Airstar Inc Corporate Leadership - Assignment Example

Corporate Leadership Student’s Name: Instructor’s Name: Course Code: Date of Submission: Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Executive summary 3 1.1 Company background information 5 1.2 Company structure 6 1.2.1 Advantages to the company 6 1.2.2 Disadvantages to the company 6 1.3 Scope of the study 6 2.0 Organizational problems 7 2.1 Organizational structure 7 2.2 Communication structure 8 2.3 Poor organization principles 10 2.4 Current strategy 12 2.4.1 Company objectives 12 2.4.2 Unclear responsibilities and tasks 12 2.4.3 Lack of clear organizational structure 12 3.0 Recommendations 13 4.0 Conclusion 13 References 14 Executive summary The purpose of this report was to analyze the situation Airstar Inc. and then provide recommendation on how performance and efficiency can be enhanced in the company. this analysis has established that decline efficiency and performance in the company is founded on three leadership related issues. The leadership issues include lack of organizational structure, lack of adequate communication structure and lack good organizational principles. All these issues have led to insanity in leadership in the company where company goals and objectives can no longer be aligned with individual tasks as many of the directors seem to lead from different scripts. To help solve the problems and help the company return to its performance, different recommendations which include review of the organizational structure, communication structure and refreshing on good organizational principles have been proposed. This is important in ensuring that the right organizational structure is created where communication can be supported and company tasks well defined in relation to organizational goals and objectives. 1. Introduction The biggest challenge many companies and other organizations face in the contemporary management society is how to make sure that there is a ‘true balance’ between the shareholder value and the work environment which actually attracts the full commitment and utilization of the human resources and capital. The success, growth and sustainability of the company to a greater extend depends on the company’s ability to mentally involve its workforce in working towards realizing its goals and objectives. To ensure impact and effective leadership at levels including the corporate and individual level then enduring and meaningful leadership must start from the top (Werkman 2009). This is because the top management is charged with the responsibility of ensuring that vision, mission and company goals are made clear to the staff and the role of each manager well defined. Focusing on individual leadership in any organization, is not likely to do any good for the business as it will not be easy to support the organizational culture, processes, policies and systems. Corporate leadership is therefore important in ensuring that the organization is always changing in line with the ever changing business landscape (Steyn 2003). The purpose of this report is to study into the scenario at Airstar Company, which in the recent past has witnessed decline in the business performance as a result of the changing business environment which is becoming very competitive. The report is aimed at identifying the problems the company is facing currently in order to recommend ways that can be used by the management to offer solution to them. This is to help the company return to its past glory in terms of customer services and efficiency in its operations for sustained growth and development. 1.1 Company background information Airstar is a Company that specializes in manufacturing, repairing and installing pistons as well as engines for owned aircrafts. The company for many years has enjoyed dominance in the industry given its superior services in terms of quality and customer services. The founder of Airstar Company had managed to establish very close relationship with his managers till his death five years ago when Roy Morgan took over the leadership of the company. However, it’s emerging that the company is not ease and that its performance is on the decline. This problem has been accelerated with stiff competition from other companies such as General Electric and Patt and Whitney. Decline in the number of the orders services by the company, has been a major worry for the business and now the management is trying to brainstorm on which strategic direction to go. However, deeper its, emerging the problem the company is facing now is all about the company goals and objectives and how the human resource is structured alongside the organizational structure to work towards attaining them. 1.2 Company structure Airstar Inc. is functionally-structured. In a functionally structured organizations, all functions are similar and that departments within are semi-autonomous. This is to mean that they are all answerable to a one authority. 1.2.1 Advantages to the company 1. First and foremost this kind of structure allows the company to divide its workforce into specialized groups where they will be able to work well like marketing, manufacturing and planning. 2. This structure also allows for clear definition and of all roles and it is proper application can easily eliminate the problem job replication. 1.2.2 Disadvantages to the company The disadvantage with this kind of structure is that some departments may become limited to their own operations and thereby losing focus on being proactive. This is likely to encourage different work styles and at the same break communication within an organization. 1.3 Scope of the study This study is important not only for Airstar and the industry in which it operates but across very different industries. This is because the problem under consideration is about how organization human resource can be structured to meet the corporate goals and objectives. This study is therefore important to many organizations that are yet to structure their human resources, organizational structures and workloads to tackle the contemporary challenges. This report will cover the problems that face the company such assigning tasks to various managers and how efficiency can be enhanced through clear description of responsibilities. 