Capstone Paper: University of Tennessee (UT) County Technical Assistance Service (CTAS): Organizational Structure and Communication Effectiveness

Wesley Doyle

Communication Studies 554: Section 001

Organizational Communication, Strategic Leadership, and Culture

Dr. Joe Lybarger

December 10, 2023

Author’s Note: This research is focused on UT CTAS, but many principles, ideas, and implementations can be recreated at other public service organizations with multiple teams, managers, directors, and external stakeholders.

This research aims to examine the organizational structure, culture, and communication effectiveness of UT CTAS. By examining these factors, one can provide suggestions for improvement in organizational communication to improve culture and, specifically, new employee onboarding, which has historically been a struggle for the organization due to its inconsistency and lack of standard operating procedures.

Part I: Topic Introduction and Relevance to UT CTAS

The Big Picture: Who is Affected by the Research and Solutions?

At a macro view, this organizational analysis of structure and communications systems within the University of Tennessee (UT) County Technical Assistance Service (CTAS) will ultimately benefit the future of the organization by examining significant factors in the present.

Like many state agencies and public organizations, CTAS’s staff roster has changed significantly since COVID-19 affected the labor market and professional workplace as so many had come to know it. With so many retirements from the organization, more than six new employees have joined the CTAS team since 2020, with a few more positions expected to be filled by spring 2024 (Walden, 2023). This wave of new blood in the organization called for a rejuvenation of CTAS’s identity, especially since many of its services and capabilities have now become web-based in nature (i.e. new online training programs, online meetings, self-paced resources, etc.)

As of 2022, CTAS adopted a purpose statement to match its mission and vision, but it took several years of planning and study (Walden, 2023). The purpose statement of CTAS is, “Helping Tennessee county government better serve its citizens (CTAS, 2023).”

This significant step as part of developing the new identity of CTAS introduces an even more critical question: how will new employees on newly structured teams openly communicate and collaborate with more seasoned employees that can be “set in their ways?”

With these motives in mind, one can begin to identify existing organizational structure and its impact on the communication systems within CTAS. Once existing structures and systems are identified, it becomes much easier to identify solutions to improving communications between older and newer team members so that the overall organization can better function. It also ensures that each member brings their strengths to the table for positive collaboration.

Who would these studies and changes benefit? Such studies and solutions would benefit CTAS overall in the long-term, but these improvements could also benefit external stakeholders such as the UT Institute for Public Service (IPS) Vice President—the “leader” of the overall institute of several hundred public service professionals—and other organizations within UT IPS, along with CTAS’s main external stakeholders—Tennessee county officials serving in public government themselves.

This research will also examine how the communication within CTAS can affect the onboarding process of new team members, as that is an issue the organization has faced significantly in recent years.

Part II: Background

Defining the Organizational Structure of UT CTAS

While the structure of CTAS tends to change every three to five years, the overarching makeup seems to reflect that of a matrix structure, with managers often collaborating alongside other departmental team members to achieve project goals (Wroblewski, 2019).

The organization tends to take on several major collaborative projects, and there are expertise areas of each department, but each project tends to have multiple supervisors and, ultimately, the team that worked on the project will report to the CTAS Executive Director and possibly other organizations within UT IPS as well.  

On paper, the organizational structure of CTAS showcases: 1 Executive Director, 4 departmental managers, and 26 team members with no people management responsibilities. In typical processes, team members will often cross-collaborate with other members as well as departmental managers in the organization (UT CTAS, n.d.)

This type of information flow between departmental managers and team members is considered a diagonal communication flow (Juneja, 2023), which is not directly reflected on the paper organizational chart of CTAS.

Defining the Organizational Culture of UT CTAS

When examining organizational culture, one must first define what culture is (or is not.) Schein (1990) defines culture as, “what a group learns over a period of time as that group solves its problems of survival in an external environment and its problems of internal integration. Such learning is simultaneously a behavioral, cognitive, and an emotional process (Schein, 1990).”

A similar definition of organizational culture was presented by Martin in 2006, writing, “organizational culture consists of an organization’s shared values, symbols, behaviors, and assumptions (Martin, 2006).” These two definitions help one to narrow focus on defining CTAS’s organizational culture best through daily actions and conversations between team members, managers, and the executive director of CTAS.

Defining the organizational culture at CTAS can best be interpreted through surveys and conversations with new and longstanding employees at the organization. This provides a valuable factor when determining culture: perspective. Seasoned employees will have a different perspective than that of newer employees, but all these perspectives matter when trying to discern the organizational culture at CTAS (White & Memory, 1997).

