Taronga Zoo- Operations Audit

Taronga Zoo

Operations

Audit Matthew Pearce

MatthewPearce

2|P a g e

Executive Summary This is an audit report reviewing organisational practices of Sydney tourism centre Taronga

Zoo referred to as ‘TZ’. TZ is a State Government Agency reporting to the Office of

Environment and Heritage. TZ can be classed as a major tourism organisation, while also a

central conservation institution both locally and internationally.

The objective of this report was to determine the reasons why TZ has experienced stagnation

in growth figures over the last six years and offer proposals as to whether changes could be

made to the current organisational structure to improve efficiency and effectiveness of

operations. The review also looked to identify challenges and opportunities for TZ into the

future.

Data was collected via a pool of 20 questionnaires from differing levels of staff. The initial

data was analysed and relevant themes were further explored via interviews. A thematic

analysis was completed post each interview to further examine the commonality of findings.

Questionnaire results displayed some salient points linked to management styles, rules and

procedural frustrations, and overall communications and integrations across differing

departments. Across the whole organisation there seemed to be a lack of understanding of

wider organisational impacts linked to change.

The interviews were used to inform further reviews of the company. From the data analysed

the following topics are discussed in line with theoretical implications:

• Institutional Bureaucracy

• Applications of Critical Management

• Organisational Dynamic Capabilities

The themes identified were negative effects of bureaucracy calling for recommendations of:

• Introducing 360 Degree Meetings

• Undertaking a full organisation wide operations audit

• Streamlining TZ Processes and Procedures

• Encouraging greater interaction between the various tiers of TZ

• Implementing a learning through mentoring programme

MatthewPearce

3|P a g e

Table of Contents

1. Introduction and Organisation Background....................................................................................4

2. Methodology...................................................................................................................................5

3. Data Analysis..................................................................................................................................7

3.1. Employee survey..........................................................................................................................7

3.2. Management Interview................................................................................................................8

4. Findings and Theoretical Application.............................................................................................9

4.1. Institutional Bureaucracy.......................................................................................................10

4.2. Applications of Critical Management....................................................................................12

4.3. Organisational Dynamic Capabilities.....................................................................................14

5. Conclusion....................................................................................................................................17

6. Reference List...............................................................................................................................18

7. Appendices....................................................................................................................................20

7.1. Appendix A: TZ 2012/13 Annual report................................................................................20

7.2. Appendix B: Graphs..............................................................................................................25

7.3. Appendix C: Questionnaire Table Analysis...........................................................................29

7.4. Appendix D: Interview Questions..........................................................................................33

7.5. Appendix E: Interview Analysis............................................................................................35

MatthewPearce

4|P a g e

1. Introduction and Organisation Background

TZ is a State Government Agency reporting to Office of Environment and Heritage and the

associated minister. TZ is a major tourism centre, while also maintaining a central

conservation role within the state government and internationally.

Operating out of two major state sites, TZ is organised into six central divisions each

covering Commercial Services, Marketing and Fundraising, Capital Works and

Infrastructure, Life Sciences, Research and Conservation, People and Learning and Second

Site Management. Each division has a general manager who is also a member of the seven-

person senior leadership team including the organisation’s chief executive officer. This board

in turn reports to a central trust governance board responsible to the Minster for Environment

and Heritage.

Established in 1916, TZ is a highly specialised organisation within a niche market in the

highly competitive Australian tourism industry. Expert employees have very little flexibility

with regards to movement within the industry and tend to be long term employed. Over the

last six years TZ has had a somewhat disjointed performance record within the industry. In

the 2012/13 financial year it completed its 12-year $221m redevelopment project (See

Appendix A). However, TZ has experienced challenges to its overall performance within the

tourism industry:

• A stagnation of visitor numbers over the last six-year period with only 6.9% growth in

the period of 2006-2013 (Appendix A: 2012/13 Annual Report).

• Shrinking revenue base over the same period resulting in much less capital

expenditure and upgrades to its facilities and support for its central conservation

mission (Appendix A: 2012/13 Annual Report).

The objective of this report is to determine the reasons for this stagnation in growth figures

both in visitations and financials over the last six years and whether changes can be made to

the current organisational structure to improve efficiency and effectiveness of operations.

Whereby our goal is to analyse the underlying challenges and opportunities for TZ into the

future.

