Developing Responsiveness through Organisational Structure: UNISON - Case Study Example

Developing Responsiveness through Organisational Structure (A Case Study: UNISON) Name of Student Lecturer Date Introduction In an organisation, different activities are performed. These activities must be coordinated by members of the organisation through a formal structure (Shtub & Karni, 2010). Organisational structure is meant to promote division of tasks, group activities, coordinate and control organisational tasks. Organisational structure that is well designed allows the organisation to function smoothly and responsively (Porter & Siegel, 2006). The purpose of this paper is to analysis a case study of UNISON, the biggest public service trade union in the United Kingdom (UK), concerning its need to increase responsiveness to change and its members’ needs through organisational structure. This paper begins with the description of the topic on organisational structure as discussed in the case study while highlighting its importance and impacts to the performance of the organisation. The paper will then present the case company (UNISON) and the case itself including the issue of concern, how it was approached, and how successful the actions were. Lastly, the paper will provide the analysis of the case study, possible recommendations and conclusive remarks. Discussion of the HR management related topic discussed in the case The case study discusses organisational structure and its contribution to organisation’s responsiveness to the needs of clients. Organisatinal structure has been defined as how employees within a business are organised and how they interact and relate to one another (UNISON, n.d). Just like UNISON, different organisations have different types of organisational structures. However, they depend on the business size, aims and corporate culture. According to the case study, their are three types of organisational structure: hierarchical, horizontal and matrix structures. It attempts to identify how businesses, particulartyly UNISON has designed its organisational structure to allow prompt decision making and respond to changes so to help its members. Therfore, organisational structure is seen as one of the determinants of organisation’s responsiveness to change in businesss environment. Acording to Mei (2012) organisational responsiveness is the propensity of an organisation to act based on information generated in the business environment. Thus, based on available infromation, an organisation should be able to respond to needs of customers quickly. To this regard, Arnason and Johnsen (2012) assert that the level of responsiveness within the organisation depends on how information is shared between employees and their managers, and how fedback is provided, which is defined by the existing organisational structure. Individual work within the organisation has to be cordinated and managed to achieve organisatinal goals and objectives. According to Shtub and Karni (2010) organisational structure is a significant tool a firm can use to achieve cordination, since it specifies who reports to who, makes clear formal communication channels, and explains how dinstinct individuals’ actions are linked together. Organisations use different structures to function. However, these structures, if poorely managed can face challenges, implyng that different structures suit particular business envirinments (Shtub & Karni, 2010). There are four main aspects of organisational structure that differentiate how employees within the organisation behave and how work is cordinated. These elements of organisational structure, also known as building blocks of strcuture include centralisation, hierarchical levels, formalisation, and departmentalisation (Shtub & Karni, 2010). Centralisation is the extent to which the authority to make decisions is concentrated at the top level of the organisation. Many important decisions in such a company are made by top level managers without involving employees at the lower level (Adair, 2007). Hierarchical (tall) structure is where there are various layers of management between employees at the top level and frontline employees. In tall structures, employees reporting to each manager are normally few, which allows more opportunity for managers to monitor and supervise employee activities (Porter & Siegel, 2006). Formalisation is the degree to which the policies, procedures, rules, and job descriptions of the organisation are stated and explicitly articulated. Thus, formalised structures have written rules and regulations which control the behaviuor of employees (Sine, Mitsuhashi & Kirsch, 2006). Lastly, departmentalisation diffentiates organisational strcutures, and it can either be functional of divisional. Organisations that use functional structures usually group similar jobs in functional areas, such as manufacturing, marketing, accounting, finance, information technology, and human resources (Shtub & Karni, 2010). Alternatively, organisations that use divisional structures have departments that represent the customers, products, services, or geographic locations served by the organisation (Sine et al., 2006). Ideally, as it is the case for UNISCO, many organisations have structures that are a mixture of both functional and divisional forms. Important of organisational structure and its impacts to company performance Organisational structure palys an important role in the organisation. It enabbles the organisation to function effciently in different ways. Through organisational structure, the organisation is able allocate authority and responsibility to employees (Porter & Siegel, 2006). Thus, it provides a clear-cut authority relationships which helps members of the organisation to know their role and how it relates to the roles of others. This, in turn help improve organisational performance and service devlivery to customers (Porter & Siegel, 2006). Organisation structure avails a particular pattern of communication that allows high level of cordination among members of organisation at different levels. It groups people and activities, facilitating comunication and cordination between people