Organizational Behavior: Samsung Electronics - Case Study Example

Organizational Behavior: Samsung Electronics. Task: Table of Contents. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………..3 Background…………………………………………………………………………………...3 Theoretical Framework……………………………………………………………………...4 Organizational Behavior Analysis: Samsung Electronics………………………………….7 Organizational Stereotype…………………………………………………………………...7 Organizational Culture……………………………………………………………………....8 Organizational Change……………………………………………………………………..10 Suggestions…………………………………………………………………………………..11 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………...12 Organizational Behavior: Samsung Electronics. Introduction. Organizations operate in different environments in line with their exact business or economic interests. Given that there are numerous industries in the world, there are different ways that each organization can be defined in the respective industries in which they operate. As such, the characteristics that define each organization is dependent on the way that it operates, and is largely a representation of the type of organization that it is. This means that there is a relationship between the interests of an organization and the behavioral characteristics that such companies depict. Therefore, each organization has an impact on the general way that the employees and other personnel carry themselves around. By continually working in an organization, there are certain definitive characteristics of that organization that employees get indoctrinated to. Similarly, employee behavior will also generally reflect the larger organizational behavior of any given organization. This basically means that there is a correlation that exists between employee behavior and general organizational behavior, and it is this relationship that defines overall organizational behavior (Hoskisson et al. 2009, p. 167). In light of this, an understanding of the tenets of organizational behavior for a company such as Samsung Electronics can highlight its operational conditions particularly in consideration of its current state amid reducing sales and revenue and looming restructuring. Background. Samsung Electronics is a subsidiary of Samsung Group, a multinational firm that has various interests ranging from building and construction to the manufacture of device components. These include semi-conductors, LCD panels, batteries, flash memory and even chips for other electronics companies. It is based in South Korea, and has been on a steady rise ever since the smartphone wave hit the technology and mobile communication industry. Between 2005 and 2013, Samsung Electronics has registered expansive growth in both sales and revenue, and this has resulted in its unprecedented rise to the top echelons of the technology industry. This growth can be seen in both its overall employee numbers, which grew up to a global figure of over 200000 employees (Sekhar 2009, p. 67). Additionally, this relatively significant growth means that the scope of what Samsung Electronics has to deal with has also changed, and this brings the need to take up an entirely different approach towards it managerial and overall operational duties. Additionally, the growth is expounded by the fact that Samsung Electronics is largely involved with a number of different business units apart from the well-known mobile division. In fact, the mobile division is in itself cluttered with different products all of which have to be given some priority when dealing with organizational operations. Therefore, it is easy to note the increasing level of complexity that defines Samsung Electronics’ operations as highlighted by the high product range and increased scope of operations. Such a form of idealization has to necessitate an entirely different approach in order that a company may maintain its stature as a great manufacturer while still existing within the operational limits of its existence as a company (Benn et al. 2003, p. 77). In the case of Samsung Electronics, the coordination, or lack thereof, of all the necessary facets of organizational management has led to the decline in its overall revenue thereby resulting in the current wave of poor performance that has seen a drop in both revenues and sales. Therefore, this forms the background for the evaluation of organizational behavior with respect to Samsung Electronics and the current wave of changes that are aimed towards trying to regain the rapidly diminishing market share. Theoretical Framework. In order to analyze Samsung Electronics’ organizational behavior effectively, it is prudent to look at the principles that define organizational behavior as a whole. As such, there are certain aspects of an organization that ultimately affect its behavior. An organization is therefore made up of various different fragments that all integrate together to define its behavior (Thompson 2001, p. 145). One of the most important elements is the people or employees of the organization. These are the most important individuals in the organization as they determine the success or failure of the organization. By certain accounts, it is