MatthewPearce

5|P a g e

2. Methodology

In order to get a complete and representative picture of the organisation’s management and

operational structure, this study has used primary data collected through both a quantitative

questionnaire and a qualitative interview. The report has focused on one department directly

responsible for Research and Conservation as quoted in the introduction. This department

consisted of one General Manager and 55 employees.

The questionnaire was the basis of our primary research and consisted of 31 questions given

to all the employees within the work group. The employee survey was built around four

broad areas:

1. Organisational Communication

2. Organisational Leadership

3. Organisational Dynamics

4. Organisational Structure

Of the 55 possible respondents, 20 completed the survey, which is a response rate of 36 per

cent. The results from the questionnaire were analysed and common response pattern

identified

The group conducted a series of four (4) interviews with the General Manager (GM). This

was based on the findings from the quantitative research and in-depth questions were

designed (Appendix B: Questionnaire Summary Graphs) and focused on:

• The core competencies and capabilities of the organisation.

• The major management challenges and opportunities facing the organisation over the

next five years.

• The initiatives being put in place to address these challenges and

• Opportunities and an assessment of how effective they are

A complete analysis was developed post interview to further examine the commonality of

findings

MatthewPearce

6|P a g e

To provide meaningful advice to TZ, data collected from the surveys and interview were

further combined with relevant academic literature using the triangulation method (figure 1)

thereby providing TZ with a comprehensive report and recommendations:

Figure1:Triangulationmethod

Analysis

Analysis of the research will form the

core of the reports findings and

subsequent recommendations.

The primary function of the analysis is to

identify the key issues to be discussed in

the evaluation from which

recommendations can be drawn.

MatthewPearce

7|P a g e

3. Data Analysis

3.1. Employee survey Regarding the organisational communication, the most common communication form was

face to face, followed by emails and then meetings, which are also stated as the top three

most effective forms. 85% of the respondents agreed that the mission statement is

communicated effectively to them, however only 65% felt that the organisation achieved its

mission of this 70% felt they were connected to the mission and there was no conflict

between the stated mission and operations. This indicates that the mission of TZ is clearly

communicated to the employees, although there is lower agreement as to whether it achieves

its stated mission.

The data collected from the survey gave indications of an effective leadership style on the

meso level. All participants rated their leader as either ‘very approachable’ or ‘approachable’

(90% and 10%). Also, they trust their manager’s judgement capability and evaluate

managers’ communication as effective (90%). It was shown that 65% think that the

organisation always listens to employee’s suggestions when making decisions. 60% of the

respondents described the communication as effective. The results from the survey showed

that the organisation relies on KPIs. This indicates that it is an outcome driven organisation

(Appendix B). Overall the data collected from the survey shows that the leadership within the

division is effective, although it is mixed thoughts about how much the organisation is

listening to the employees when making decisions.

There is a good cooperation between the different departments, they are generally very open

to share information with each other and there is a low level of competition between them.

Regarding the cooperation between departments, 80% claimed that there is high cooperation

on a meso level (Appendix B).

The organisational structure can be described as predominantly top down and formal (60%).

This is further enhanced by the fact that most respondents felt the organisation was structured

either by function (65%) or service (25%). When asked if their teams worked well together,

65% of participants felt the team worked well together (see Appendix B). To sum up, the

organisational culture can be described as mixed. Formal lines of control prevent complete

MatthewPearce

8|P a g e

organisational collaboration; smaller teams themselves are also mixed as to whether there are

good working relationships between employees.

Even though the organisation has just finished 10-year development plan, 40% of the

respondents didn’t feel like there was any change emerging within the organisation. This lack

of understanding brings us to one of our core findings within the questionnaire. Large

portions of the respondent’s feel they do not have enough resources to complete their duties

according to expectations. This suggests varied organisational trust. Through the initial

research we have discovered that there may be a conflict between the tourism and

conservation purpose of the organisation following recent changes.

3.2. Management Interview Through the interview, important findings from the survey become stronger as it was

confirmed and supported by the GM. The interview proved that the employees communicate

very well with their manager but the communication to employees from the top tier of the

organisation is disjointed and one directional. However, the GM admits that there are times

he has to put his own work on hold in order to mediate friction that has occurred amongst

employees (Appendix E).

Although the interviewee gave evidence of an organisation with positive characteristics, he

did note the following challenges:

• He finds weakness within his micro level managers and their soft management skills

• Procedures and processes within TZ are convoluted and constricting and need

streamlining

• There is very little room for personal growth for all employees

• Lower level employees don’t feel like they are a vital component within the

organisation

MatthewPearce

9|P a g e

4. Findings and Theoretical Application

The organisation of TZ is a top down hierarchal structure, where teams are designed by

function of service. Figure 2 illustrates a high level view of the organisational chart of TZ.

