On Vision Buyout

Truly, new plans and vision would draw all sorts of comments and reactions from the members of the organization, especially those in the rank and file. People would usually perceive changes as additional burden and long period of adjustments. Negative feedback are normal because they provide check and balance that would somehow give possibility of further improvements. However, I guess, this effectively applies to organizations that are not too wide in scope.

In our case, wherein changes and modifications in programs and thrusts are conceived and devised in the higher office, or shall I say the Central Office in Manila, Philippines, adopting the apparent change would not be easy. Let’s say for instance, the K12 Program. While its general objectives are seen to be of merit, a number of people, including parents and teachers find too many flaws for the program to work smoothly.

While higher officials constantly think of uplifting and improving the quality of education in the country, they fail to address the most obvious, yet potent factors that hinder the growth of Philippine education, which is the basic shortages in classrooms, books, teachers, and other materials essential to quality learning. The consortium the K12 Program should have taken into considerations the long overdue demand for more physical resource for books and classrooms among others. I truly understand the government’s plan towards education and I share with them such sentiments. But, I could not however dismiss the possibilities that it will only worsen the current scenario considering the fact that the program would entail additional two years of schooling, which will compel the department to hire more teachers as well as a possible overhaul the existing instruction materials to soothe with the program.

Teachers on the other hand cannot actually do more but accept the fact that they are bound to comply with directives and orders. Nonetheless, I cannot eliminate the possibilities that teachers may work without the needed commitment and dedication that are essential to the utmost success of the program. As far as I could remember, there was never proper consultation between the significant members of the organization regarding the program. I mean, proper representations should have been taken into considerations inasmuch as the actual implementation of the program reclines underneath of the organizational structure – the schools where the rank and file employees tasked to carry out the program abound.

It’s just good for the Central Office that they do not necessarily have to undergo the tedious vision buyout process because it has already been instilled among teachers that they are bound to obey orders without questions. I likewise understand the plight of the teachers in such scenarios. I just can’t help but pity the implementers of the program who are fated to perform duties and functions to a program they do not perfectly understand.

The department has just too many programs that they cannot sufficiently sustain and support. While vision buyout in the Department of Education do not literally transpire, I suppose, the Central Office has the ethical obligation to inform and educate its members so in such ways, commitment and dedication, as well as respect remain a healthy practice in the organization in general.

The Lion and the Bee

The Organizational Analysis Session started with RSG not in his usual jovial mood. The first session for the year 2012 was greeted with sermons and lectures of supposed conducts and manners that professionals should practice. Although I came in just about ten minutes late on the preceding class, I understand how RSG felt, knowing that I was with him when we waited for the others so we could formally mapping-up our plans.

It gave us an eye-opener, a lesson that we must have to learn….Nevertheless, the OA session ensued with good exchanges of ideas. One the first discussion, RSG asked us to reflect and manifest our personal opinions on the idea whether we can all be leaders and on the other hand, can we all be managers?

It was intriguing. And in my mind, it would seem to be an endless debate because at one point, on the aspect of status and position, all can be leaders, but not all can be managers. At this aspect, managers acquire their powers and authority after they have been duly appointed. The basic nature of managers is that they oversee and manage the entire operation of the organization. Their fundamental duties and responsibilities of managers are basically defined by the organization’s CBL.

Leaders on the other hand come with almost inborn characteristics. They are basically aggressive in nature compared to managers who act in a more intelligent and methodical manner. Managers’ actions are typically based on facts or prolonged studies. While leaders often times act on impulse.

Generally, it is really hard to tell, when it comes to traits and characteristics, which is better, managers or leaders….Chances are, effective leaders and managers must possess both characteristics.

Let’s say for example, the principal in our school must act as both as a leader and a manager. Although typically, principals are regarded as school managers, because the nature of their authority and power comes from the Central Office of DepEd, there has to be instances that they take the risk in rendering decisions that are perceived to deliver good and better results for the school.

I understand that school principals act and make decisions based on issued directives from higher ups, they must likewise take into considerations that some policies do not render effective in all instances. One of the reasons for its ineffectiveness I suppose is that these directives and policies are created by people in the higher-ups who do not actually know the real scenarios of the different schools. I guess, it’s one of the disadvantages of big organizations. One policy may be effective in one area but proved to be less effective in some…

It is on this regard that I conclude that none of the managers or leaders is better than the other because in the broadest sense, they should be both, at least in characteristics and traits….

Reflections From Lesson Number One

I have been into different companies, yet, honestly, it was only on December 3, 2011, during the Organizational Analysis Class of RSG that I have I understand the significance of Vision, Mission, and Goals of a particular organization.

In my stint in these companies, I was unmindful of their vision, mission, and goals. All I care for is that I complied with the rules and policies that the company has set for its employees. I always thought that these mission, vision, and goals are not for me to take care of. And that it is the sole concern of the top management. Perhaps because I was never present, nor heard the top management discuss company issues and concerns, prompting me to believe that we are only awaiting for orders and directives.

When RSG discussed the lessons in detail, I feel a little bit guilty and embarrassed that I did not even care to do my share. Now, that I am currently designated Coordinator of the Special Program in the Arts (SPA) of Davao City National High School (DCNHS), I am obliged to attend school administrative meetings wherein we discuss various performance indicators of both students and teachers. However, all I have in mind is that these are to maintain and sustain the prestige and honor that DCNHS should protect safeguard as the premier public secondary school in the city.

I did not come across in my mind that these have something to do with the school's mission, vision, and goals. And I truly feel shameful for myself. I really thought that as a teacher, my foremost concern lies within the four cornered classrooms where we thoroughly discuss our lessons.

I think, there is a great need for public schools to orient its newly hired teachers, including its non-teaching personnel to orient them regarding the importance and significance of the school's mission, vision, and goals; that in such ways, their efforts and determinations should fall in consistent with that of the school.

It's sad to note that every year, we have been required to attend Civil Service Seminars, constantly reminding us of the Code of Ethics of Public Servants but there was never a seminar that DepEd provides informing and encouraging us to work hand in hand for DepEd's Goals and Objectives.

As far as I could remember, what are provided are seminars and workshops for effective and efficient teachings. While its programs and thrusts are perceived to be in line with the department's mission, vision and goals, I suppose it is more important and imperative that teachers' effort must not be based on protocols and directives, but of commitment and dedication, that in such case, output is far better than what is expected.

I do not generally say that DepEd or the government is wrong...I just wished that they seriously look deeper in addressing issues and that every employee must feel that they are part of the organization and not simply rank and file employees who work under the directives of the higher ups....