This type of survey and conversation also helps to determine underlying assumptions about an organization’s culture, which can directly and indirectly affect the internal organizational culture at a statewide organization like CTAS (Schein, 1990). One could also examine significant artifacts displayed at the central CTAS office in downtown Nashville, Tennessee, to determine the values and beliefs of such an organization (Zerella, Treuer, & Albrecht, 2017).

Communications Systems Approaches Defined: How Does CTAS Communicate?

Interdependence: There is a large degree of interdependence of CTAS’s communication within its own teams as well as other organizations upon which CTAS relies to relay and share information. CTAS works on the technical and legal aspects of county government (Walden, 2023), but it relies on partner organizations such as the Tennessee County Services Association (TCSA), County Officials Association of Tennessee (COAT), Tennessee Advisory Council on Intergovernmental Relations (TACIR, and the Tennessee State Comptroller’s Office, for technical assistance, program coordination, policy analysis, and proactive advocation for county governments in the Tennessee General Assembly. While this list is not exhaustive, it provides a glimpse of the interdependence of which CTAS has with partner organizations in relaying messages and better serving county governments in Tennessee.

Consistency: One factor in the existing communication system upon which CTAS could improve for its new employees is consistency. (Williams, 2017).  This consistency is internally needed as the collaborative project load between departments grows. Consistency also works to reinforce the diagonal flow of communication by first instilling departmental knowledge of service areas in CTAS (think “Which department covers what?”

 

Examining the Effectiveness of CTAS’s Communication Systems (and Their Effects on Newcomers to the Organization)

Based on the organizational structure of CTAS, as well as the diagonal flow of communication between middle managers and team members across the organization, one could theorize that two-way, open communication works best in the organization.

However, when it comes to encouraging open communication, it is the managers’ and executive director’s responsibility to encourage two-way communication from team members and managers (Raina, 2010) so that the collaborative process in CTAS can continue to improve. This also ensures that new hires to CTAS will be involved in the collaboration process and bring new, innovative ideas to the table to make CTAS a better service organization to county officials.

Middle managers’ commitment to excellence is what ultimately defines the culture (Martin, 2006) at CTAS, so it is imperative for the team of managers to set the standard and drive the culture in the organization. Although they are a small group, managers have a significant amount of power and influence at CTAS. They also have the power to define the message of CTAS, which is to better serve county government in Tennessee. This public service mission is not a strange one to many similar governmental agencies, with or without regulatory powers.

These verbal communication styles are imperative to encouraging positive and collaborative culture within CTAS, but what written elements are in play?

Currently, standard operating procedures at CTAS are practically nonexistent. Many human resource policies come from the University of Tennessee system itself, including annual compliance training and security measures. This lack of documented resources for new hires can prove ambiguous and frustrating, especially when it comes to working for an agency of the state government. Furthermore, it is troubling for new team members to have the authority to “fill in the gap” in some areas, while having to adhere to strict, ambiguous standards in others. This type of frustration is commonly noted from CTAS individuals in some conversations, but this can have many effects on the social costs of joining an organization with such a wide base of services and customers.

If a newcomer is hesitant to ask many questions, they are often left to fill in the blanks themselves. A lack of open communication and standard operating procedures can have a tremendously negative mental stress on new employees (Miller & Jablin, 1991).

 

Part III: Reflection on Systems, Structures, and Processes

Research Pitfall: Lack of Contextual and Written Background for UT CTAS

Most of the internally based information gathered in this research was through verbal means; there is not a lot of written history or context about CTAS as an organization unless one asks the directors or more seasoned employees. Most of the verbal information was gathered through an interview with CTAS Executive Director Jon Walden, who has been with the organization for 25 years. However, many middle managers had come into their managerial positions within the last 5-6 years, and shifting to this position from a lower-level team member position almost always shifts a person’s perspective.

Furthermore, as noted above, the lack of standard operating procedure leaves many questions when it comes to determining the culture of CTAS. When talking to current employees of the organization, it is evident that the employees work devotedly to fulfill the mission statement, but without standards and clearly set boundaries between employees, managers, and overall departments, it can be somewhat of a human resources concern when evaluating the culture.