Information is channelled from the Board at the top and filtered through each level until it

reaches the employees (k) at the bottom of the chart as need to know information.

Figure 2: TZ Organisational Flow Chart

A hierarchal structure provides the board with a complete picture of the organisation’s flow

(Frew, 2009) and enforcers’ stability and formality through routine (Reihlen, 1996). Through

clear ‘decision-making chains, rules and responsibilities,’ (Lee 2013, p. 191) the hierarchy

structure is theorised to ensure efficiency within an organisation. The formalised top-down

structure acts as a vertical information channel that, ‘allows efficient information processing,’

(Reihlen, 1996, p. 6) within departments. The departments, which are controlled by a

supervisor, allow accountability for individual action and limit the damage a single individual

can do to the organisation by buffering communication channels with external entities that

management usually engage (Romme, 1995). This structure creates a highly specialised job

role for the individual staff member, as they require specific skill sets and knowledge that are

not readily transferable between departments. These buffers defend the organisation from

internal dissent (Lee 2013) through frameworks that reinforce routine, consistency and

stability to satisfy an organisational need (Romme, 1995). However this tight organisational

structure has created a bureaucratic environment where employees feel the rules and

regulations are restrictive (Appendix C).

MatthewPearce

10|P a g e

4.1. Institutional Bureaucracy

Rules and regulations that create a sense of restriction amongst employees are best explained

by Dacin, Munir and Tracy’s (2010) view on institutional theory. Institutional theory is the

most common business perspective used to help explain and understand organisational

culture and beliefs confined within the stability of hierarchies.

TZ’s hierarchical structure causes information within the organisation to be modified to

degrees of abstraction for upper management and lower tiered employees (Appendix C).

Information separation at different tiers of the hierarchy makes decision making within the

organisation bureaucratic (Reihlen, 1996). Hodgson (2004) describes bureaucracy as paper-

driven, inflexible and inefficient, which, is the stereotypical structure of government

organisations.

TZ’s mimicking of government processes and procedures is not suited to their overall

strategic mission of conservation (Appendix C). TZ’s current bureaucratic process not only

wastes time and resources, but also decreases the productivity of the organisation (Ludwig &

Pemberton, 2011). There are many examples in TZ where bureaucracy has limited its ability

to perform at an optimum level. We can summarise these into 4 areas:

1. Tender Process - As it stands the tender process is both inefficient and expensive

sometimes costing TZ ten times more than its private competitors to develop new

attractions.

2. Complicated Internal Procedures - These are slow paper-driven procedures that need to

be followed to perform simple tasks. For example if an employee needed use their own

car to go the local hardware store for material they need to apply through two levels of

approvals from their supervisor and leadership team member (Appendix E). Additionally

any maintenance applications within the park need to first be applied to online then be

passed through the two department heads of capital works and site management before

work is finally conducted.

MatthewPearce

11|P a g e

3. Convoluted Policy Structure - As it stands TZ has 45 policy and procedures, one Code

of Conduct and a separate set of OH & S rules. This makes operating within the

organisation complicated and inefficient.

4. Loss of Phronesis - As a side effect of the complicated internal procedures and

convoluted policy structures there is a loss of phronesis with in TZ’s bureaucratic

organisation. Most employees of TZ have been with the organisation for an average of 5-

10 years acquiring high amounts of Phronesis. However, this knowledge and wisdom is

not transferred up the tiers as input for upper managerial decisions.

Recommendations

• Streamline TZ Processes

It is recommended that TZ management should look at consolidating their procedures and

streamlining their processes into one overriding operations manual. As it stands TZ’s

institutional top down bureaucratic processes limits the ability for employees especially on

the lower tiers of the organisation to operate efficiently.

It is not our recommendation to completely change TZ’s hierarchal structure. The day-to-day

operations at TZ, requires a top-down hierarchical approach, to enforce safety protocol,

stability and formality (Reihlen, 1996). However, in regards to decision making TZ

management need to create a communications channel that allows a bottom up approach.

Employees, feel ‘TZ management should look at consolidating their procedures and stream

lining their processes’ (Appendix C). In order to streamline process, TZ first needs to

consider resource reorganisation that is; flat-lining tier approvals for smaller activities, which

will allow for strategic flexibility (Ludwig and Pemberton, 2011).

