Lexington Recreation and Parks Department Organizational Analysis

Organizational Context

The Lexington Recreation and Parks Department was established in 1947 for the

purpose of providing a comprehensive year-round program of recreational activities in

conjunction with outstanding parks, playgrounds, and facilities to enhance the overall

quality of life for all citizens of Lexington. Our department employs six full-time

employees with each responsible for a different area of expertise. Although a small

department, we have an abundance of character and depth but with this depth, bring

different problems and challenges.

The leadership of our department is inadequate at best. Leaders of park and

recreation departments must be driven and must have a desire for their particular

department to be successful. Employees must also be held to high standards and pushed

to be their best. Lofty, but reasonable goals must be set for them so that they have a

driven purpose each and every day. Although our department has specific goals for each

employee, there is no demand from the director of our organization to push past the goals

and to strive for something better. Our director is sedentary, stubborn, and unyielding to

change. With our department being a simple structure, not to mention we all sharing a

small building and one hallway, the director is involved in every aspect of our daily

working lives. This is the cause of extreme frustration, paranoia, and an overall

dissatisfaction among employees.

Strategic planning in our department is lacking. There is no long term, master

plan established to guide our future endeavors or the path we must take. Our department

Swicegood 1

operates on a year-to-year basis, seeing what remains at the end of one year and using

that which is left for the next. There is no strategic map to follow that actually looks to

better our department over the long run. It also seems as though our director is oblivious

to the drastically changing demographics for which we are responsible for serving. We

have kept the “status quo”, striving to reach what are deemed acceptable by leadership

but with no desire to improve. New programs have not been offered in many years and

participation continues to decline, yet there has been no attempt to change.

Our organizational culture, the politics involved, and the overall organizational

environment are somewhat discouraging and demoralizing. There are constant

communications breakdowns within our department. Our director has a tendency to keep

information to himself, causing staff to feel somewhat alienated. Being left out of the

planning process, employees feel that they are not an important and integral part of the

department as a whole, causing frustration and confusion. Organizational politics

frustrate the employees due to the continual occurrence of the director choosing to please

his friends and avoid conflict, rather do what is right and has the department’s best

interest at heart. Overall, a culture has been created which consists of a tense, deceitful

environment, coupled with accepted inactivity and a commitment to the way things are

and always have been no matter how outdated those ways may be. This culture has been

created and continues to be fostered by a director who has a narrow-minded, obstinate

approach. Strong organizational cultures are bred from a solid foundation. This

foundation must be built on solid core values, beliefs, and a unified mission that

permeates throughout the organization. Our department lacks the culture, environment,

Swicegood 2

and effectiveness to be successful with all being deficient due to the overall lack of

leadership from our director.

Perceived Organizational Problem

All organizations face challenges, in some way, shape, or form, but usually there

are a select few that pose the greatest threat to overall organizational efficiency and

effectiveness. The major challenge facing the Lexington Recreation and Parks

Department is the general disconnect between the director, employees, and the

community that we serve. Because of this challenge, a number of issues occur.

There is no “vision” for the department as a whole. My fellow co-workers and I

are constantly asking the question of “where do we go now?” The way that our

department has operated in the past and how it continues to operate in the present is no

longer feasible. We have no set master plan or a list of progressive steps to follow that

will present the opportunity for our department to evolve with the changing landscape

around us.

Disconnect also creates a lack of communication within our organization and

prevents us from effectively communicating with the community that we serve. There is

no clear direction for employees from the director. Employees have no real set goals or

objectives to reach that are mandated by their director. With a department of only six

people, it should be fairly easy for employees to know their exact role and the desired

path that the Director would like for them to be following.

This causes an overlap and regular redundancy of duties within our organization.

Due to the lack of definition in roles, there is a constant overlap in duties and

Swicegood 3

responsibilities which have employees stepping on each other toes, causing internal

tension and unwanted stress. Employees are often left in-fighting for resources because

of a lack of leadership. There is a scarcity of resources due to tough economic times,

including limited budget, overcrowded facilities, and support staff that are stretched to

the limit. Employees are left fighting for what they think they deem necessary for their

particular area with no supervision from their director. This causes further internal

conflict within the department.