 

Research Pitfall: Previous Research Focus on Private vs. Public Organizations

While companies can tout social responsibility and workers’ benefits as much as they would like, the primary focus is that of making the most money out of the most efforts from its employees. This endgame is different than that of public organizations, which can ultimately influence the culture, communications systems, and many daily processes of a private organization. When researching, one can easily find thousands of articles featuring case studies about private businesses that hired an external organizational/human resources consultant and shared the results. However, many public/nongovernment organizations do not have the budget, time, or resources to bring in outside consultants.

That leaves a lingering question: would the results of such studies and focus areas be different for public organizations, knowing that their endgame is to serve the public in a way that private sectors cannot?

(Personal) Research Pitfall: Lack of Focus on Specific Aspect of Organizational Communication

When compiling information and research for this paper, it soon became clear that a lack of focus was at play; however, it was nearly impossible to focus on one area when that issue affected so many other areas of the organization. The organizational structure affects the communication systems, which in turn affect the organizational culture, which in turn affects the onboarding process of new hires at CTAS. However, interviewing staff and leadership at CTAS helped to determine the organizational culture and creating recommendations for improvement to the communication systems and onboarding processes in the organization.

Part IV: Looking Forward to the Future of CTAS’s Culture and Systems Key Takeaways and Practical Application for Current CTAS Leadership

Transitioning and implementing to new systems in order to improve organizational culture is one of (if not THE most) daunting task an organization can take. Furthermore, the amount of time that surveys and communications flow analyses will take causes a significant drain on the organization’s time, labor, and other influential resources. However, if these gaps in communication and ultimate effects on CTAS culture are not addressed, those issues will only become more apparent as newer, younger employees are hired into the organization. Furthermore, these types of surveys and analyses can help current team members and managers to understand the organization on a microlevel, which is something that it lacks (as do many organizations that struggle with communication flow and organizational culture issues.) Ultimately, it will benefit CTAS, UT IPS, and many of CTAS’s customers as a result.

Who are the Beneficiaries of Clearly Defined Systems and Improved Culture?

Once communication systems and standard operating procedures have been established for CTAS, it then becomes easier to onboard new employees into a well-operating machine. It also helps new employees to identify problem areas, create solutions to those problems, and ultimately contribute more to CTAS and its customers—county officials.

This system could also work to benefit sister agencies within UT IPS—the Municipal Technical Advisory Service (MTAS), Tennessee Language Center (TLC), Naifeh Center for Effective Leadership (NCEL), Law Enforcement Innovation Center (LEIC), Center for Industrial Services (CIS), and the newly-established Substance Misuse and Addiction Resource for Tennessee (SMART).

These agencies have somewhat different organizational structures, but their mission and vision statements resemble that of UT CTAS; therefore, an organized communication system and culture improvement could certainly benefit the hundreds of employees housed within the UT Institute for Public Service.

Bibliography

CTAS. (2023). CTAS Strategic Plan. Retrieved from ctas.tennessee.edu: https://www.ctas.tennessee.edu/strategic-plan

Juneja, P. (2023, 6 December). Communication Flows in an Organization. Retrieved from ManagementStudyGuide.com: https://www.managementstudyguide.com/communication-flows.htm

Martin, M. J. (2006). 'That's the Way We Do Things Around Here": An Overview of Organizational Culture. Electronic Journal of Academic and Special Librarianship.

Miller, V. D., & Jablin, F. M. (1991, January). Information Seeking during Organizational Entry: Influences, Tactics, and a Model of the Process. The Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 92 - 120.

Raina, R. (2010, October). Timely, Continuous & Credible Communication & Perceived

Organizational Effectiveness. Indian Journal of industrial Relations, 46(2), 345 - 359.

Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational Culture. American Psychologist, 109-119.

UT CTAS. (n.d.). Staff. Retrieved from ctas.tennessee.edu: https://www.managementstudyguide.com/communication-flows.htm

Walden, J. (2023, November). (W. Doyle, Interviewer)

White, J., & Memory, H. (1997). Developing Organisational Communication. In J. White, & H. Memory, Developing Organisational Consultancy (p. 16). Routledge.

Williams, O. (2017, September 26). Organizational Communication Objectives. Retrieved from bizfluent.com: https://bizfluent.com/info-8400949-organizational-communication-objectives.html

Wroblewski, M. (2019, January 24). Organizational Structure & Communication. Retrieved from Chron: https://smallbusiness.chron.com/organizational-structure-communication-3815.html

Zerella, S., Treuer, K. v., & Albrecht, S. L. (2017). The influence of office layout features on employee perception of organizational culture. Journal of Environmental Psychology.