• 360 Degree Group Meetings

TZ needs to consider implementing aspects of neo-institutional theory, which explores

employee phronesis (Dacin et al., 2010). Spelthann & Haunschild (2011) identify that

phronesis is not transferable into documents but best communicated through Fieldman’s

(1976) contingency theory of socialisation. Fieldman’s (1976) theory describes social

encounters with other employees as ‘the main source of creativity, inspiration and working

morale’ (Spelthann & Haunschild, 2011, p. 105). 360-degree group meetings involve

MatthewPearce

12|P a g e

feedback from multiple stakeholders including immediate colleagues, supervisors, senior

management as well as members of other departments (Luthans et al., 2003). This currently is

a common practice at the management level in TZ through ‘Work-In-Progress’ meetings

(Appendix E). 360-degree meetings is an effective tool to create a relaxed social environment

in which employees can share their knowledge, wisdom, thoughts. Furthermore, 360-degree

meetings create the communication avenues for lower tiered employees to engage upper

management directly (Luthans et al., 2003).

4.2. Applications of Critical Management

Critical Management Studies (CMS) seeks to challenge traditional assumptions of power,

accountability, hegemony and ideology within the workplace. According to Fournier and

Grey (2000) management needs to start to view an organisation through the lens

epistemology studies and as such needs to constantly revaluate and critically examine what is

considered good operations and practice. In TZ’s case this revolves around upper

management’s lack of engagement and support of their lower tiered employees.

Because TZ is a government organisation it does run the risk of being labelled a controlling

environment causing disempowered and undervalued feeling amongst employees. In fact,

according to the questionnaire results (Appendix B) TZ is currently experiencing a high level

of dissatisfaction amongst its employees, with 40% responding that management does not

support and promote their development and organisational learning. In addition 30% of

respondents felt they were unable to achieve the mission of the organisation due to lack of

resources. Interviews with management identified further a lack of connectivity between

upper levels of power, contributing to a large impact in employee dissatisfaction. Interview

with the GM also confirmed that there is a lack of learning within the lower supervisor roles.

It was identified that central decisions are often made at the board level and are

communicated down to the lower tiers without any significant employee input, reflexivity

and questioning. As such the application of CMS questions TZ’s management alignment

between, ‘knowledge, truth and efficiency’ (Fournier & Grey 2000, p. 17) and whether this is

challenged. Survey results from employees in TZ concluded that there was a mixed view on

whether individuals in the lower level of the hierarchy play a significant part in the overall

decision-making process (Appendix C). Additionally ideas generated by lower tiered

employees, who are the face of the organisation, must flow through four layers of

MatthewPearce

13|P a g e

management before they reach decision-making authorities (Appendix E). Danneel’s (2008)

identified that communication that moves through multiple channels is damaging to the

organisation and results in high power distance and reduces employees commitment to the

work they carry out within the organisation, known as low mutual influence (Feldman, 1976).

Consequently employees feel they have no avenue to raise their concerns or ideas to the

senior management directly (Winterich & Yinlong, 2014) and feel that this does not reflect

due process.

One of the key concerns when using the lens of Critical Management Theory to critique an

organisation is whether or not that organisation takes into consideration the long-term

impacts on not only individuals but also globally. CMS does not take mainstream

management theories and practices at face value (Foster & Wiebe, 2011). As such TZ must

question whether a government model of operations is right for their organisation.

Recommendations

• Training at the lower supervisor levels

Training supervisors at the lower level with soft management skills will remove the current

overload on upper management (Heckman & Kautz 2012). This will allow supervisors to

effectively communicate and manage conflict and issues in a more informal capacity, saving

on more formal processes within upper management.

• Senior management and lower tier interaction

The presence of power distance and the low level of employee mutual distance can be

mitigated by greater interaction between senior management and lower level employees. This

in turn allows senior management to gain more perspective and insight into the everyday

operations and actions of employees consequently decreasing power distance within the

organisation. Because of this increased interaction, future decisions made by top management

will naturally take into account new viewpoints from a wider range of stakeholders

(Winterich & Yinlong, 2014).

