The Program That Includes Any Organizational Initiative - Essay Example

Management Question Program evaluation refers to the standardized scientific method used in the assessment of the structure of the program. The term program includes any organizational initiative that aims at the provision of products or services (Rossi et al., 2004, p8). Examples of programs are research projects, education and informative services just to mention a few. In program evaluation, the main area of assessment is the efficiency and effectiveness of the initiative. The stakeholders who are responsible for sanctioning the evaluation require feedback on the funding, implementation, and reception of the program (Rossi et al., 2004, p11). Furthermore, program evaluation seeks to evaluate if the program is worthwhile, needs improvement or re-focusing. The program evaluation that sparked my interest is the assessment of the juvenile justice programs. The juvenile justice programs are tasked with transforming delinquents into socially functioning individuals. Rarely do citizens question the effectiveness and success of such a respected public institution. This evaluation utilizes SPEP (Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol) to determine the efficiency of the juvenile institution (Rossi et al., 2004, p23). The SPEP compares several juvenile justice programs to determine their effectiveness. Prior to evaluating this effectiveness, the researchers developed a meta-analysis of the programs. Meta-analyses are a definitive way used in assessing the best practices from the analysis of several studies on programs. The meta-analyses aim at improving the program, in our case the juvenile justice, to achieve efficiency and effectiveness (Bardach, 2012, p68). Other techniques used in the evaluation program for the juvenile justice program are the OJJDP’s strategy that assesses the current juvenile systems. This program evaluation aims at improving on the juvenile justice record of positively changing the lives of delinquents. The evaluation aims at instigating change and reform in this system responsible for the lives of misguided youths. It further aims at disapproving certain methods used in, such as the use of confinement to discipline delinquents. The results of the program evaluation are not definitive. However, the researchers leave several guidelines and recommendations that suggest the best way forward for the juvenile justice program. This way is based on the results gathered from the research. All stakeholders of the program are addressed individually as the evaluation seeks to improve on the program’s effectiveness (Rossi et al., 2004, p30). The juvenile system administrators, for example, are advised to develop a futuristic administrative model. The model should take into account the risks associated with these programs (Bardach, 2012, p51). For instance, the development of intervention programs that guide teenagers who fail to benefit from the system. In addition, the program should concentrate on high-risk offenders to prevent future aggravated crimes. The legislators of the law on juvenile justice programs are also addressed. They should aim at creating and promoting programs that improve on the current system to increase the efficiency of the latter (Bardach, 2012, p55). For juvenile justice advisory groups, the improvement on collaboration with other groups is advocated. This collaboration will spur growth and reform in the program and the overall system. Additionally, the collaboration seeks to improve risk assessment in all involved groups. Their responsibility, as an advisory committee, should be to discourage the use of confinement of offenders (Bardach, 2012, p55). The committee should develop other ways to discipline the juveniles other than confinement. Question 2 The 21st century is characterized by technological and informational advancements. These advancements have been rapid, to say the least. The public has adopted and embraced technology with open arms. However, the public sector has failed to embrace technology in a similar rate. Kouzes and Barry believe that technology has revolutionized leadership in both the private and public sectors (Kouzes & Barry, 2012, p9). This is because the subject of transparency, which was unheard of in the past, is an area of concern for these sectors. The current problems that public management faces began roughly two to three decades ago. Bureaucracy and the strict following of procedures characterized the years before the 1980’s (Kouzes & Barry, 2012, p57). The public sector did the job correctly and according to the law. From 1980’s to the new millennium, public management increased efficiency of the sector. There was more focus on the output and good management. Since then, post-millennium, the public sector has shifted focus to improving the results. That is, the sector now focuses on the good leadership and results. The public sector differs from the private sector in numerous ways. The obvious difference is the lack of competition in the provision of services to its citizens. Civil servants experience laxity and fail to meet their required expectations. The status quo or the process in the public sector is that of laxity and negligence of duty. To overcome this, the public sector requires reforms. The reforms are not in the form of policies but in the form leaders that can inspire the public sector to outperform themselves. First, they require a leader that