2.0 Organizational problems 2.1 Organizational structure Organizations can be structured in very many ways depending the company objectives and culture. This is to ensure that that structure is supportive to the company objectives by enhancing performance (Ungureanu 2008). The organizational structure allows for establishment of different responsibilities for different managers and the processes to be followed in assigning them to different departments and staff (Werkman 2009). Having a wrong organizational structure is likely to compromise performance and efficiency of the company. The ultimate objective of having an organizational is to ensure efficiency and good working relationships among the staff and more especially among the managers. The factors that have been cited as key influencers of the organizational structure include the company size, skills required and the company product. With ever changing business environment, flexibility and creativity are also coming into picture in designing an organizational structure (Gulati et al 2005). Coming up with the most effective organizational structure is a big challenge for many organizations. For example, Airstar Company is one of those companies whose organizational structure does not meet the taste of the day. With an organizational structure, the board of managers is supposed to establish what the company vision is and the kind of values it stands for. This is goes along with the identification of the appropriate chain of authority and activities. The appropriate organizational structure must always be the one that clearly identifies the functions and responsibility of each and every team member. Further, the organizational structure is expected to outline what the company policies and procedures in order to ensure that the team is working cohesively and under good working relationships. However, with the case of Airstar, there is no effective organizational structure to work with. For instance, the tasks to be performed by different managers are not clearly explained. This can be seen from the overlapping of tasks and even other managers performing tasks which are not with their job descriptions. For example, the conflict between vice president of marketing and the controller over merger and acquisition strategies is a clear reflection of the confusion in the organization structure on who is to do what. 2.2 Communication structure Wide range of research exists to support the role of effective communication in enhancing organizational performance. For example the research by Capgemini Ernst and young in 2003, established that 80-85% of top 500 American companies was as a result of intangible assets such as communication and reputation in the market. The evidence shows that communication makes very significant contribution both to the public service and the business world. Ipsos MORI while studying the performance of 29 London Local Authorities, in 2005, including 7 councils that were as among the best in 2003/3 by the Audit Commission, found out that 7 councils were all among the top eleven highly performing councils in London (Werkman 2009). High performance was associated with effective communications structures used by both the businesses and public service sector. Communication at organizational level is also important in ensuring that every staff is engaged and able to perform his responsibilities as expected. The research by Cabinet Office in among 45 private owned companies operating in London, found out that effective communication enabled more engagement of employees and that 45% of engaged employees were more effective and that they could outdo their colleagues by around 20%. Further, engaged employees showed less sick-offs as opposed to the disengaged employees ( Gulati et al 2005). Despite these revelations which attributed enhanced organizational performance to effective communication, this has not been the case at Airstar Company. From the company’s style of operations, it is emerging that there is no clear structure through communication should be done. Take for example when the President to Airstar, Roy Morgan complaint of failing to receive reports for his juniors. This can be demonstrated from the scenario where the President sought to use the secretary to get a copy of the finance report. This has made it real very difficult for the president to have a say on what is happening at managerial level. Further, this has made it very difficult for the president to have a view on the appraisal of executive performance and the accomplishment of the company objectives. With lack of communication, many of the of the managers have been working on their job descriptions something that has led to overlapping of responsibilities like in the case between the vice president for marketing and the controller. 2.3 Poor organization principles Good governance is recognized everywhere in the world as key to success. This is the reason as to why the board members of different companies are working on ways to serve the company and stakeholder interests by ensuring that they always bring into board the kind of employee with appropriate skill and experience to deliver on the company goals. However, most important is the kind of organizational structure under which they are to work in. in an organizational setting, the management is expected to bring about passion and commitment to the business by ensuring that the company image is protected based on its values (Fairholm 2004). While ensuring that the company positively impact on the shareholder money and the community, various policies and procedures are regarded instrumental in ensuring positive relationships exist and the members of staff always work as a team. The purpose of having principles for the organization is to ensure that the process of making decisions is made and accountability always prevails. In other words, principles in an organization are used to ensure strong and effective leadership (Bensaou & Venkatraman 1995). In turn, the principles are expected to go along way in assisting people and the organization to benefit in overall. In many occasions, organization principles are closely linked with responsibilities and to some level the legal requirements on the side of the management. There are six main organizational principles which are preferred universally (Gregory 2008). However, in practice these principles are likely to vary with the company type and its size. The universally accepted organizational principles are: understanding what an individual role