• Implement an Operations Audit

The aim of this audit would be to apply CMS practice to the operations and structure of TZ

and whether reflecting a standard government organisation is what is most effective. Thereby

MatthewPearce

14|P a g e

the goal would be to ‘uncover alternatives that have been effaced (previously) by

management knowledge and practice.’ (Fournier & Grey 2000, p. 18)

4.3. Organisational Dynamic Capabilities

Teece defines Dynamic Capabilities as the firm’s ability to adapt to rapidly changing

business environments (Teece et al., 1997). In the case of TZ, due to the lack of growth

results, it could be considered that TZ are finding it difficult to align or re-align with the

changing business environment in which they are operating. This may be partially due to the

two competing core goals of trying to achieve revenue growth whilst promoting and being

conservationist.

Dynamic Capabilities theory is focused on how companies can maintain their performance to

ensure competitive survival (Katkalo et al., 2010). It can be considered that TZ possesses all

attributes of Valuable, Rare, Imitable, and Non-Substitutable (VRIN) resources within the

various Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) that they employ. The attractiveness of TZ as a

world-renowned institute within conservation should help it maintain its capability standards

and attract top SMEs. It could be viewed that given TZ has such a wealth of SMEs, this

should be valued and understood as a key asset and that some of their less than successful

business results may not be associated with these key assets rather how they balance other

costings or ventures.

Dynamic Capabilities theory suggests that the responsibility of achieving agility is placed at

the senior managers remit and that it is these individuals that need to change their existing

operating models and mindsets to achieve realignment (Teece et al., 1997). Whilst the data

gathered was focused on mid level managers and front line staff, the responses from these

individuals suggested that senior management or the influence of a government entity makes

agility difficult to infiltrate through to day to day operations.

The processes established and enforced by TZ, create a complex and difficult environment,

which impedes any operational innovations. Convoluted procedures, induced by the nature of

TZ being governed by State Government Agency, make any initiatives cost prohibitive and

slow to adopt. Linked to the lack of resource allocation efficiencies, feedback from frontline

staff suggests that they are not empowered to be able to reallocate resources based on

MatthewPearce

15|P a g e

changing requirements. This inability for the staff to provide guidance on changing demands

can make the company less agile in recognising where resource improvements can be made.

Therefore, the lack of organisational dynamics within TZ can be summed up in key 2 areas:

1. Lack of Critical Assessment Programmes – There is evidence that within TZ that

assessment meetings are used predominantly to justify programmes and their resource

allocation rather than critically assess them (Appendix E). This shows a lack of

Dynamic Capabilities as management too infrequently questions whether they are

using their VRIN resources (i.e. front line employees) at an optimum level.

2. Departmental Connectivity – Additionally the lack of connectivity between the

departments and between the levels of management is further enhancing

organisational disconnect. This in turn leads to a lack of efficiency and effectiveness

in transferring SMEs across different programme thereby allowing top use of

resources.

Recommendations

• 360 Degree Group Meetings

TZ is in this instance missing the link in communication from the frontline staff back to top

management. We recommend for the communication channel to be established, so the

knowledge of SMEs can be used in order to achieve the organisational goals. As with

leadership and communication, 360-degree meetings would provide an effective tool when

looking at organisational dynamics. We suggest additionally to using it for lower

management coordination, that it can be expanded to include employees from other

departments and so create more dialogue and crossover within the greater organisation

(Luthans et al., 2003).

• Streamlining Processes

Although the TZ holds all the positive attributes of a VRIN organisation, it can be considered

that they are failing in utilising this advantage. The hierarchy, lack of empowerment and

convoluted processes and procedures make any efforts for adaptability to evolving market

conditions very difficult.

MatthewPearce

16|P a g e

• Organisational learning through mentoring

While organisational learning is more of an organic process within organisations, this

predominantly occurs through a strong mentoring programme. It was stated within the

interview notes (Appendix E) most employees within TZ have been with the organisation for

more than two years. Therefore, there is great potential for strong organisation learning

within TZ that needs to be channelled in the right direction.

MatthewPearce

17|P a g e

5. Conclusion

When seeking to cognise the present practices at TZ we, the group, took an in depth view of

institutional, dynamic capability, social contingency and critical management theory. Due to

TZ being a State Government Agency, it present’s as a true hierarchy structure with

bureaucracy being one of the key frustrations. Thus making for a restrictive workplace heavy

on institutional process resulting in a lack in efficiency. From the feedback taken from

employees and through a critical management lens, organizational dynamic and the resulting

lack of connectivity between departments is additionally playing a large role in employee

dissatisfaction. While TZ at the senior management levels appears to communicate well in

the decision-making process, the power distance between the senior management and the

employees in the lowest hierarchal tier is vast resulting in employees feeling that they have

little to no impact on the overall decision-making process at TZ. This could be regarded as

alarming seeing that the lower tier employees are the frontline of TZ, have a vast arrange of

knowledge not just in their field of expertise, but also in operation experience.