centred on theri respective tasks (Sine et al., 2006). Ideally, individuals with common problems to handle need to share infromation and this is achieved through organisational structure. Organisations can locate decision-making centers through organisational structure (Shtub & Karni, 2010). In UNISON’s organisational structure, for example a regional organiser is responsible for making decisions within his or her particular region and leaves other matters largely up to other regional organisers to ensure that there is no conflict of interest. Organisational structure also helps develop and maintain proper balance and and encourages employees to cordinate group activities (Anand & Daft, 2007). This means that more significant aspects determining the success of the organisation are likely to be given first priority by management. Therefore, the organisation will be able to respond to the needs of their customers as soon as possible considering that fact that the organisation can not operate without them (Anand & Daft, 2007). Still, organisational structure help to stimulate creativity in the organisation (Adair, 2007). Effective structures encouarge organisational members to be creative thinkers by providing patterns of authority that are well defined. In this case, all members of the organisation are made aware of their areas of specialisation, therefore display their best in the workplace so their efforts are recognised and appreciated (Adair, 2007). Most importantly, organisational structure encourages growth by providing a framework within which the organisation operates. In particular, a flexible structure helps the organisation meet emerging challenges and create opportunities for growth and prosperity by increasing the capacity to handle various activities (Shtub & Karni, 2010). Information about UNISON As indicated earlier, the case company used in this paper is called UNISON, whose main concern is to become more responsive to needs of its members through a sound organisational structure. UNISON is the biggest trade union for public service in the UK, representing more than 1 million members working in all the areas of public service (UNISON, n.d). A part from having employees in the national level, the trade union has also employees at regional, area, and local levels. The members of the union work in town halls, schools, colleges, universities, social services, clinics and hospitals. Most people in the UK depend of services provided by the union members and they play an important role in protecting, enriching and changing lives (UNISON, n.d). Many organisations in the UK hold UNISON branches. UNISON is responsible for representing and supporting its members in work-related issues across the UK. Among the duties performed by the union include looking after the members’ welfare and campaigning for changes in issues at work on their behalf (UNISON, n.d). Another major role of UNISON is to engage in both local and national negotiations and collective bargaining on their behalf. During such arrangements, the union negotiates with respective employers and groups of employers in fight for the rights of its members collectively (UNISON, n.d). In campaigning on behalf of members, UNISON seeks to introduce changes that are beneficial to members, such as improved working conditions, wages, or job security. For the past two years, the UNISON campaigns have and continue to be against spending cuts by the government that will negatively affect the operation of public services and people working in the sector (UNISON, n.d). On behalf of its members, UNISON has focused on these campaigns to promote a better public service in today and in future, and to ensure that its members are protected from work-related concerns (UNISON, n.d). The issue in the case UNISON is committed to ensuring that it represents and supports all its members in issues that often arise in the work place as quickly as possible. This among others are roles the trade union has performed since it came to existance. With membership of 1.3 milion workers in public serrvice, UNISON has to ensure that all challenges facing its members are resolved promptly so to remain competitive in the industry. However, despite the effort by the trade union of representing and supporting its members, the problems employees face at work have become more challenging, especially after the government introduced the spending cuts policy (UNISON, n.d). In-deed, UNISON has focused its campaign efforts over the past two years on the challenges the public services encounter from government massive cuts. However, there is more to be done. For example, in 2102, the coalition governemnt planned spending cuts in public sector which meant that over 730,000 people would lose their jobs in public service (UNISON, n.d). As a trade union, UNISON had a challenge to safeguard its members from losing their jobs through such unfriendly policy by the governemnt. This means that UNISON has to support not only members, but also their families and other people who rely on public services for a living a quickly as possible. This is because when members lose their jobs, it is a sign of failure on the part of UNISON, as a representive and supporter of the very members. Thus, the question that arises is what should UNISON do to make decisions and respond to changes promptly in order to help its members? How it was approached by UNISON In response to the above concern and the need to meet its aims, UNISON established an organisational structure with well defined roles and responsibilities to each level. It pursued this strategy with the belief that its structure would help it operate efficiently and be responsive to the needs of its members. UNISON designed a complex structure that reflects its culture and the complex nature of work it performs (UNISON, n.d). UNISON has a workforce of 1,100 staff that works in the 12 regions in the UK and in the newly established centre in London. Each regions of the trade union has employees who perform duties in various areas, such as learning and development, health, education and local government (UNISON, n.d). Given that UNISON’s members are organised into