My organization originated in 1981 about seven years before
I was born and started with only thirteen original pioneers. The Guam Army
National Guard today has over one thousand soldiers to include Airmen who share
the Guam National Guard organization. From thirteen people in 1981 to over a
thousand today the growth of my organization has come a long way. We started
with only half an acre of land for the headquarters unit in 1981 to over 4
acres of land for growth and development for our new and incoming units. The
strategy in expanding the organization to a self-sustaining entity came through
visions from leaders from the past to present. The vision in expanding our
infrastructure, our personnel, training capabilities, and forward deployments
abroad. Hamel (1998) discusses five preconditions for the emergence of
strategy, which are, “new voices, new perspectives, new passions, new
conversations, and new experiments.” (p. 14) All five preconditions in some way
took part in where my organization is at today.
The one thing that I believe for the evolvement in my
organization is continuity. The continuity of the ideas of where my leaders in
the past and present had instilled a vision to see our organization grow from
1981 to 2016 and beyond where we will be able to be a force multiplier (meaning
we can sustain our own units with resources and training) and having our own
infrastructure like our sister units in active duty. Porter (1996) states that
“Continuity fosters improvements in individual activities and the fit across
activities, allowing an organization to build unique capabilities and skills
tailored to its strategy.” (p. 74)
When my organization first started it began with an active
duty general officer giving guidance to our pioneers. So the feedback began as
Oblensky (2010) shared about a “Transition to bubble/bubble.” So in a way we
went in reverse going from a Transition to bubble/bubble to a Matrix
transition. Because we were such a young organization outside advisors were
given to us at the beginning. Today, we self-sustain ourselves to a Functional
feedback system at a 90 degree.
Our strategy development evolved as Oblensky (2010) stated
into the “traditional view that those from the top formulate strategy and
direct those below.” (p.820) Our hierarchy structure in the military has
remained the same for years. It is a one dimensional type of organization with
“recommendations” from those at the bottom as the closest involvement in the
decision making process. However, I believe that we are entering (at least my
organization) into a “transition towards matrix.”
In 10 years I will most likely be at the mid-range of
ranking to possibly at the top of our organization. I see my organization
moving to a more complete unit. What I mean by that we are self-sustaining our
training, our resources, our personnel, communication, and all other
requirements needed to act as an active duty unit. That to me will be the
ultimate goal, it will save us money and pump more money in our organization as
it will put us on the map as a training ground for other units to use. I look
forward to this day as this is the ultimate goal for my organization and I
definitely would want to take part in the strategic output of it all.
References:
Hamel, G. (1998, Winter98). Strategy Innovation and the
Quest for Value. (Links to an external site.) Sloan Management Review. pp.
7-14.
Obolensky, N. (2010). Complex adaptive leadership. (20nd
edition.). London, UK: Gower/Ashgate
Porter, M. E. (1996). What Is Strategy? Harvard Business
Review, 74(6), 61-78.
No comments:
Post a Comment