The lack of communication ultimately leads to a lack of interaction with the

general public and community we are meant to serve. The public that we serve has no

real input into what our department executes other than what is passed thru word of

mouth. There needs to be a connection between our director, the department and the

community to facilitate information transfer which will allow us to meet their wants and

needs.

The director, with disconnect from his employees and the surrounding

community, is stubbornly resistant to change in most, if not all aspect of our operation.

Set in the “old ways from the old days,” our director and in turn our department

extremely reliant and connected to the past methods and practices, with no desire to adapt

and change. The director believes the way he has accomplished things in the past is the

best way to in the present, although everyone else in the department would like to try

various, more updated methods. The community and population that we serve have

changed drastically in the past decade but we have yet to adapt to their needs and wants.

Our demographics are radically different from what they were even five years ago. The

programs that we offer should change along with the community we serve, yet despite

Swicegood 4

decline in numbers and overall dissatisfaction within the community, we continue to offer

the same basic programs and events we have offered for the past decade.

Problem Analysis

The general disconnect between the Director, employees, and the community that we

serve can be attributed to a number of factors. One problem may lie in the configuration

of our department. With being a small department, we operate in what Bolman and Deal

reference as a “one-boss arrangement”. (2008, p 103) Information should ideally flow

from the top, with departmental employees communicating more directly with the

Director more so than with each other. This structure should be efficient and fast given

our relative small department size of six people. Our director lacks the necessary strong

leadership skills which ultimately results in him becoming overloaded and stressed. This

in turn produces bad decisions or no decisions at all. The employees quickly become

frustrated because they are given no direction, late information, and are left to decipher

different situations alone.

To expand on leadership skills, or the lack there of, there is no vision for the

immediate present, much less the future of our organization. Kouzes and Posner mention

that “leaders should be forward-thinking individuals; they must try and envision the

future. They must plan ahead, look for funding in other places, or maybe move in a

different direction to differentiate ourselves from competitors”. (2007, p 14) There is no

connection between the small planning process that we may have and actual

implementation. The director may have an idea or buy into a certain plan, but has little to

no communication with his employees who are the ones responsible for the actual

Swicegood 5

execution and implementation of the plan and its details. The employees often have no

input into the planning process and for the most part are kept in the dark. The only part

of the process they see is the end results after their “leader” has developed the plan and

presents it to them. A good leader must involve those who will be implementing the plan

in the actual planning process so that everyone is on the same page and will know what to

expect.

The department also has a poor alignment with our external environment due to

poor leadership. We are no longer a mission-centered organization which is again due to

a lack of strong leadership in our department. As Hopkins and Hyde state, some

“leadership has shifted from a mission-centered focus to a resource-driven focus, and the

leadership is internally oriented, with comparatively little attention paid to the external

environment”. (2007, p 4) Our director is so focused on budgetary constraints, low

resources, and his own personal image, that he completely ignores what has happened

outside of our doors. The population that we serve has dramatically changed and so

should our programs along with it but this is not the case. Opportunities that should have

been sought after, which may have created funding and provided resources, have been

missed. The problem has also lent itself toward creating a culture within our department.

I would describe the culture of the department as a tense environment full of frustration,

paranoia, and the acceptance of inactivity and a commitment to the way things are and

always have been no matter how outdated those ways may be. There is no drive to adapt

to the changing landscape of the community that we serve.

Swicegood 6

Solution & Prognosis

In order to combat our organizational problem of general disconnect between the

three parts involved, we will look to restructure our department through application of

Bolman and Deal’s four frames approach.

The first of the four frames is the structural frame. The structural frame “focuses

on the architecture of an organization – the design of units and subunits, rules and roles,

goals and policies. It helps to organize and structure groups and teams to get results”.

