Organizational Changes Aberdeen and Green River Case Study

Aberdeen’s team structure is one of open communication, where teams are encouraged to directly resolve issues as they occur, and to involve Human Resources as necessary. This allows for the team structure to council one another and to hold personal accountability within the facility for actions and behaviors, however, there is not a set monetary reward for performance within Aberdeen, teams evaluate one another’s performance and recommend raises in salary according to that evaluation.
Green River utilizes a method of management control, where upper and mid level managers are responsible for the schedules and coordination where Aberdeen holds an entire team accountable, in fact Aberdeen enlists an entire team to rely on one another’s abilities. In this method, Green River does not employ the same circular and open communication that Aberdeen fosters and expects. Communication is very lateral and quite literal in Green River’s methodology, where specific roles are unique to an individual’s level of seniority, which in turn creates a hierarchal formula where innovations from those lower on the command chains may not be communicated accordingly, or worse, innovations may be non-existent. This unilateral method of transmission between employees, management and senior staff does not in turn foster the personal responsibility and team accountability that the leadership within Aberdeen is committed to. Instead, this creates a chain of authority that removes circular contributions from employees in the facility.
The initial conclusion then is to realize that Aberdeen’s circular framework of team interdependency and responsibility enables each member to positively be connected with through interdependency and relationships (Leede and Nijhof pp 23 1999), where Green River’s employees do not share that interrelated organizations in their classical representation of an authoritarian system, of which Max Weber "recognized that the bureaucratic approach had the potential to "routinize" and mechanize almost every aspect of human life, of eroding the human spirit, and the capacity for spontaneous action" (Beulah 2005). While it would be a fallacy to say that the leadership in Green River ‘erodes the human spirit,’ it is viable to assume that that the methods of leadership in Green River do not foster innovation and accountability in the manner that Aberdeen does. At Green River, workers are removed from the managerial process, and therefore hold no emotional attachments or responsibility toward it, where at Aberdeen, workers (in teams) are part of the process and have developed these attachments, and in regards to Weber, foster spontaneous action-in this case, creativity and innovation.
The recommendation is for Green River to adapt the basic characteristics of Aberdeen, with a focus on team organizations and open communication. Teams can work at Green River, as well as the communication process of Aberdeen, but this is not a task to be taken lightly, nor will it happen overnight. Green River