaviors. According to Northouse (2018), behavioral theories were first classified into two categories. The first category is concerned with tasks and the second category is concerned with people. Task-oriented leaders are goal oriented, they want to achieve their goals, and they create calendars, to-do lists, and daily planners to help them accomplish tasks. Relationship-oriented leaders are still goal-oriented, but they find meaning in connecting with people, celebrating relationships and creating a dynamic team (Weinstein, 2013). In a work setting, a relationship-oriented leader is not afraid to interrupt an employee to talk about sports or the employee’s family. Relationship-oriented leaders also seek the opinion of employees when addressing a problem. 

The current leadership theory used at SCEMD is behavioral leadership theories. According to behavioral theorists, a leader’s behavior is the best predictor of the leader’s results and success. Leaders at SCEMD use either task oriented or relationship-oriented behavioral approaches to work towards achieving their goals. Aforementioned, task-oriented leaders focus on behaviors and processes within the organizational structure and the standard operating procedures (S.O.P). Task-oriented leaders at SCEMD concentrate on initiating behaviors, organizing teams and operations and clarifying roles. Task-oriented leaders also gather information in detail to help in planning and managing tasks. 

There is another class of behavioral leaders at SCEMD, the people-oriented leaders. People-oriented leaders focus on satisfying the needs of the people; they motivate staff and emphasize effective human relations. People-oriented leaders believe that they will achieve their goals if they focus on encouraging, observing, listening, coaching and mentoring (Kelis & Ran, 2013). Relationship-oriented leaders at SCEMD are quite popular among employees because they take the time to interact, listen, and mentor others. Relationship-oriented leaders are successful because they motivate employees to become the best version of their selves. 

The leadership theory also determines the leadership styles. The three leadership styles are authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire. Leaders at SCEMD use democratic leadership style founded on the principles of behavioral leadership theory (Pasha et al., 2017). Democratic leaders treat employees equally, whether they are using a task-oriented or a people-oriented approach. Democratic leaders seek employee input when making decisions because they do not want to make decisions that employees might not agree with. Leaders at SCEMD listen to employees, and they consider employee opinion before making decisions. Leaders do not apply pressure or give orders to employees without explaining the reasons behind specific actions. According to Ospina (2017), democratic leadership style has tremendous benefits to the team morale and employee motivation. When leaders use a democratic leadership style, employees do not expect to be consulted about every single decision, but leaders aim to increase employee participation in decision making. At SCEMD, teams meet with their leaders twice a week to discuss issues affecting them. Leaders take the opportunity to seek employee input about those issues and encourage them to make suggestions on how to address the issue. Democratic leaders also empower employees such that employees can work on their own without supervision. Leaders at SCEMD empower employees to make daily decisions without relying on them because employees have the necessary skills and tools to make the right choices. The leaders also encourage employees to seek their help or guidance when facing an issue they cannot solve. 

The behavioral leadership strategy is appropriate for SCEMD. Behavioral leadership theories are diverse; it gives room for task-oriented and relationship-oriented leaders because leaders are different. SCEMD reaps many benefits from using behavioral leadership theories because it reaps the benefits of both task-oriented and relationship-oriented approaches. People-oriented leaders create a highly motivated team satisfied with work, whereas task-oriented leaders tend to have highly productive teams (Judge et al., 2004). A study by Judge et al. (2004) found that in small organizations, task-oriented behaviors are more effective than in large organizations. The study also warned that organizations should not rely solely on a task-oriented approach as it can lead to employee burnout. 

Democratic leadership style is beneficial since it is associated with the concepts of participation, satisfaction, and productivity are related. Various research studies have been conducted on the importance of employee involvement, and they conclude that employees are more productive in a participative working environment (Pares et al., 2017). Another meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of democratic versus authoritarian leadership. The study found out that the most favorable leadership style for employees is democratic leadership because it gave employees more opportunities for interaction and decision making (Pares et al., 2017). 

Additionally, the democratic leadership style is right for the organization because it increases employee satisfaction, commitment, and cohesiveness (Ospina, 2017). Under Democratic leadership, there is friendliness and group-mindedness; SCEMD employees work together rather than engaging in selfish competition with each other that affects the team spirit negatively (Northouse, 2018). Democratic leaders motivate employees such that they are willing to put in the extra effort to implement ideas and policies of the leader. Northouse (2018) warns that democratic leadership in public administration takes time and commitment. At SCEMD, leaders have to engage with employees before deciding as in the case of authoritarian leadership; thus they have to be patient with employees. 

The behavioral leadership approach has many benefits to the organization, but it also has its limitations. Behavioral approaches fail to consider the environment and its effects on behavior. Behavioral theories focus on the action of the leader while neglecting external influences from the environment and followers. It is impossible for leaders to be task-oriented or relationship-oriented only because leaders work in a different context. SCEMD is an emergency prevention organization, and it has unique environmental factors that differentiate it from other organizations. Behavioral leadership approach is used alongside democratic leadership style at SCEMD. Democratic leadership encourages team spirit and motivation, but it is not applicable in all situations. It is impossible for leaders to consult employees all the time about the way forward, and in most cases, the leaders make decisions on their own. Despite their limitation, behavioral leadership theories and democratic leadership style are appropriate for the current situation at SCEMD. 

