ISSUE 107 : Jul/Aug - 1994 - Australian Defence Force Journal

16 AUSTRALIAN DEFENCE FORCE JOURNAL NO. 107 JULY/AUGUST 1994Formal authority allows the CO to attempt to controlconflict by decree. It was possible to promote EEOprinciples with the compulsory employment ofwomen in the field component and in positions ofauthority. However, it should be noted that this actionresulted in covert manifestations of conflict. Theestablishment of an organisational structure, rules andregulations that are justified on technical terms arealso motivated by considerations relating to issues ofcontrol.Control of resources is also a powerful tool availableto a CO. At 1st Field Hospital, the control ofstaffing was a key issue and was used to influence thebalance of power between department heads. It waspossible to effectively place greater emphasis of fieldactivities by allocating staff to the person in control ofthe field component. At the same time the maintenanceof the traditional division of labour betweenmedical and nursing staff did not resolve that inherentconflictThe influence of medical administrators was alsoincreased as a result of their ability to control informationsystems within the hospital. The senior medicaladministrator acted as a "gatekeeper" (Pettigrew.1972. p. 197) and was able to control and shape informationflows in accordance with personal intereststhat also conformed with the CO's desired outcome.The coalition between CO and the senior medicaladministrator played an important part in shapingactions within the hospital.Symbolism and the management of meaning alsoplays an important part in the control of conflict(Pfeffer, 1981. p. 181). Ceremonies are an integralcomponent of any military organisation. At 1st FieldHospital, military parades were used to demonstratethe power structure within the organisation. In addition.the use of the unique military language of acronymsand abbreviations was also used to reinforce hierarchalrelationships. These relationships were furtherdemonstrated during ritual events such as regular conferencesand formal social functions. Finally, a mythwas cultivated following 1st Field Hospital's victoryat the annual health services sports competition in1990. This myth created a strong bond between allpersonnel and was invoked as a symbol of successand unity.ConclusionThe amalgamation of two Army units to create anew 1st Field Hospital was undertaken as part of theAustralian Army solution to financial restraint and arenewed emphasis on the field Army. Other lessapparent external factors influenced the amalgamationprocess: community attitudes to social issuessuch as the employment of women, the nature of thecivilian health care system and consumer expectations,in particular. Internal factors also affected theprocess of change. Specifically, the establishment of abureaucratic control structure that placed greateremphasis on medical administration at the expense ofprofessional autonomy. Changes to the corporateculture were also initiated that placed greater emphasison the military ethos and acknowledged the placeof women in the field Army.The amalgamation process was one of majorchange for both medical units, and dramaticallyaltered the work practices of key personnel. The militaryapproach to managing this change is derivedfrom an instrumental account of management andemphasises the psychological perspective of leadershipand motivational skills. However, this approachdoes not pay credence to the interests, meanings orbeliefs of individuals within an organisation. A considerationof these factors recognises that conflict isinherent in all organisations and that power resourcesmay be mobilised to manage conflict. This articleidentified the power resources available to the CO 1stField Hospital and their use. In this case the mobilisationof power resources controlled most sources ofconflict so that the amalgamation process was recognisedas a success. At the time these actions wereintuitive; they may have been enhanced to a greaterunderstanding and awareness of the politics of managingchange.KIW.IOCRAPmAlford, R.. 'The political Economy of Health Care: Dynamicswithout Change" Politics and Society. Winter. 1972. p.79-116.Aungles, S., & Parker. S., Work Organisations ant! Change. Allen& Unwin. Sydney, 1989. p. 16.Brown. R.. Reorganising the National Health Sen-ice. Blaekwelland Robertson. 1979. p. 171 -172.Daniel, A.. Medicine anil the Stale, Allen & Unwin. 1990. Sydney.Defence Report, 1990-IWI. AGPS, Canberra. 1991.Dibb. P.. The Dihh Report. AGPS Canberra. 1986.Edwards. P.. Conflict at Work. Blaekwell. New York. 1986. p.24.Hacked. J.. The Profession of Arms. Sedgwick and Jackson.London. 1983, p.215-228.Her/berg. F., "The Motivation-Hygiene Theory", in OrganisationTheory: Selected Readings. lid by D.S. Pugh. Penguin. Melbourne.l990,p.375-392.Mintzberg. H.. "The Manager's Job: Folklore and Fact", inOrganisation Theory: Selected Readings, ed by D.S. Pugh.Penguin. Melbourne. 1990. p.223-245.Morgan. G.. Images of Organisations. Sage. London, 1986. p. 141-198."O'Connor. M.. To Live in Peace: Australia's Defence Policy.Melbourne University Press. Melbourne. 1985. p. 15.