is is, ensuring and working towards delivering on the company purpose, working effectively as a team, exercising control at all levels, demonstrate integrity and finally show openness and accountability (Dumas & Sankowsky 1998). However, according to the vice president of manufacturing at Airstar, the company was not actually in track with respect to principles of good organization. For example, according to him, Jim Robinson, reviewing some of the organizational principles will help the company to be back on track in terms of performance and efficiency. At Airstar, company goals, policies, plans, strategies and programs are not clear. In addition, at the company still tasks for individuals are not clear that responsibilities do override thus causing a lot of conflict among the management team. Further, the spirit of teamwork is also not demonstrated in the company. This can be seen from lack of communication among the board members. This is well demonstrated in the scenario where the company finance report is not available for the company president. What this means, is that some report may not be true since they have not been confirmed by the management before they go to public. Finally, transparency and accountability is not practiced within the business. This can be seen from the way roles are assigned without following the due process. For instance it is questionable as to when the company marketing manager became in charge of acquisitions and mergers and yet that was not documented anywhere in the company records. What this says about the company is that many of the tasks are assigned superficially. This is because the process followed was more informal and that it could easily compromise the process of ensuring that appropriate skills and experiences are considered before having somebody serve in a particular position. 2.4 Current strategy The current strategy at Airstar is not working for a number of reasons. 2.4.1 Company objectives First and foremost, the strategy does not identify what the company objectives are and the various processes, programs and policies that have been put place in place to ensure their achievement. This has brought confusion allover the company, since no clear direction is in place to follow (Bechky 2006). 2.4.2 Unclear responsibilities and tasks The current strategy does not identify what the company tasks are and who should do what. This has resulted into the overlapping of the responsibilities where different functions tend to interfere with those of others. This in many occasions will derail the process of decision making because of the different interests (Bechky 2006). 2.4.3 Lack of clear organizational structure The current strategy being used at Airstar does not allow for use of one single formal organizational structure where each function can refer from in terms of its responsibilities. What this does to the business an informal flow of command whereby it is not easy for the staff and their supervisors to know where to receive their authority from. Further, lack of clear organizational structure, has caused arbitrary occupying of positions within the company. This has denied the company the opportunity to appraise and promote individuals formally to the positions they are competent in and the end result has been competence at work (Orlikowski 2002). 3.0 Recommendations Based on the analysis of the situation at Airstar Inc. which has prompted to decline in performance, the following recommendations have been posed to be applied by the management in order to help the business go back to its past glory in terms of reputation and efficiency: Review the organizational structure: The organization need to be reviewed in order to help clearly outline the chain of company and authority should be exercised. This is to help reduce the existence of conflicts among the staff. Design a communication structure: The analysis has established that there is now clear structure for communication. To manage this problem, the company must work on designing a structure that will allow flow of information up and down the organizational structure. Embrace good governance principles: Finally, there is need for the company to the management through good organizational principles for refresher purpose. This is to ensure that they are always put into practice. 4.0 Conclusion Corporate leadership is founded on good management practices which are guided by the company goals and objectives. The purpose of good management practices is to ensure enhanced performance and efficiency for an organization. However, a number of barriers such as lack of a good organizational structure, communication structure and good organizational principles can always hinder realization of the company objectives. This report however, recommends for further research to unfold the various ways in which efficiency and organizational performance can be enhanced. References Bechky, BA 2006. Gaffers, gofers, and grips: Role-based coordination in temporary organizations. Organization Science, 17(1), p. 3-21. Bensaou, M., & Venkatraman, N 1995. Configurations of Interorganizational Relationships: A comparison. Management Science, 41(9), p. 1471-1493. Dumas C & Sankowsky D 1998, “Understanding the charismatic leader-follower relationship: Promises and perils;” Journal of Leadership Studies, Vol. 5, p.12- 28. Fairholm MR 2004. “A new sciences outline for leadership development”. Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, 25(4), p. 369-383. Gregory A 2008. Competencies of senior communication practitioners in the UK: An initial study, Public Relations Review; 34(3), p. 215–223. Gulati R. Lawrence P and Puranam, P 2005. Adaptation in Vertical Relationships: Beyond Incentive Conflict. Strategic Management Journal, 26(5), p. 415-441. Steyn B 2003. From strategy to corporate communication strategy: A conceptualisation, Journal of Communication Management, (8)2, p. 168–83. Orlikowski WJ 2002. Knowing in Practice: Enacting a Collective Capability in Distributed Organizing. Organization Science: A Journal of the Institute of Management Sciences, 13(3), p. 249. Ungureanu MC 2008. Banks: Regulation and Corporate Governance Framework. Corporate Ownership & Control, Vol. 5, No. 2, p. 56-90. Werkman RA 2009, Understanding failure to change: a pluralistic approach and five patterns, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 30(7), pp. 664–684. Read More