solely the responsibility of the employees to facilitate the success of the organization (Wall & Griffiths 2006, p. 87). This goes to show that the personnel involved in the production processes have the greatest impact on the way that the organization as a whole is to be run. As such, organizational behavior is directly linked to the way that a company or organization treats its employees, such that the relationship between employee behavior and overall organizational behavior is defined by a direct bond (Benn & Baker 2009, p. 271). Additionally, the people involved in the activities of an organization have their own means of interactions that define the organization’s social systems. These social systems characterize the overall way that the organization operates in such a way that they define exactly how different social classes are idealized in the organization, and also the types of relationships that individuals in these classes have among each other (Lewis 2011, p. 229). There are both individual and group definitions of social interactions within an organization. This is particularly based on the elements that define humans such as the ability to conform to a given social class and subsequently feel attached to such a social class. This leads to the second element of organizational behavior which is structure. Through the social forms of institutionalizations that exist in organizations, there is the aspect of structuring which makes it possible for the different social idealizations to co-exist for the mutual benefit of all (Evans 2002, p. 56). Each of the existing social classes have their own niche that they occupy in the organization, and it is up to the structural elements of an organization to define exactly the type of relationship that these different classes have (Ulwick 2005, p. 116). The structure makes it possible for a healthy concomitance between different levels of existence within an organization, and this facilitates better relations that ultimately lead to mutual benefit for all parties involved. However, keeping in mind that the focus for this evaluation is on Samsung Electronics, which is a technology company, the very element of technology plays a very critical role in influencing the way that the company’s organizational behavior is structured. This is particularly true by virtue of the fact that for a technology company, it is the existing technological knowhow that directs the type of relationship that will exist between all the factors involved (Moorhead & Griffin 2011, p. 176). As an illustration, the company management may be in dire need of some form of technology necessary for the accomplishment of a certain organizational objective, but in the event that the necessary personnel are unable to provide it within the required time, there is bound to be contention and poor relational link between the management and the department in question. Therefore, this tries to highlight the importance of technology particularly in the context of the case of Samsung Electronics as an organization in the technology industry. Additionally, the technology influences the working conditions and has a major impact on the general employee welfare, thereby extending to the way that they feel towards the company (Moorhead & Griffin 2011, p. 167). This then extends to the overall organizational behavior that the company is identified with since the employees are the eyes through which the company is viewed by third parties. Another element that defines organizational behavior is the environment in which the organization is in. This element is subjective due to the fact that different organizations operate in different environments courtesy of the exact nature of their business operation (Doppelt 2008, p. 199). This ranges from product to service delivery, and cannot be idealized in one form. Nonetheless, the environment in which an organization operates defines the type of organizational behavior that such a company is bound to have. There are conditions that define both the internal and external environment in which a company operates, and each of these environments guide the operations of an organization to such a level that the organization is a subject to them (Gershon 2009, p. 125). Moreover, an organization only has control over the internal environmental factors such as the employees. On the other hand, external environmental factors such as the political sphere, competition, and any natural forces are often beyond the scope of most organizations, yet still play a major role in influencing the organizational behavior of such companies (Edwards 2009, p. 111). Organizational Behavior Analysis: Samsung Electronics. Organizational Stereotype. There are conditions that impact on an organization’s behavior. One of these conditions is the underlying organizational stereotyping that a company or organization has. This stereotyping is the way that the organization thinks of itself and the mindset that the employees have whenever they think about the organization. Additionally, organizational stereotyping is the way that individuals, partners, governments, suppliers, and even