Other leadership theories such as contingency and transformational style can be applied to address some of the limitations of the current leadership approaches at SCEMD. According to Pasha et al. (2017) transformational leadership style is a relatively new style of leadership and it has the potential to transform public administration. Transformational leadership style focusses on motivating employees so that they will engage in transformational change in an organization. Transformational leadership style is guided by the four independent variables of idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. The four variables of the transformational leadership style are related to the values of public policy making and commitment to public service; thus, the leadership style will be beneficial to SCEMD. 

Transformational leadership style increases the power of a leader and the degree of the leader’s acceptance among employees. Transformational leaders are charismatic leaders who gain the trust and acceptance of employees (Caillier, 2014). Transformational leaders also devote themselves to inspiring and employee development so that employees will implement positive changes to their work processes. Public administration literature on employee motivation state that leadership style plays an important role. Transformational leaders do not focus on goals and processes, but they encourage employees to work more to achieve more and to transform the organization (Bass, 1998). Transformational leadership has many benefits that will transform SCEMD, but the implementation of transformational leadership will be an issue. Transformational leadership is often accompanied by organizational change. The general manager at SCEMD will have to make a compelling case for change and inspire other leaders and employees to accept change. The process of implementing a transformational leadership style and change takes time and resources; and yet there will be resistance to the change from individuals who are satisfied with the status quo. 

Part III: Strategies for Improvement 

Given the availability of many approaches and styles of organizational leadership, it is crucial for the organization to evaluate its leadership approaches and its role in the current state of the organization. The SWOT analysis is an evaluation tool that can uncover strengths, weaknesses, threats, and opportunities facing an organization. SWOT is a managerial and a business strategy tool used to determine the internal and external factors affecting an organization. 

SCEMD is a government-owned agency involved in policy development and initiation of programs regarding planning, disaster awareness, response, recovery, and continuity of operations. The organization has 150 employees responsible for handling various emergency operations. SCEMD has a divisional operational structure, and it applies modern organizational theory to guide its operations. Below is a SWOT analysis for SCEMD as an organization, with the main focus on leadership and the organizational structure: 

The SWOT analysis template above shows the strengths and weaknesses of the SCEMD. The divisional organizational structure is a source of autonomy within the organization (Harrison & Lock, 2017). The SCEMD was created to represent several phases of emergency management operation starting with awareness, mitigation, and response. The divisional organizational structure makes it possible to fulfill all the roles related to emergency management effectively. All the divisions are under one manager who coordinates emergency management operations in each division. The manager, supervisors, and employees at the SCEMD are committed to public service, and they work together to protect the public from any emergency. 

There are a few weaknesses are facing the SCEMD. First, the divisional structure is rigid such that it can be hard to implement change. Employees at SCEMD are assigned to different units responsible for certain activities. The units are in charge of their resources and projects. Given the high degree of autonomy and specialization, each division may see itself as a completely separate unit from the others and become concerned with its objectives instead of the objectives of the whole organization. The divisional organizational structure also encourages competition among divisions such that the divisions attempt to outdo each other rather than working towards a common goal. Additionally, since each division operates separately, the organization faces an increase in cost as each division has its budget, projects, and equipment. 

Another weakness is associated with a democratic leadership style. The several divisions that make up the SCEMD are under the control of one manager. It is impossible for the manager to involve all the employees in decision making because he has to make a lot of decisions affecting the different units. Democratic leadership can also lead to too much freedom for employees given the organizational structure. It is impossible for the manager to supervise all the employees, and some can take advantage to avoid doing their work. 

The SWOT analysis also explores some of the threats facing the SCEMD such as federal policies, bureaucracy, and resistance to change. SCEMD is a federal government agency, and it operates under the policies and regulations established by the federal government. SCEMD does not have the authority to change specific policies unless with the permission of the federal government, and the manager. Additionally, SCEMD is a government body; thus bureaucracy and resistance to change are some of the common challenges. Public sector organizations are not after profit like private sector businesses; thus the managers and employees do not see the need for change, and they can resist new leadership styles and processes aimed at improving service delivery. The divisional organizational structure also adds to the bureaucracy. 

The organization has to address the weaknesses and threats it faces if it wants to achieve its objectives. The first weakness is associated with the organizational structure. The SCEMD has the option of adopting a new structure, particularly a hybrid structure which combines a functional and a divisional structure. A hybrid organizational structure can address all the challenges associated with a divisional structure by creating a sense of unity among employees, increasing flexibility, and enabling decentralized decision making. Alternatively, the manager can appoint supervisors from each division who will be responsible for decision making and working together towards increasing efficiency, flexibility and decentralized decision making at the SCEMD. A hybrid culture is open to change because employees work closely with each other to achieve organizational goals. 

