ORGANIZATIONS AS FAMILIES

Comparison of an organization with a family is viable where in both there are ‘Heads’ and ‘Subjects’, where parents are bosses and children are employees.  To have a stress free family/organization, the relationship between Heads and Subjects must be handled with care.  The rules have to be agreed upon and abide by all.  There also has to be a high degree of trust.  Above all there must be an interest on the part of the Head in the Subjects and some loyalty to the Head on the part of the Subject.

In a family, the interest is based on affection and responsibility.  Like parents, helping their children learning from mistakes made, reprimand and explain rather than punish when their children break rules, and take pride in their achievement.

There also exist obvious differences between organization and families.  For a start, organizations are actually bigger and they produce products and services.  Producing products and services can be done within a short period whereas producing adults is a long and slow process.  An organization starts with relatively mature subjects, while families start from zero.

Comparison between the two is useful when we look at the way the Subjects are handled.  Some of it is:

Organizations	Families
Regarded by Heads as need to be maintained in order to be working efficiently but not worth the attention otherwise. Meaning: Strict discipline Emphasis on production Subordination to the system Penalties or reprimand for errors	Regarded by Heads with love, interest and responsibility. Meaning: Get to know Help to develop Love and care for them Explain and guide

A workforce that knows the boss cares will exhibit far more loyalty, work much better and generate productive ideas.  Remember, for every success there are dozens of failures.  It is much easier to follow good examples.  Being human at work is the essential key to good management.

SHARED FROM:

Maurice B. Line (2004), “Management Musings 18: Organizations as families, happy or otherwise”, Library Management, Vol. 25 Iss: 6 pp. 316-317