Unless TZ looks at consolidating their procedures and streamlining their processes, TZ could

very well be looking at a continued drop in attendance records and revenue over the coming

years. With a highly competitive experience industry in NSW, including a private zoo being

planned for western Sydney, TZ would benefit by applying more critical management

through:

• Introducing 360 Degree Meetings

• Undertaking an operations audit

• Streamlining TZ Processes and Procedures

• Encouraging greater interaction between the various tiers of TZ

• Implementing a learning through mentoring programme

These changes would need to be introduced slowly due to the hierarchical nature of the

organisation but, if done correctly, TZ can become competitive once again and even emerge a

leader amongst its competitors moving into the future.

MatthewPearce

18|P a g e

6. Reference List

Dacin, T. M., Munir, K. & Tracey, P. 2010, ‘Formal dining at Cambridge colleges: Linking ritual performance and institutional maintenance', Academy of Management Journal, vol. 53, no. 6, pp. 1393-1418.

Danneels, E. 2008, ‘Organizational antecedents of second-order competences’, Strategic

Management Journal, vol.29, no. 5, pp. 519-543. Downs, C.W. & Adrian, A. D. (2012) Assessing organizational communication: Strategic

communication audits. Guilford Press, UK. Feldman, C., D. 1976, ‘A contingency Theory of Socialisation', Administrative Science

Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 3 pp. 433-452. Frew, B. 2009, ‘Neither Hierarchy nor Network: An Argument for Heterarchy', People and

Strategy, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 11-12. Foster, M. W. and Wiebe, E. 2011, Praxis Makes Perfect: Recovering The Ethical Promise of

Critical Management Skills, Journal of Business. Fournier, V. & Grey, C. 2000, ‘At a Critical Moment: Conditions and Prospects for Critical

Management Studies,’ Human Relations, vol. 53, no. 7, pp. 7-32. Grey, Chris Willmott, Hugh. 2005, Critical Management Studies: A Reader, Oxford

University Press. Heckman, J. J. & Kautz, T. (2012), ‘Hard evidence on soft skills’ Labour economics, vol. 4,

no. 19, pp. 451-464. Helfat, D.E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M., Singh, R., Teece, D., & Winter, S.G.

2007, Dynamic capabilities Understanding strategic change in organizations. Oxford, Blackwell, London.

Hodgson, E., D. 2004, Project Work: The Legacy of Bureaucratic Control in the Post-

Bureaucratic Organisation, SAGE, London. Katkalo, V. S., Pitelis, C. N., & Teece, D. J. 2010, ‘Introduction: On the nature and scope of dynamic capabilities’, Industrial and Corporate Change, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 1175- 1186.

Lee, H. 2013, ‘Dynamics of Hierarchy and Heterarchy as a Mechanism for Promoting Innovation and Knowledge Creation', International Journal of Advancements in Computing Technology, vol. 5, no. 12, pp. 191-196.

Ludwig, G. & Pemberton, J. 2011, ‘A managerial perspective of dynamic capabilities in

emerging markets: the case of the Russian steel industry’, Journal of East European Management Studies, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 215-236.

MatthewPearce

19|P a g e

Luthans, F. & Peterson S.J. 2003 ‘360-degree feedback with systematic coaching: Empirical analysis suggests a winning combination’ Human Resource Management, vol. 3 no. 42, pp. 243-256.

Mitchell, M. & Eckstein, S. 2009, 'The Influence of Power Distance and Communication on

Mexican Workers', Journal Of Business Communication, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 169-184. Reihlen, M. 1996, The Logic of Heterarchies Making Organisations Competitive for

Knowledge-based Competition, University of Cologne, Germany. Romme, G., Zollo M., & Berends P. 2010, ‘Dynamic capabilities, deliberate learning and

environmental dynamism: a simulation model,’ Industrial and Corporate Change, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 1271 – 1299. Romme, L. & Georges, A. 1996, ‘A note on the hierarchy-team debate', Strategic

Management Journal, vol. 17, pp. 411-417. Spelthann, V. & Haunschild, A. 2011, ‘Organizational Creativity in Heterarchies: The Case

of VFX productions', Creativity and innovation Management, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 100-107.

Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. 1997, ‘Dynamic capabilities and strategic Management’,

Strategic Management Journal, vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 509–533. Winterich, K. & Yinlong, Z. 2014, 'Accepting inequality deters responsibility: How Power

Distance Decreases Charitable Behaviour', Journal Of Consumer Research, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 274-293.