competitors think regarding any given company or organization (Anderson 2011, p. 253). In light of this, Samsung Electronics has been stereotyped as one of the most influential companies in the technology industry (Cant et al. 2008, p. 129). This stereotyping has affected the company’s behavior in the sense that they always strive to maintain the idealization by always coming up with new forms of technology, some of which may not necessarily be successful. This is best highlighted by the way that the organization has an almost unrivaled number of mobile handsets that it releases every year. In comparison, its fiercest rival, Apple Inc., only has one line of mobile handset, the iPhone, which only gets iterated once a year. This enables it to have better control over its products thereby making it much more tailored to the demands of the customers. However, Samsung Electronics’ approach of numerous products in every market segment limits its specialization even though it is structured on the element of its stereotyping. As such, the stereotyping results in organizational behavior tailored towards meeting the demands of the nature of the typecast given. From this perspective, it is easy to see how the element of stereotyping facilitates an organizational behavior that may be limiting in terms of what is good for a company. And this is the connection that arises between stereotyping and the current situation where Samsung Electronics is registering reduced sales and revenues. In part, this issue is as a result of the numerous models, which means that any subsequent models will not be easily purchased due to the existing models. As such, Samsung Electronics has been seeing a drop in the sales of their premium line of devices, but this is due to the fact that the organization does not really have one premium device. While there is the S line of devices, there is also the Note line, and recently they unveiled the Alpha line. All these lines are basically targeted at the Samsung enthusiasts, and the probability that a consumer can purchase more than one of them is very limited. As such, all of these units will register reduced sales as the target consumers would have bought only one of the three differentiations. As an illustration, Samsung released a Galaxy S5, Note 4, and Galaxy Alpha all within one year. This means that any potential Samsung customer is bound to purchase only one of these three devices. The overall result is that the sales and revenues of the others will be greatly limited. In short, this tries to illustrate the relationship that exists between the stereotyping of an organization and the overall behavior of the organization. In the case of Samsung Electronics, the stereotyping is that they are capable of dominating all market niches available, and the outcome is that their behavior tries to emulate and fulfil this stereotyping, although with disadvantageous results as highlighted by the reduced sales and revenues. Organizational Culture. Another element of organizational behavior is the organizational culture which is one of the most important elements of behavior in an organization. Organizational culture refers to the characteristic traits that the organization as a whole exhibits through its employees and other human personnel (Burnes & Todnem 2013, p. 222). Each organization has a culture that is unique to it, and is an identifying element that somewhat unifies the people in the organization. It can be defined by the norms, beliefs, habits, and general demeanor that the organization invokes among the public (Kourdi 2009, p. 291). Moreover, organizational culture forms the basis for structuring organizational objectives and goals. This means that through the organizational culture, an organization can effectively structure its objectives and goals in conformity with the beliefs and norms that the human elements of the organization can identify with (Goudvis & Harvey 2007, p. 222). It is largely disadvantageous to structure organizational objectives that are out of sync with the organizational culture as this would result in poor performance of employees. Samsung Electronics seems not to have a solid organizational culture that can be used to guide its objectives and goals. This is due to the fact that Samsung Electronics cannot really pride itself in any one unique product that truly highlights their core ideals as a company. Instead, they have an array of different products and this fails to highlight any form of focus on one single product. By most accounts, a strong organizational culture is based on a common goal and a single unifying factor that runs across all departments of an organization (Morden 2007, p. 123). This is the very factor that Samsung Electronics lacks, and this means that there is no ‘soul’ attached to their product range. Samsung Electronics indeed prides its self in having the financial might and technological knowhow to come up with a device in almost all facets of the technology industry. However, this is not all it takes to attach pride and life to products. This means that the individuals involved with the management of Samsung fluctuate