shows and models the way for his or her subordinates, and at times equal (Kouzes & Barry, 2012 p31). Public sector leaders should behave in a professional manner so that others might follow in his example. It is obvious knowledge that subordinates mimic the behaviour of their leaders to some extent. Subordinates look up to their leaders for inspiration to perform their duties. These leaders should understand that humans need to achieve small milestones first before proceeding to larger milestones (Kouzes & Barry, 2012 p32). Secondly, public sector leaders need to passionately pursue the organizational goals. Furthermore, they should aim at making a difference by leading their subordinates differently. By inspiring the vision and future that the organization can become, people will slowly follow them (Kouzes & Barry, 2012 p36). Leaders ought to breathe life into the dreams and visions of the organization’s future. Their strong convictions about the future are usually infectious and the subordinates will slowly follow. The public sector is usually marred with corruption and negligence of duty. This is the status quo of majority of the public sector. Leaders in this sector should challenge this status quo by innovating, by the shrinking down the bureaucratic process of delivering services (Kouzes & Barry, 2012 p39). Public sector leaders should aim at taking risks that could change the slow process the government takes in delivering services. Additionally, leaders should be aware of the disappointments as they seek to do things differently. The fourth leadership challenge that the public sector fails is the enabling of others to act (Kouzes & Barry, 2012 p43). That is, leaders in the public sector are usually lethargic due to old age or due to little or no accountability of their actions. By fostering and building spirited teams within the organization, leaders are able to actively involve others in creating change. These leaders should be aware of the individual strengths of their employees, and seek to maximize their productivity by assigning them to tasks that fit them (Kouzes & Barry, 2012 p48). The leaders should be able to hire quality employees, orient and teach them their responsibilities and finally leave them to perform their work. The last leadership challenge that the public sector faces is that of inspiring people to work hard (Kouzes & Barry, 2012 p53). Being a monopoly in the provision of public services, the public sector lacks heart in its actions. The public sector workforce is at times compared to zombies who are limbo while performing their duties. Leaders in the public sector should not reinforce this mentality and should seek to create hope and determination in their subordinates (Kouzes & Barry, 2012 p57). Leaders should encourage award hardworking employees through incentives and make them appreciate themselves. It is a known fact that positive emotion, in employees, leads to more productivity. Public sector employees should possess enthusiasm and commitment while performing their duties. There are several recommended solutions try to reduce the effects of these problems. These solutions are derived from the concepts of management. The concepts are directly in solving problems regarding the resources, culture, authority and processes that are at the disposal of the public sector (Kouzes & Barry, 2012, p7). Firstly, the government should focus on getting the required results and simultaneously managing for outcomes. The service delivery should be centred on the citizen and the community at large. This means that the public sector should seek the advice of its citizens during problem solving. The government should seek to build the culture of its people. Such an initiative develops the values of the citizens and enhances their leadership capabilities. The government breaks down any barriers to transparency by integrating the citizens into the decision making process. Furthermore, the government should seek to incorporate technology in its service delivery using e-government. This option eliminates the barriers in service delivery while integrating vital government processes. Other solutions include the change of perspective by the government between outcomes and results. The two are confusing terms; the government should aim at improving results while managing the outcomes of their service delivery (Kouzes & Barry, 2012 p27). This compliments well with the earlier solution, citizen-centred service delivery. Additionally, the government should promote values and ethics in service delivery throughout its structure. This strengthens the sector, its citizens and finally the culture of the country. In conclusion, the above authors provide invaluable advice on how the public sector should be organized to meet its set purposes. Such advice is applicable in all realms in the public sector from policy implementation to issues surrounding governance. The public sector and other sectors, in general, should seek to go further and beyond in achieving their purpose. Bibliography Bardach, Eugene. 2012. A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving. 4th Edition, University of California, Berkeley Kouzes, James M., and Barry Z. Posner. 2012. Leadership Challenge: How to Make Extraordinary Things Happen in Organizations. 5. John Wiley & Sons Rossi, Peter H., Mark W. Lipsey, and Howard E. Freeman.2004.Evaluation: A Systematic Approach. 7thed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Read More