The three main threats facing the SCEMD are federal government policies, excessive bureaucracy and resistance to change. SCEMD cannot address the issue of federal government policies, but it can attempt to minimize the effects of the other threats by taking advantage of the available opportunities. The manager and supervisors at SCEMD should adopt transformational leadership strategy to change the way of doing things within the organization. Transformational leaders bring positive changes such as getting rid of the bureaucracy that slows down processes and service delivery within the agency. According to Heyler & Martin (2018), transformational leadership promotes public service by motivating employees and encouraging self-sacrifice for the greater good of the public. The SCEMD manager can also encourage teamwork and cooperation among the different divisions to enhance unity and address resistance to change. Public institutions take time to adopt a change in comparison to the private sector, but with the right structure, leadership, and teamwork, the organization will adopt change faster. The manager should take advantage of technology and modern organizational theories because they are opportunities for revolutionizing service delivery in the public sector. The modern organizational theory attempts to address all employee and customer needs as they arise rather than relying on existing rigid structures (Milakovich & Gordon, 2013). Contemporary organizational theories take into account changes in customer needs, changes in the external environment, as well as technological changes. 

In conclusion, organizational structure, leadership theories, and styles are related concepts that affect organizational success. The choice of the organizational structure depends on many factors, including the size of the organization and role and the interests of the organization. SCEMD is using a divisional organization structure because it enables the organization to meet all of its emergency preparedness roles. The divisional organizational structure is a source of specialization and autonomy for the divisions and employees at the SCEMD. There are some limitations associated with the structure such as lack of flexibility and competition among units. The SCEMD can change some aspects of the organizational structure to enhance flexibility and teamwork. The SCEMD uses modern organizational theories, mainly behavioral and contingency theories that are best suited to address the many challenges in the internal and external environment (Hayes, 2018). The theories apply to various situations within the company, while enabling SCEMD managers and employees to provide the best services. SCEMD should not limit itself to certain organizational theories, and leadership styles as the department are facing a plethora of issues. SCEMD managers should experiment with other leadership styles, particularly transformational leadership to encourage positive change in the organization. 

References 

Aldemir, C. (2018). Educational Governance in Turkey: From the view of New Public Management and New Social Movement Theories.  Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences ,  17 (2). 

Burton, R. M., & Obel, B. (2018). The science of organizational design: fit between structure and coordination.  Journal of Organization Design ,  7 (1), 5. 

Caillier, J. G. (2014). Toward a better understanding of the relationship between transformational leadership, public service motivation, mission valence, and employee performance: A preliminary study.  Public Personnel Management ,  43 (2), 218-239. 

Chapman, C., Getha ‐ Taylor, H, Holmes, M. H., Jacobson, W. S., Morse, R. S., & Sowa, J. E. (2016). how public service leadership is studied: An examination of a quarter century of scholarship.  Public Administration ,  94 (1), 111-128. 

Gonos, J., & Gallo, P. (2013). Model for leadership style evaluation.  Management: journal of contemporary management issues ,  18 (2), 157-168. 

Guţă, A. J. (2015). Analysis of the public management administration in Romania based on diagnostics and SWOT analysis.  Annals of the University of Petrosani, Economics ,  15 (1), 147-154. 

Haddow, G., Bullock, J., & Coppola, D. P. (2017).  Introduction to emergency management . Butterworth-Heinemann. 

Harrison, F., & Lock, D. (2017).  Advanced project management: a structured approach . 

Routledge. 

Hatch, M. J. (2018).  Organization theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives . 

Oxford university press. 

Hayes, J. (2018).  The theory and practice of change management . 

Heyler, S. G., & Martin, J. A. (2018). Servant Leadership Theory: Opportunities for Additional Theoretical Integration.  Journal of Managerial Issues ,  30 (2), 230. 

Kellis, D. S., & Ran, B. (2013). Modern leadership principles for public administration: time to move forward.  Journal of Public Affairs ,  13 (1), 130-141. 

Milakovich, M. E., & Gordon, G. J. (2013). Public administration in America (11th ed). 

Boston, MA: Wadsworth. 

Northouse, P. G. (2018).  Introduction to leadership: concepts and practice . SAGE. 

Ospina, S. M. (2017). Collective leadership and context in public administration: bridging public leadership research and leadership studies.  Public Administration Review ,  77 (2), 275- 287. 

Parés, M., Ospina, S. M., & Subirats, J. (Eds.). (2017).  Social Innovation and Democratic Leadership: Communities and Social Change from Below . Edward Elgar Publishing. 

Pasha, O., Poister, T. H., Wright, B. E., & Thomas, J. C. (2017). Transformational Leadership and Mission Valence of Employees: The Varying Effects by Organizational Level.  Public Performance & Management Review ,  40 (4), 722-740. 

Tomaževič, N., Tekavčič, M., & Peljhan, D. (2017). Towards excellence in public administration: Organisation theory-based performance management model.  Total Quality Management & Business Excellence ,  28 (5-6), 578-599. 

Weinstein, R. B. (2013). Servant leadership and public administration: Solving the public sector financial problems through service.  Journal of Management Policy and Practice ,  14 (3), 84-91.