between sides and generally flow with what the public wants. This prevents them from coming up with a single factor that unifies all their business interests and subsequently guiding them through their operations. Consequently, Samsung Electronics’ organizational behavior does not really have a solid framework as organizational behavior is based on the organizational culture. Since its organizational culture is loose and cannot unify the different organizational elements, this translates to the behavior such that the different facets do not have a common behavioral trait that guides them through their operations. As such, this means that their goals and strategies cannot really be met with the efficiency that it deserves. Overall, this results in a poor structure that cannot sustain all the components of business particularly in light of the wide scope of business interests that Samsung Electronics is involved with. Corporate culture is very essential in defining the direction that an organization is able to take wholly (Jansson 2008, p. 212). Without such a unifying factor, the management style, employee beliefs, product enthusiasm, and corporate principles that generally define organizational behavior cannot be identified (Kangas 2003, p. 65). This, therefore, like in Samsung Electronics’ case, results in an unsustainable business plan as exhibited by the reduction in both sales and revenue. Organizational Change. Organizational change is one of the most important tools for realizing effective organizational behavior. Through organizational change, it is relatively easy to modify organizational culture to be within the expectations of the management team (Doppelt 2010, p. 212). However, organizational change takes different forms regarding the pre-existing ideology in an organization. As such, this ideology has to be evaluated in line with the expected change and the necessary amends can then be made. Regarding Samsung Electronics, change has to incorporate the elements of technology and a restructured organizational culture as this would subsequently facilitate a better transitional approach towards change. There are theories that define organizational change, such as the stage theory of organizational change. This theory is based on the stage or phase in which an organization is in (Moreton et al. 2012, p. 245). There are stages within the existence of an organization that it has to look at the existing conditions and orchestrate change in line with trying to gain a better position in the industry (Burke 2002, p. 302). Therefore, the stage theory of change best applies to Samsung Electronics at the stage in which they are since it gives them the opportunity to restructure their culture and adopt one that is bound to facilitate the realization of better sales hence increased revenue. This connects with organizational behavior as it gives the relationship between the need for change and the factors that define the change; in this case Samsung Electronics’ drop in sales. Additionally, there is the aspect of prioritization and hierarchical approach towards interests. This approach enables an organization to view its interests and structure its managerial and overall business objectives in line with the most important interests (Hitt 2011, p. 134). Samsung Electronics can effectively restructure its managerial approach to focus only on the most important product lines and give peripheral attention to the other products under its business interests. This approach is best suited for enabling a behavioral perspective that is more specified as opposed to the current situation of Samsung Electronics that does not attach any distinct trait to its business interest. By structuring organizational culture to enable a more uniquely defined product line-up, Samsung Electronics will then be able to realize organizational principles that facilitate better employee and corporate identification with the company beliefs (Hossenlopp 2010, p. 298). Suggestions. Samsung Electronics’ current situation of reduced sales and revenues stems from the lack of a clear approach towards achieving its core business objectives. As highlighted, this is the result of an organizational culture that is rigid to change and ineffective at facilitating the realization of the right culture for better corporate interactions. In light of this, the following recommendation can effectively alter the organizational principles to enable a more productive behavior: The first recommendation is for Samsung to reduce its range of devices to a more manageable size. This will make it much more comfortable for the realization of organizational culture that revolves around a common goal, hence more positive organizational behavior (Gully & Phillips 2013, p. 132). The company could also invest in better technology and facilitate more in-depth research in the technological knowhow. This will result in better designed products to enable it maintain the rapidly dropping market share. Additionally, increased business results in better employee motivation thereby improving overall corporate behavior (Culp 2002, p. 87). Given that Samsung