MatthewPearce

20|P a g e

7. Appendices

7.1. Appendix A: TZ 2012/13 Annual report

MatthewPearce

21|P a g e

MatthewPearce

22|P a g e

MatthewPearce

23|P a g e

MatthewPearce

24|P a g e

MatthewPearce

25|P a g e

7.2. Appendix B: Graphs

Hastherebeenanychangeintroducedinyourorganisationinthelasttwoyears?

MatthewPearce

26|P a g e

MatthewPearce

27|P a g e

MatthewPearce

28|P a g e

MatthewPearce

29|P a g e

7.3. Appendix C: Questionnaire Table Analysis

Topic Result/ Analysis Comment

Communication Face to face followed by emails were the most common forms of communications.

Positive information that could be fed back to organisation to continue use of this form of communication

Face to face was viewed as the most effective.

Positive information that could be fed back to organisation to continue use of this form of communication

The effectiveness of emails produced varied responses as did meetings.

May warrant further investigation through interviews.

Improvements may be needed or suggested as to how emails and meetings are used.

Overall the larger proportion of the sample viewed communications as neutrally effective and above.

Positive information that could be fed back to organisation

Conflict resolution The sample was equally divided on their thoughts regarding if conflicts are dealt with and resolved openly.

May warrant further investigation through interviews

The sample was equally divided on their thoughts regarding if conflicts are dealt with in a timely manner.


Mission statement The majority of the sample thought the mission statement was clearly communicated


Varying forms of delivery methods linked to the Mission Statement were reported across policies, inductions and regular communications.


Change within the last 2 years

The sample responses were mixed regarding whether there had been substantial change in the last two years,

Respondents likely focussed on change that directly impacted them, rather than holistic or organisational

MatthewPearce

30|P a g e


with the majority suggesting there had been change.

wide change. Particular units within the precinct have experienced significant change, being impacted by collection changes and new projects in current master-planning.

Organisational structure

The majority of the sample viewed the structure as Top Down

The link at the bottom of the table will help.

Teams are structured mainly by Functions or Services.

Routine on the precinct requires specific knowledge and skill sets that are not readily transferrable between departments.

Organisational culture

The sample reported mixed views regarding whether the organisational culture is represented in the codes of practice with a marginal proportion favouring formal means of demonstration.


Conflict resolution The sample was equally divided on their thoughts regarding if conflicts are dealt with and resolved openly.


The sample was equally divided on their thoughts regarding if conflicts are dealt with in a timely manner.


Effects of Rules and Regulations

A large proportion of the sample saw the rules and regulations as ‘restrictive’


But, this may be expected given the organisational structure and means by which individual departments need to operate and have some form of consistency across the whole

MatthewPearce

31|P a g e


organisation.

Continuous innovation

The sample produced mixed responses as to whether continuous innovation is used in the organisation.


Management style A very large proportion reported Managers as being very approachable.


A large proportion saw the leadership as effective


The sample provided mixed responses to whether employees received appropriate recognition or promotion from management


The majority of the sample suggested there was support provided from management for individual’s success and development needs


The majority of the sample reported trust in management decision making


The majority of the sample reported central decision making processes versus individual empowerment


Individual’s needs and role in organisation

The majority of the sample reported they were satisfied in their jobs.


There were mixed views reported for whether individual’s felt they played a part in the overall decision making processes.


These viewpoints changed for a ‘team’ level compared to the wider organisation impact.

The majority of the sample felt they were a valued asset of the company.

Positive information that could be fed back to organisation.

MatthewPearce

32|P a g e


The greater effect of ‘worth’ was felt on a team level.

The majority view was that there was an emphasis placed on individual KPIs


There was a large percentage of the sample that reported they felt there were insufficient resources to enable them to complete their jobs.


Team work The majority of the sample reported positive team working.


The majority viewpoint was that team objectives were aligned to the whole organisation.


Responses as to whether there is competition between differing departments produced a mixed result with the majority leaning towards the neutral weighting or lower.


The majority viewpoint was that there are high levels of co-operations between departments


MatthewPearce

33|P a g e

7.4. Appendix D: Interview Questions

Communication

1. Emails have been rated as the second most used means of communication with in the

organization. However, the results show that it is considered the least effective means

of communication. Why do you think employees feel emails are the least effective

means of communicating information? Do you feel there is a better medium / method

of communicating information to your employees?