different branches throughout North Ireland and Britain, the hierarchical structure is meant to help the organisation act quickly and respond to changes as soon as they occur. The organisational structure of UNISON at the national level was designed in way that it is centralized allowing the senior members and workers in the union to make decisions affecting the entire union (UNISON, n.d). This means that the UNISON is run from the top and has a well-known person as the head (national secretary) who makes most of the decisions that affect the union and its members. In addition, UNISON established a culture of equality which allows people freedom to express their thoughts and ideas and to involve in decision making within the union (UNISON, n.d). Consequently, UNISON gave the regions some power to make decisions. This was based on the understanding that people in the regions may have a better idea of needs of the people at the local level. UNISON sought some level of decentralisation of its organisational structure to facilitate greater responsiveness at all levels (UNISON, n.d). Nevertheless, the organisational structure of UNISON is characterised by a narrow span of control implying that there is tight control of activities. In order to ensure that information is spread outside the organisation, UNISON adopted cutting-edge communication techniques by developing a media centre including radio and television recording facilities (UNISON, n.d). Different people have different roles at all levels within the organisation’s hierarchy and these roles are specific to the goals of the union. In this case, the local organiser recruits and supports members at the local level and reports to the area level in the hierarchy (UNISON, n.d). The area organiser is responsible for organising work across branches and conducting region-wide campaigns and events. The holder of this post reports to the regional level. On the other hand, the regional secretary acts as a regional manager who is responsible development of communication policies and strategic and national policies (UNISON, n.d). Through these arrangements, UNISON appears to be keen on not only providing a good working environment, but also to deal with the challenge of supporting its members is a responsive way. UNISON also added a new role of ‘fighting fund organisers’ at the local level to help deal with the challenge of cuts to public services. Therefore it recruited more than 100 people to occur the position of fighting fund organisers (UNISON, n.d). These people were meant to take the union in new directions, in particular using new methods, such as social networking to remain in touch with members. The introduction of such roles has helped the union to make its structure focus more at local level and achieve a highly decentralised organisation. In addition, UNISON introduced career paths for the new recruits so to increase flexibility and help the union to invest resources appropriately (UNISON, n.d). The success of the actions The actions proved to be succesful and UNISON made a valuable contribution to the lives of people working in the public sector. Union organisers at both local and regional levels have been able to perform their roles well within their mandate which contributed to the success of the union of addressing the needs of its members on a timely basis (UNISON, n.d). The organisational structure of UNISON is clear enough and has well defined roles and responsibilities at each level. At every level, people are allowed to make decisions that affect members allowing greater flexibility to changes in issues at work. Also, the introduction of career path for organisers was received well by employees in the union as it provided them with oportunity to grow and rise through the organisation. In particular, making the hierarchy decentralised at local level by introducing the new role of fighting fund organisers helped improve UNISON’s responsiveness to change, such as cuts to public services. Description on effectiveness of the actions in the company The actions by UNISON were actually well thought of and to a greater extent were effective in helping the union achieve its aims. First, the action that involved establishing a hierarchical organisational structure with well defined roles and responsibilities to each level was good. The intention of UNISON was to organise the business in layers where by the higher layers in the structure have more authority than the lower layers. The tall structure allowed the union to clearly define the role of individuals. Given that UNISON was highly concerned with ensuring that it responds to changes likely to affect its members, such as spending cuts initiative by the government, this structure would facilitate quick decision making by people at the top of the organisation. However, the problem with this structure according to ( ) is that communication may not be effective since the message could be delayed as it moved through all the layers. Although UNISON made the national level centralized allowing the senior members to make decisions affecting the entire union, which may be criticised for lack of democracy, adopting equality culture, on the other hand, was a confirmation that the union was concerned about the rights of people. Allowing people to express their views and involve in decision-making, especially at the regional level contributed a lot to UNISON being responsive to the needs of its members. Also, UNISON developed a media centre including radio and television recording facilities, which I belief was necessary to improve communication in the union. Considering the fact the UNISON has 12 regions across UK, introducing cutting-edge communication approaches helped improve how it dealt with issues at work facing its members. Generally, the tall structure adopted by UNISON was effective in helping the union act quickly and respond to changes. For example the UNISON centre focused on providing services, such as financial, legal and personal services to members and regions while employees at the regional levels dealt with issues that occurred in their geographical area. Therefore, it can be argued that the actions