Electronics is currently involved in various business units, it could consider restructuring its business idealization to enable better connectivity between the units. Consequently, this will facilitate better relations at both the individual and organizational level, and these are the core principles for productive organizational behavior and culture (McIntyre et al. 2013, 98). Samsung Electronics can solicit for the services of experienced industry analysts to help it interpret the direction that the market takes, and subsequently adapt to them effectively. This dynamic approach to the organizational adaptation to the industry will facilitate better employee belief in the posterity of their existence at the corporation, thereby resulting in improved relations and culture (Hart & London 2010, p. 267). Conclusion. Organizations exist in varying environments in the course of undertaking their business activities. The ability to be dynamic enough and adapt to the different conditions is what defines a successful corporation (Russ 2010, p. 137). However, this ability is tied to the existing organizational culture and behavioral traits that are at the core of the organization. In consideration of all these, Samsung Electronics as a technology company forms a basis for the evaluation of its being in the wake of the reduced sales and revenues. By considering the above recommendations, and the definitive elements of organizational behavior, Samsung Electronics can easily tackle the current wave of issues and realize its true potential. References. Gully, S & Phillips, J. (2013). Organizational Behavior: Tools for Success, Mason, OH: Cengage Learning. Hart, S & London, T. (2010), Next Generation Business Strategies for the Base of the Pyramid: New Approaches for Building Mutual Value, New Jersey, NJ: FT Press. Burke, W. (2002). Organizational Change: Theory and Practice. California: SAGE. Moorhead, G. & Griffin, R. (2011). Organizational Behavior. Malden, MA: Cengage Learning. Anderson, D. (2011). Organizational Development: The Process of Leading Organizational Change. California: SAGE. Goudvis, A & Harvey, S. (2007), Strategies That Work, Stenhouse Publishers, Massachusetts. McIntyre, J. et al. (eds.) (2013). Strategies for Sustainable Technologies and Innovations. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Publishing. Kangas, K. (2003), Business Strategies for Information Technology Management, Idea Group Inc. (IGI), London. Lewis, L. (2011). Organizational Change: Creating Change through Strategic Communication. Malden: John Wiley & Sons. Thompson, L. (2001), Understand Corporate Strategy, Cengage Learning EMEA, London. Benn, S. & Baker, E. (2009). “Advancing Sustainability through Change and Innovation: A Co-evolutionary Perspective”, Journal of Change Management, 9:4, 383 – 397. Kourdi, J. (2009), Business Strategy: A Guide to Taking Your Business Forward, John Wiley & Sons, London. Burnes, B, & Todnem, R. (eds.) (2013). Organizational Change, Leadership, and Ethics: Leading Organizations towards Sustainability. New York: Routledge. Jansson, H. (2008), International Business Strategy in Emerging Country Markets, Edward Elgar Publishing, California. Edwards, M. (2009). Organizational Transformation for Sustainability: An Integral Metatheory. Massachusetts: Taylor & Francis. Sekhar, G. (2009), Business Policy and Strategic Management, I.K. International Pvt Ltd, Boston. Doppelt, B. (2010). Leading Change toward Sustainability: A Change-management Guide for Business, Government, and Civil Society. London: Greenleaf Publishing. Gershon, R. (2009), Telecommunications and Business Strategy: Industry Structures and Planning Strategies, Taylor & Francis, Texas. Benn, S. et al. (2003). Organizational Change for Corporate Sustainability: A Guide for Leaders and Change Agents of the Future. Texas: Routledge. Wall, S & Griffiths, A., (2006), Economics for Business & Management, Prentice Hall, London. Doppelt, B. (2008). The Power of Sustainable Thinking: How to Create a Positive Future for the Climate, the Planet, Your Organization, and Your Life. London: Earthscan. Cant, M. et al. (2008), Business Management: A Contemporary Approach, Juta and Company Ltd, Cape Town. Evans, N. (2002), Business Agility: Mobile Business Strategies for 21st Century and Markets, FT Press, New Jersey. Ulwick, A. (2005), Business Strategy Formulation: Theory, Process, and the Intellectual Revolution, IAP, Manchester. Russ, M. (2010), Knowledge Management Strategies for Business Development, IGI Global Snippet, Chicago. Moreton, M et al. (2012), Strategic Management and Business Analysis, Routledge, California. Hoskisson, R et al. (2009), Strategic Management: Competitiveness and Globalization, Cengage Learning, Ohio. Morden, T. (2007), Principles of Management, Ashgate Publishing Ltd, Hampshire. Culp, C (2002), The Risk Management Process: Business Strategy and Tactics, John Wiley & Sons, Burlington. Hossenlopp, R. (2010), Organizational Project Management: Linking Strategy and Projects, Management Concepts, New Hampshire. Hitt, M. (2011), Understanding Business Strategy Concepts. Cengage Learning, Ohio. Read More