Ann Arbor Probation - Essay Example

Ann Arbor ProbationStructureThe Michigan Department of Corrections probation department serves the local trial court in Ann Arbor, Michigan. This department is a part of the Michigan Department of Corrections which according to the Michigan.gov site is one of the principle state departments (Michigan.gov, 2011). The hierarchy is based on a top down approach or a tall hierarchy, beginning with the Directors office which is the chief administrator. The next step is the correctional facilities management, field operations administration and operations support administration.

The field operations administration directly oversees the probationary units in the field. Due to this department being a state agency it reports directly to the governor and as a result is indirectly influenced by citizen voters. This influence fortunately does not affect the day to day workings of the probation department. Management of the field operations administration falls directly on the correctional facilities management administration and then back to the director’s office. The political aspects rarely directly affect the workings of the probation department in this respect.

Strengths and Weaknesses of the two structural designsThe strengths of a tall hierarchy as seen in our local probation department is that they have the full power of the state of Michigan supporting their decisions and a clear chain of command allowing for a much better approach regarding efficiency. The weaknesses would originate from the political side and could potentially cause disruptions in service if allowed to directly affect the daily working of the department itself. Given the insulating effect of multiple layers of structure the political leadership is however, hampered in its ability to truly affect change at a base level within the organization itself.

Would it be possible for this agency to move to a flat hierarchy and still maintain positive control of the daily workings within the department, the short answer would seem to be no. However, if the flat hierarchy was approached with a private mentality looking to a profit based outlay the possibilities begin to open up. For instance using a flat hierarchy and a profit based structure for employees and management one could potentially prevent loss of command control through the use of financial motivation among the staff and individuals working there.

The idea would be to base bonuses on a net profit/loss approach and drive productivity to reflect a desire for additional money. Steps regarding partnership between formal and informal structures As an administrator attempting to maintain positive productivity and working relationship between both informal and formal structures of control one would have to approach the political side. By appealing to the voting base one could potentially retain positive momentum through the use of a positive public relation campaign.

Gaining the support of the voter base would assure a more beneficial working environment and disallow the destructive informal cliques that tend to grow from within the various administrations or as a result of having various administrations. The importance of showing the reliance of one administration on another be they informal or formal would be affected directly by how well the voting population understood the goals of the system itself. Within the system the reduction of cliques would likely remain a constant battle and could potentially be reduced by advancing cross training goals and approaches in the workplace.

By having key members of each administration training and working in other administrations and taking that information gained back to their department’s one could promote a positive image of the greater picture thereby directly affecting efficiency within the system as a whole. ReferencesMichigan.gov. (2011). Department of corrections. Retrieved from http://www.michigan.gov/corrections/0,4551,7-119--24147--,00.html