Week Eight Individual Assignment

Creating an Organizational Paradigm

Donna Begay

University of Phoenix

ORG 716 – Organizational Theory

Dr. Karen Kozma

October 6, 2004

Creating an Organizational Paradigm

In California, there are 109 federally-recognized tribal governments. The U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) interacts with these tribal governments. Most of the 109 California federally-recognize tribal governments reside on reservations, rancherias, or allotments (Giese, 1997). These tribal governments in conjunction with the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs have developed a standard tribal organization structure. Since 1905, Tribal government organizations have gone from governing by consensus to rational systems structure. The current paradigm for many of the California Tribal government organizations has been initaited by new economic development and self-governance opportunities. In this paper, the following will be presented: California Tribal government current organizational design, proposed Tribal government organization design with new paradigm, and forecast and evaluation of how the new paradigm will help the organization sustain itself and adapt for the future.

California Tribal government current organization design

In the early 1900s, the State of California and U.S. Government worked with Tribal communities in developing formal Tribal government structure. Prior to 1970’s, California Tribal governments were model by strict Tribal operational Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) guidelines. In addition, BIA had established a federally recognized process that also encourage a hierarchical (top down) Tribal government structure. This BIA Tribal government structure for Tribal organizations occurred during 1940s through 1980s, this promoted rational systems. The focus of a rational system based organization is goal specific and machine-like efficiencies in business processes at the worker level. In a rational system, it is expected that sub-unit level of operations only focus on the organization goal. This promotes a non-complex operation environment. Rational systems have unique environments that offer a unique language. W. Richard Scott (2003) provides characteristics of rational systems, this includes a description of language “information, efficiency, optimization, implementation, design, authority, control, coordination, rules, directives, and performance programs” (p. 34). Rational systems can be very structured and not offer very much room for expanded boundaries or creativity. Under the BIA guidelines for Tribal operations, rules, regulations, control and authority are certainly apparent in the culture of California Tribal operations.

The BIA Tribal organization model is still used as a foundation of existing California Tribal governments. Displayed in Figure 1.0 is a typical California Tribal government organization (high level) as it exists today. In regards to the BIA Tribal organization model, LaDonna Harris, Stephan M. Sachs, and Benjamin J. Broome (2001) describes an excellent narrative of tribal government evolution from a historic view:

The development of current forms of tribal government has taken place in many stages over a considerable period of time. More than half of the federally recognized tribes have governments that were organized under the guidelines of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, the Okalahoma Indian Welfare Act of 1936, or the Alaska Reorganization Act of 1936. Some tribes, such as the Crows and the Yakimas, have organized themselves through their own tribal agreements. Most tribes have an elected governing council of some kind (using a variety of names) that often combines legislative with executive (and sometimes judicial) authority. A few nations, including the Onondagas, some Pueblo groups, and many smaller bands in California, and most Native communities in Alaska, continue to use the tradition form of tribal governance (p.3).

Figure 1.0 Tribal Government Organization – common structure.

This organization design focuses on the common goal of services to Tribal Members. Most of the tribal funding is from non-Tribal government entities (i.e., State and Federal level). The priorities of most Tribal governments are housing, health, education and employment services. All of these services were agreed upon through U.S. treaty obligations. However, the federal government has experienced a shortage of public funding and cannot meet their treaty obligations. As a result, there has been a federal sponsored economic development option that is titled “Indian Gaming”.

During the 1990s through 2000, several California Tribal governments have invested in this new economic strategy called “Indian Gaming”. This new economic strategy provides the tribe the opportunity to earn their own revenue and protect their tribal sovereignty. Tribal sovereignty promotes the tribe’s ability to exercise self-governance. By year 2004, there are major organizational structure changes due to Indian gaming and the political influence of gaming Tribes. This creates the initial paradigm shift of Tribal operational rational systems to open systems design.

Proposed organization design with new paradigm

In California, during 2000 through 2004, Tribal governments evolved into very strong political communities. With the assistance of Indian Gaming revenues and California citizen support of this type of economic development, California Tribal governments begin to shift their rational system structure to open systems. Evidence of open systems for Tribal organizations includes the improved social systems, central policy circle that also develops goals for the tribe, and self-maintenance with new revenues (Scott,2003, pp. 25-30).

In Figure 2.0 is a proposed Tribal Organization structure that reflects the new paradigm of economic development and self-governance.