(Bolman & Deal, 2008) Our department would be classified by Mintzberg as a simple

structure, with one person, our Director, trying to accomplish coordination of function

through direct supervision and oversight. The problem with this structure, as Bolman and

Deal state, is that sometimes, as in our case, a “boss too close to day-to-day operations is

easily distracted by immediate problems, neglecting long-range strategic issues”. (2008, p

80) Our department would be better served by operating in what Helgeson called a web

of inclusion organizational architectural form. The web of inclusion model would have

our director at the center of our organization, openly asking for input from each

employee. The director would emphasize accessibility and equality for the staff,

fostering communication between everyone. To accomplish this task, the director will

organize weekly meetings for the entire staff. At these meetings, important information

will be transmitted to the employees. These meetings will be used to set departmental

goals while also providing the opportunity for the generation of new ideas. Employees

will be able to air grievances and any concerns they may have. The director will also be

able to provide updates on any planning issues that concern the recreation and parks

department. Also, monthly meetings will be held between our department and the

Swicegood 7

community that we serve. These meetings will allow our department to transmit

information to our patrons while also providing them with a chance to have a voice in our

affairs and a forum to express their particular concerns, ideas, wants, and needs.

The human resources frame “emphasizes understanding people, their strengths

and foibles, reason and emotion, desires and fears. It helps to tailor organizations to

satisfy human needs, improve human resource management, and build positive

interpersonal and group dynamics”. (Bolman & Deal, 2008) By applying this frame,

our director will be able to empower his employees. This can be done through providing

information and support to his employees. The director can also redesign work

responsibilities among each employee. The employees will be required to deliberately

cross-train with all other employees which will help to foster communication and

understanding of others’ roles. This will allow employees to see what the other

accomplishes on a day-to-day basis while also seeing how other areas of the department

operate. This cross-training will create mutual respect among each employee. The

director should also promote egalitarianism within the organization. Egalitarianism

implies “a democratic workplace where employees participate in decision making”.

(Bolman & Deal, 2008) Employees will feel as if they are part of the bigger picture

which may give them a sense of pride and belonging as well as help promote teamwork

between staff members. Also, if any extra funds are available, they should be set aside to

allow for employees to better themselves through training and continuing education.

The political frame sees organizations as competitive arenas of scare resources,

competing interests, and struggles for power and advantage. It helps to cope with power

and conflict, build coalitions, hone political skills, and deal with internal and external

Swicegood 8

politics”. (Bolman & Deal, 2008) Organizations can face a myriad of political obstacles,

including internal struggle between staff and external struggles with other organizations.

Bolman and Deal state that “the political frame stresses that the combination of scarce

resources and divergent interests produces conflict as sure as night follows day”. (2008, p

206). This statement can be applied to both internal and external issues. To alleviate

internal issues, the director should foster cooperation between employees and explain

departmental resource management. The director will closely monitor actions of

employees and navigate the different personalities of the department. He will also

explain the scarcity of resources, including but not limited to low funding, limited

facilities, and a small support staff. He will show each employee that these scarce

resources belong to the department as a whole, not individuals and their specific area of

interest. The director will also develop relevant relationships and possible partnerships

with outside organizations in our community. These partnerships with other local

organizations, some even possible competitors, will present opportunities to our

department that would otherwise be unavailable. These partnerships will relieve political

tensions between diverse groups in our community, foster good will toward our

department, and also provide possible funding, needed facilities, and the generation of

new, collaborative ideas. The director will also meet regularly with the City Manager

and Assistant City Manager, without attendance of City Council and other department

heads, to explain in detail the overall needs of our department. These meetings will be

informal discussions without the pressure and time constraints of other meetings they

may have. They will be in a relaxed setting, allowing a freer flowing stream of

information while also allowing true opinions to be stated.

Swicegood 9

The symbolic frame “focuses on issues of meaning and faith. It puts ritual,

ceremony, story, play, and culture at the heart of organizational life. It also helps shape

a culture that gives purpose and meaning to work, stage organizational drams for external

and internal audiences, and builds team spirit through that ritual, ceremony, and story”.