2. The results have identified that some conflicts within the organization are not handled

in an open or timely manner. Please describe the current organizational process for

handling conflict?

3. Is there cross-functional communication between the various business units within the

organization? How is this communication conducted?

Structure

1. Horizontal team structure is said to allow flexibility with in the team to vary

individual workload under changing task demands. How will introducing a horizontal

team, impact day-to-day operations? Do you see this being successful?

2. There is a perception that hierarchies have lost their relevance in today's turbulent

business context. Do you feel that management have lost sight on the organizations

goals? And do you feel that management decisions need to be made based on input

from the bottom of the hierarchy if not your customers?

3. Do you feel introducing a heterarchical team into your organization will benefit

organizational decision-making and overall employee self-worth?

MatthewPearce

34|P a g e

Organizational Dynamics

1. How does the organization support and encourage the employees?

Specifically do you promote the employee who has good performance?

2. When the organization has key decisions which need making, do you consider the

advice or suggestion form employees? Additionally are the employees involved in the

decision-making process?

MatthewPearce

35|P a g e

7.5. Appendix E: Interview Analysis

Notes from Interview with Nick Boyle

• Ground staff daily interaction with each other is face to face would be accurate

• Nick is available for general pop ins but most is- meetings and emails- and does set

times to meet individuals if they require

• Nick’s meetings today- 10-11, 11-12, 12-1, 1:30, 2-3, 3:30-4:30- Leadership team,

HR, direct reports (5 supervisors reporting to him), His GM (Life Sciences), and rest

face to face set meetings with employees- open door though if there is something to

talk about.

Levels of Management

1. Board

2. Senior Management Team (6 GM and Director)

3. LS- Leadership Team- Senior Management + Upper Middle Management (Nick is

apart of this)

4. Nick

5. 5 Supervisors (elephant, carnivores, ungulates, Asian primates, African primates)

6. Senior Keepers

7. 55 Keepers, Full/Casual

• They are trying to challenge the senior keepers to support organisation and

supervisors a bit more. Not as supportive as they want them to be.

• ‘Collection Rationalization’- what will be kept and what get rid of- to increase

efficient use of resources- animal welfare, research, tangible conservation, visitor

experience and finance sustainability- That would account for the complaints about

change. Keepers aren’t big fans of this.

• Culture is formal indicative of a government organisation.

• People are a mix of formal and informal personalities. Are mostly Engaged and

intelligent but are also hands on

• Most employees have worked there for over 10 years- stuck in a rut- Supervisors are

younger who have an x-factor- begrudging from older employers to these managers

MatthewPearce

36|P a g e

• Safety aspect to regulations- Tender process is very slow, heaps of red tape. 45 policy

and procedures. Code of Conduct. OHS

E.g.- Policy of using your own car for work things. A couple of levels of approval.

Forms to fill out just to go to Bunning’s in your own car.

• Aging exhibits and infrastructure makes it hard to keep everything working- Has to go

through the process of approval for improvements and maintenance- meanwhile the

person who made the original application for repair are still waiting for something to

be done- then blame maintenance.

• Employees are normally critical of upper management and direct supervisors.

Nick’s Opinion on what needs to be improved

• Taronga should look at consolidating their procedures and a steam lined processes.

• His role is hugely administrative- have a lot more to offer than approvals and admin

etc.

• Haven’t put enough time and effort into soft management at the supervisor/ senior

keeper level- i.e. lower level

• Fair point on recognition

• Progression linked to longevity

• Sometimes too big to readily acknowledge achievement

• Quarterly recognition but no value placed on them

• Situation Behaviour Impact SBI is used as their critique style- However these has to

be more positive feedback with critiques.

• Recruitment- making sure they are recruiting people who have skills beyond science

and animals- higher EQ people skills- Change the culture- 21st Century Expectations

• Spending and efficiency is a huge issue. Need to get much better with financial

management- i.e. common for them to tighten the belt in some areas but are more

proliferate in other areas

E.G. New Tiger Keep- $12 million budget- includes trips abroad, etc.

YET they have to scrimp and save for bins. This causes conflict and a sense of waste

within organisation.

MatthewPearce

37|P a g e

• Cost 10x more to build structures at Taronga than in other private zoos. Tender

process improvement? Cost and Charge?

• Conservation organization (with research) vs. Experience- Need to straddle the divide

• Meetings are normally critical rather than praising

Documents

Taronga Zoo- Operations Audit