Figure 2.0 Proposed Tribal Government Organization

There are new Tribal organization elements that include: contribution committee, marketing, information technology, fire management and emergency response, and inter-government affairs. Contribution committee reviews both Tribal and non-Tribal project funding approval, these projects benefit communities. Marketing provides support for the tribe’s Indian gaming and tribes public relations. Tribes are investing in information technology to support their complex operations, external public information, improve educational opportunities, and effective communicate. Emergency Response units will also be required to support Tribal communities for growing population and remote access to external emergency response resources. Inter-government affairs provide support between the Tribal Council and non-Tribal governmental entities (U.S. government, Governor, Legislators, and local governments). Existing services such as health, community development and housing and economic development also experience a paradigm shift in operations. Health services is no longer funded only by public funding, this provides Tribal government the ability to enhance delivery of health services to children and elders. There is also long-term health care program or plan available for Tribal members. Community development must be aware of environmental impact of tribal population and housing development expansion plans. Economic development must focus on Indian gaming issues and provide separate fiscal reporting for this type of activity.

There are also new Tribal to external operational relationships with California State government, local government, community organizations, and new economic development partners. This also provides an internal need to review the critical decision making process of the Tribal Council and Tribal Structure. The use of lawyers or legal teams has proven to be successful during federal recognition process, Indian Gaming Compacts, Indian Gaming environment, and contractual arrangements for Tribal services and goods. However, the balance of Tribal sovernity and Legal Team’s juristiction will be a major focus for Tribal Government structures and future tribal leadership and management. The paradigm shift for Tribal governments must consider these new elements that impact tribal governance.

The timing of implementing this proposed organizational design can vary for each Tribal government. Based on the economic status and Tribal government size, this proposed organizational design could be “over kill” or be considered too complex to existing Tribal operation standards. Also, for tribes receiving federal tribal funds, this organization design would have to be reviewed by the BIA. However, Tribal government would have final decision on whether to accept this new organization design.

National Congress for American Indians (NCAI) had outlined an organizational strategy for Tribal governments. This proposed organizational design also support NCAI’s recommendation for Tribal organizational improvement. Specifically, the NCAI outline Tribal governance improvements and issues for the following: sovereignty, self determination, sovereignty protection, state-tribal relations, trust responsibility, trust reform, economic development, infrastructure, gaming, taxation, welfare reform, bureaucratic impediments, housing, health, education, environmental protection, homeland security, and veterans (National Congress of American Indians, 2003). NCAI was targeting many of the U.S. based tribes. The proposed organization paradigm reflects California Tribal governments. In California, we have geographically and economically diverse tribal representation. This is why the proposed organization design focuses mainly on economic development and self-governance.

How the new paradigm will help the organization sustain itself and adapt?

Previously described is the California Tribal government paradigm shift from rational to open systems organizational design due to economic development and self-governance. Outline in Table 1.0 is a summary of this paradigm shift:

Table 1 - Tribal Organization Design Paradigm … ….. …. ….. …. …. ……

Rational System Tribal Organization Paradigm	Open Systems Tribal Organization Paradigm
Receiver of public funds to improve tribal community.	Generate own revenue with optional community projects
Non-competitive government structure – no major threats	Competitive with other Tribal governments Indian gaming
Focused on primary Tribal community needs.	Focus on both Tribal and non-Tribal community needs.
Established BIA business plan each year with fiscal accountability	Establish an on-going business plan for 5-10 year period.
Prepared detail reporting to funding sources and matching resources to outcomes.	Focusing on improved Tribal operations by improved benefits, staff development and training. Outcomes are important, but organizational process flows and interaction are critical.
Non-reliance on information technology	Dependent on effective information technology systems.

In California, there are a variety of design strategies for tribal government organization structures. These organizational designs are impacted by social influence, environment momentum, and on-going evolution of the organization (Randolph & Dess, 1981). Tribal elections, State Indian gaming politics, and on-going fight to keep tribal sovereignty alive are all examples of these organizations design influences. The paradigm shift for Tribal governments requires awareness of these influences, take proactive steps in addressing these influences, use both Tribal and non-Tribal knowledge to resolve issues, and don’t give up any portion of tribal sovereignty as a remedy.

Tribal organizations will have new organizational models and structure within this proposed organizational design. New organizational models include business model and information model. Feurer, Chaharbaghi, Weber, and Wargin (2000) describe the business model as the following: “Business models are developed for describing innovative processes and their role with in the overall organization”. These authors provide good example of HP Corporation’s views for business models: business activities or processes (process model), business information (information model), and interaction between these activities. In order for Tribal governments to implement this into their organization design, establishment or use of cross-functional teams will have to be established. Cross-functional teams will include both Tribal and non-Tribal member input for various organization sub-committees or activities.