(Bolman & Deal, 2008) With our department having no clear vision, our director must

instill that vision through a set of values that define who our department is and who we

will be. The director must determine the mission and vision that our department will

have going forward. This mission will guide our decisions and direct where our

resources are allocated. Employees should also be given the opportunity to express what

they believe our departmental purpose is and what core mission we will hold. The

employees will give their respective input as a team building exercise. The formation of

the mission and vision will be a collaborative effort among all parts of the organization.

Employees will also be given the opportunity to express their feelings on where the

department has come from and the past successes that it has achieved. To know where

the department is going, it must first know where it has been. Employees should also be

recognized regularly for any achievements they may have, with their names printed in the

local paper and information posted in the departmental office. Any positive press for the

department should also be posted and highlighted to show the positives that we may

already possess.

Prospecting the Future

Reframing and reorganization are critical for the survival of the Lexington

Recreation and Parks Department. Looking at the 2010 census data for our City, the

Swicegood 10

population of the city has fallen significantly since the last census, classifying Lexington

as a dying city. With the drop of population to fewer than 20,000, the city is in danger of

losing critical federal funding that is essential to the city’s general fund. With budgets

already constrained, the city as a whole cannot tolerate a significant loss in revenue.

This, in turn, means less allocation to the Recreation and Parks Department overall

budget. Less funding from the city’s general fund will also be coupled with diminished

opportunities for securing other funds, such as grant money and fundraising. With nearly

every recreation department in North Carolina and throughout the United States facing

similar budget shortfalls, the competition for grant funding will be at an all time high.

Our department may not even be eligible for many grants due to our dwindling

population. Well over half of the dwellings in Lexington are rental properties, signifying

that the population base that we serve is predominately low-income meaning that we will

be unable to charge user fees to generate revenue. The leadership of our City is not big

proponents of recreation, viewing our department as expendable. All in all, the present

outlook of the City of Lexington and more importantly the Recreation and Parks

Department, is bleak at best. However, with this said, the future outlook may be

promising given we take the necessary steps to better our current situation. Specifically,

our department has and must continue to develop partnerships with other community

organizations and civic groups. Partnerships with organizations such as the YMCA, City

School System, and the County Recreation Department are no longer an idea, but a

necessity. All organizations will benefit from one another in some way, shape, or form.

Each organization is also facing a similar situation to that of our department, so

partnerships will be essential. Another event which holds promise is the upcoming

Swicegood 11

elections of the City. The leadership in place now has been in place for nearly 15 years.

During these 15 years, our City has seen the disappearance of nearly all manufacturing

and textile employment and poor recruitment efforts to replace what was lost. The new

elections will almost certainly bring in new leadership as some of the old leadership is

not even running for reelection I believe that with this new leadership, there will be a

drastic change in the leadership structure of the City as whole which may trickle down to

each department. New leadership will bring fresh ideas and new perspective. I believe

more will be demanded of each department and its’ leadership. For our department

specifically, that means the status quo position that we have possessed for so long will no

longer tolerated. Improvement and performance will be requirements or new leadership

will be brought in that will perform up to expectations.

As said above, these ever-changing, difficult times will force our department to

adapt or face the possibility of extinction. The development of new revenue streams,

community partnerships, and a reframing will be vital to future success. Failure to

acclimate to the present and future environment can bring disaster but if our department

can follow the aforementioned management actions, we will flourish. As stated by

Bolman and Deal, “when the world seems hopelessly confusing and nothing is working,

reframing is a powerful tool for gaining clarity, regaining balance, generating new

options, and find strategies that make a difference”. (2008, p 22)

Swicegood 12

References

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing organizations

Hopkins, K. M., & Hyde, C. (2002). The human service managerial dilemma: New expectations, chronic challenges, and old solutions. Administration in Social Work, 26(3), 1-13.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2007). The leadership challenge

Swicegood 13