Hi I need some help with my assignment for problem identification and analysis. I need to Identification and analysis the problems (organisational culture, leading, and controlling). I have identifies the problem, i need some help if my identification, analysis, evidence, explanation and theories are correct stated. And also is there any grammatical errors that i made? thank you.

1.0

1.1 Organisational Culture

Organisation culture is an important aspect that each organisation should have because it includes safe and positive environment, experience, values, believes, and a vision goal (Williams, McWilliams & Lawrence, p.153, 2016). Atlanta Public School (APS) issue was not meeting the states and nation level scores of Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT). A problem that has been identified was the inappropriate use of organisational culture where the schools cheated to meet the achieving score, avoiding the consequences and shame. Teachers shared a common believe of not wanting to quit so they had to change their attitude and behaviour.

The new policy, "No Child Left Behind Act" (NCLBA), was established to motivate schools and students to work towards academics with reward-punish actions. The policy had implied for a successful culture to help schools to improve the academic performance and to raise the SAT scores. The evidence showed that schools that met the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) measure scores, the schools would receive compensation and schools that failed to meet the requirement were warned that further failure would result in staff replacement (Simons & Kindred, p. 2, 2017).

Beverly Hall who was assigned as a superintendent in APS had different expectations, raising the standard of NCLBA. Her consequences were harsher and immediate which increased stress on principals and teachers if they did not meet her expectations. Not meeting the criteria meant that the staff had to leave their job, so the teacher had to turn towards cheating to increase students result.

Cheating was implemented by teachers pointing out the answers, giving test questions before the test, teachers walked around telling which answers needed to be revised, retaking the test, cheating of another person, etc. (Simons & Kindred, p. 4, 2017). Cheating in APS does not implement any role modelling (Simons & Kindred, p. 12, 2017), not stories are heard of praised actions, no vision in improving education and there is no urge in changing and maintain the organisational culture. APS priority is to secure the students' scores reaching the required standard before the school authorities will be replaced or being humiliated.

1.2 Control

Control is all about having a clear path in attaining required goal, comparing goals in terms of quality and responding to the occurred crises with appropriate solutions. Control can be acquired when the organisation staff behaviour and performance are equal to quality, then the organisation goals can be met (Williams, McWilliams & Lawrence, p.282, 2016). The main issue that APS faced was the principals and teacher's behaviour towards reaching the goal, they did not control their action, and blinded by the consequences-reward action. A problem is the study is that it did not have behaviour control and self-control or self-management. A behaviour control is when there is control over the people's actions and behaviour to perform their job to the best of their capacity. Self-control to control owns behaviour and action in achieving specific goal.

The evidence showed that teachers behaviour changed towards cheating, they promoted cheating because they had to meet the Criterion-Referenced Competency Test (CRCT) and if they refused then they will be demoted. The staff did not have behaviour and self-control over their actions, due to fear under Hall control that stressed the staff in meeting her requirement, and if it is not met then Hall would replace the staff immediately. Hall had replaced 90% of principals who did achieve her standard (Simons & Kindred, p. 11, 2017). Hall did not access whether the academic quality had improved but instead she focused on the outcome, which let to control loss, where the input and output to not match the requirement that is needed for improving the education that raised the performance in students.

The policy that NCLBA used a bureaucratic control (Williams, McWilliams & Lawrence, p.284, 2016), where it infused the staff behaviour by financial reward for meeting the score or punishment with warning and staff replacement for not meeting the scores. The NCLBA policy had a good intention but it resulted in change of teachers and principal's behaviour, where they did not control their own actions for implementing better education, but it was driven behaviour for financial reward, resulting cheating. Even though the staff was driven by reward, Hall did not have any behaviour control over employees to implement better education. Hall did not have any group communication, feedback, feed-forward control and clear objective vision to the staff, but instead she was driven for results and outcomes.

1.3 Leading

A leader in an organisation is someone who motivates and inspire people to accomplish goals and being able to listen and investigate different solutions to the problem. The issue in APS was that the students were not able to meet the criteria to pass the required scores in SAT and AYP. This led to problem of control data and unappropriate use of SMART goals in goal-setting theory. A control data is where all the information of every school performance is collected and there is a required percentage that each teacher needs to fulfil. SMART goal consists of Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, and Time-bound (Williams, McWilliams & Lawrence, p.238, 2016).

When Hill became in charge of APS, she wanted to introduce her new management techniques, student attendance, increasing the gradates success, and to increase the scores in SAT and AYP. Hall created maps and charts that helped her to outline her goals in increasing the scores in schools and to divide the responsibility (Simons & Kindred, pp. 3-7, 2017). However, having the outline might have helped her in seeing the goal, putting it in scorecards but she did not know how to achieve and implement her goal. She faced goal difficulties and there was no performance feedback.

Apart from achieving the NCLBA policy Hall had set her own policy that teachers and principals had to meet. If the staff did not meet her standard, then she used a negative reinforcement theory to motivate the teachers to increase the achievement or else there would be immediate consequences. Negative reinforcement forced teachers to meet her standard even if it was through cheating (Simons & Kindred, p. 6, 2017). When the APS scores had been increasing the leaders and Hall did not do any investigation on what changes did the school made to improve the scores, whether they improved the teaching skills, or the environmental change made it student and teacher to perform better. When the rumours about cheating had been spread Hall ignored it and commenting that the school has positive review from her data control and that there was no way that cheating was implemented (Simons & Kindred, p. 14, 2017). Hall did not have good leading skills that motivated staff to explore alternative solution to increase student's performance, no communication and feedback being administered and there was no agreement or understanding on what Hall had introduced. The case study shows that Hall did not used Goal-setting theory to her ability to inspire, motivate and to make sure that everyone is on the same goal working towards improving the student's performance.