Feurer, Chaharbaghi, Weber, and Wargin (2000) describe current business and information models that also apply for California Tribal governments. The interaction of these two models could be key to successful tribal operations. The development and use of a business model that also includes information technology is certainly a paradigm shift for Tribal governments. The combination of these models could result in improve services to tribal members, effective communication, and expanded working knowledge for the benefit of tribal operations. As outlined in Figure 2.0, there will be more complexity to tribal organization design. This will require a strong business and information model. I propose that these models be carefully developed and implemented within Tribal government. This will result in organizational effectiveness and efficiencies.

In order for Tribal governments to implement business and information model into their organization design, establishment or use of cross-functional teams will have to be established. Cross-functional teams will include both Tribal and non-Tribal member input for various organization sub-committees or activities. A good example is for the Contribution Committee unit, they may need both Tribal and non-Tribal input to proposed community projects. There is also a need for timely networking with outside government entities in ensuring proper tribal or gaming operation support.

Specific tools for evaluating the effectiveness of this proposed new Tribal government organizational design is by three levels: participants, constituents, and Tribal government criteria (Scott, 2003, p. 353). Participants are members of the proposed organizational structure, including external participants (i.e., U.S. Government, Governor, Legislators, Local Governments). Constituents are the Tribal members. Tribal government criteria would be established through a strategic business planning process which would include participants and constituents. Criteria for open systems organizational design will be directed towards organizational self-maintenance, internal organization exchange, interdependence of organization and environments (i.e., enactment, attention, and outcomes), and long-term self reliance direction (p. 141).

Conclusion

In summary, California Tribal governments fought to survive the 1800’s genocide upon their tribal people. It is this survival aspect of California Tribal governments that allows for their adaptability. Both as people and governments, California Tribes are accustom to paradigm shifts. However, these shifts for their governments have been influenced by BIA. Today, tribal government organizations design is quickly adapting to the new economic development of “Indian Gaming” and continues fight for Tribal sovereignty. Based on existing organizational theories and models, California Tribal governments are becoming open systems with integrated business and information models. The success and impact of Indian Gaming is certainly an interesting topic for organizational design. It was not too long ago that the U.S. government provided a means for Tribal governments to generate their own revenue. Today, California State government would like to have a portion of these revenues.

This leads to a need for California Tribal governments to make organizational paradigm shifts to adapt to this political, but successful Indian gaming environment. Some Indian Gaming tribes have invested in financial planners, built strong partnerships with other Indian Gaming tribes, strong reliance on attorneys, established labor unions, own their own banks, financing their children’s education, and investing in tribal housing projects. The measure of success for the new proposed Tribal government organization is already apparent in Native American health statistics, economic status, education opportunities, cultural preservation, improved security, inclusion in University and Public school curriculm design, and safer Tribal communities. Ultimately, self-maintenance an attribute of an open system organization design can lead to the protection of Tribal self-governance. The proposed organization design is certainly promoting the Native philosophy of “looking out for the next seven generations”.

References

Faurer, R., Chaharbaghi, K., Weber, M. & Wargin, J. (2000, Winter). Aligning strategies, processes, and IT: A case study. Information Systems Management, 17(1), 23.

Giese, P. (1997). Index of Native American Resources on the Internet. WWW Virtual Library - American Indians. Retrieved October 4, 2004 from http://www.kstrom.net/isk/maps/ca/california.html ….. …. ….

Harris, L., Sachs, S.M., and Broome, B.J. (2001, Winter). Wisdom of the people: Potential and pitfalls by the Comanches to Recreate Traditonal Ways of Building Consensus. American Indian Quartely. Research Library. 25,1, 114.

Randolph, W. A. & Dess, G. G.  (1981). The congruence perspective of organization design: A conceptual model and multivariate research approach.  Academy of Management Review, 9(1), 114-127.

Scott, W. R. (2003). Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems (5^th ed.). Upper Saddle River,

NJ: Prentice Hall.

National Congress of American Indians (2003, January 31). The State of Indian Nations Today: Mapping a Course for the Next Seven Generations. Paper presented at Winter Tribal Membership meeting. Washington, DC: T. Hall. Retrieved October 4, 2004 from http://www.ncai.org/form/docs/SOIN_ADDRESS.pdf ….. …. ….