A Lesson in Reinvention

A case piece of spring on the lesson in reinvention is what this study will focus on and the paper will to a fault try to establish the successes and major challenges that a come with known as Hampton in Virginia City has faced over the finally years since its inception. Hampton organization is currently chthonic major reforms that have conduct to potpourris in its organizational culture.There are a range of activities that were taking amaze with the most of the 1,300 metropolis employees having participated in the avail sufficient more than 115 project forces, committees, advisory groups, self-directed teams all who worked under different jobs that were not their general jobs.For instance, the citys assistant manager, Mary hit was preoccupied with the projection of digging ditches with a citys sewer crew, developing of a new city park that was required by an new(prenominal) way of life was performed by a certain heavy construction team that worked under the public w orks department, the chief housing inspector Mr. Donald Gurley on the other hand was busy organizing for an exhibition that concerned the provision of city go for a college in the neighborhood which was also a training course that could be made available to the citys residents, Kevin Gallagher who was in safekeeping of the citys recycling programs assisted the street crews in elucidation ice and snow (Lane, 1999 p. 412-418).All these activities that were taking place mainly because of the change that Hamptons city manager Bob ONeil had initiated. He wanted his assistants to meld thoroughly with various agencies and this could only be achieved by making them to work in conjunction with various agencies so as to be able to know and understand how these organizations operated.As a result, this strategy led to various impacts on the employees of Hampton organization. The assumptions and beliefs that the employees had ab break through each other changed as the case of Mary Buntings assumption on sewer employees. She found out that these employees were rattling more flexible and skilled on their new responsibilities. Motivation was also apparent on the employees under the heavy construction team. Teamwork is evident and created a positive impact on employees and employers.For instance, Kevin Gallagher enjoyed the teamwork that was created as it connected him to other employees as well as understanding their roles and responsibilities. This is informal connecting and creation of networking among the employees as a result of the collaboration that was among the employees of Hampton as they tried to achieve the organizational objectives (Lane, 1999 p. 412-418).This change as offered by city manager Bob ONeil was congenital for Hampton because of the existence of a non-competitive economic as well as fical development structure and the inside the box standardized issue of bureaucracy that was anxious in the organization was causing a major stagnation to Hampton .In the past, the employees at Hampton did not portray much flexibility and bureaucracy was felt in the city administration whose boss was the manager. The departmental heads were directed on what to do by the assistant city managers and on the other hand these heads of departments keep an eye on their hoarding decisions, their turf and information by ascertaining supervisors and middle managers who were creditworthy for controlling the everyday work of employees.Another issue concerning bureaucracy is that employees as well as managers were preoccupied with operational procedures that were mainly detailed and the chain of command was evident in communication processes in Hampton. In other course the past Hampton organization greatly prized the aspects of stability, control, loyalty and certainty (Lane, 1999 p. 412-418).As a result, Hampton was easy dying as noted by James Eason. The impacts then were broad(prenominal) population growth rate, high taxes, reduced per-capital in come and home values were among the concluding in the region, a strain on the budget that was caused by debt-repayments and at last there was business loss in the city to the neighboring communities.This therefrom proved that Hampton was non-competitive hence the city council opted to find a suitable city government that could be quick to respond to the needs of the community, an innovative city government as well as action oriented and flexible.The city council identified Bob ONeill who had once worked as an intern in the city hence he clearly understood the bureaucracy duty from the inside. Bob ONeil was given a performance contract that was written by the city council that contained clearly specific and spelled out for city government (Lane, 1999 p. 412-418).Upon his arrival to the Hampton organization, ONeill instructed his assistant managers to work on long-term strategic policies rather than micromanaging their departments. Moreover, he asked directors to fully control t heir agencies.He also worked with the city council by means of the method of core strategy in order to achieve the answer goals. He also put the heads of department under performance contracts which contained spelled out results that they were expected to attain and also included bonuses for any achievements made by these departmental heads (Lane, 1999 p. 412-418).