by UNISON were helpful to achieving its aims of developing responsiveness to change and supporting members. Discussion of experience on the topic My experience with the topic of organisational structure is that different organisations develop different structures based on their aims and corporate culture. Also, structure is always associated to the type of business an enterprise practices, implying that it could be organised by product, function, and geography. For example, UNISON’s organisational structure was organised by function (Corporate Services, Learning and Development, Health, Local Government and Education, Organisation, and Private Companies and Policies) and geography ( the 12 UK regions, Britain, and Northern Ireland). I have also learnt that organisations choose a structure that enables them perform their activities efficiently. Thus, an organisation may decide to use hierarchical structure, horizontal structure, or matrix structure as long as it help achieve its aims and objectives, as well as lead to effecient utilisation of available resources. The beaviour of an organisation is reflected in the type of structure it operates. In-deed, the structure defines the way an organisation works (Shtub & Karni, 2010). This is evident at UNISON, where its highly centralised hierarchical strcuture at the national level implies that its activities are run from the top. Another important experience on organisational structure is that they are characterised by span of control, chain of command, accountability, and communication channels. Irrespective of any structure, these features must exist and they determine the effectiveness of the organisation in decision-making and in dealing with other issues that emerge within and outside the business environment just like in the case of UNISON. Recommendations Considering the degree to which UNISCO is centralised and formalised, the existing number of levels in its hierarchy, and the type of departmentalisation is uses to pursue its goals and objetives shows the desire it has to ensuring that it remains responsive to changes and the needs of all members. In-deed, the organisation demonistrated much effort in attempt to achieve its aims, which is really encouraging. Despite, the organisation can still do much better to improve its performance, especially being responsive to change. Thus, the following recommendations can be useful to the organisation as far as achievement of its aims comcern. While developing its structure, UNISON should always ensure that individual duties and responsibilities as well as lines of authority are effectvely understood by all people in the organisation to help optimise its operations (Zheng, Yang & McLean, 2010). UNISON should empower people in the organisation to understand its strategic vision by clearly defining dependencies and relationships within the organisational structure. This would help increase respond to issues affecting its members (Naqshbandi & Kaur, 2011). The organisation should continue to orient new employees, such as fighting fund organisers and provide them with career development and succession plans. This would act as a motivational tool to employees who will remain committed to helping the union achieve its goals and objectives (Zheng et al., 2010). UNISON should understand the complex nature of its organisational structure and focus on helping to simplify relationships. This will help promote more flexibility in dealing with challenges that face its members, such as cuts to public services (Naqshbandi & Kaur, 2011). Other issue related to the organisational structure A part from the recommendations on organisational structure, another issue that is equally important and related to the topic in the case study is organisational design. It is the process of effective coordination of the elemements of organisational structure (McGee & Molloy, 2003). Based on the classical school of thought, the organisation can focus of having a highly formalised hierarchical structure. This implies ensuring that organisational activities are standardised such that there is high division of labour, high level of departmentalisation, delegation of authority, and wide span of control (McGee & Molloy, 2003). Besides reducing operating costs, UNISON will also be able to reduce possible conflicts and ambiguity, and increase coordination among employees. In addition, it will facilitate smooth operation of the union since clearly defined roles and relationships often help improve organisational effeciency (McGee & Molloy, 2003). Conclusions Conclusively, UNISON is more concerned with representing and supoprting its members on challenges in the workplace. The current challenge the union had to deal with was about the spending cut to public services policy introduced by the coalition government in 2012. This meant that the union had to develop appropriate strategies to deal with such challenges more responsively. Thus, the union designed a hierarchical structure with clear roles and responsibilities at every level. The tall structure helped the union improve its performance, especially in dealing with problems affecting its members. This leads to the conclusion that whichever structure an organisation adopts, it is important that it help the organisation achieve it goals and objectives effeciently and responsively. References Adair, J. (2007). Leadership for innovation: How to organize team creativity and harvest ideas. London: Kogan Page. Anand, N., & Daft, R. L. (2007). What is the right organisation design? Organisational Dynamics, 36(4), 329–344. Arnason, L., & Johnsen, S. (2012). The Role and perception of Organisational Trust-a Case Study. McGee, E. C., & Molloy, K. (2003). Getting Results Through Organisation Design. Mei, M. Q. (2012). Customer Orientation and Organisational Responsiveness. In The DRUID Academy Conference 2012. Naqshbandi, M. M., & Kaur, S. (2011). A study of organisational citizenship behaviours, organisational structures and open innovation. International Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 2(6), 182-193. Porter, L. W., & Siegel, J. (2006). Relationships of tall and flat organisation structures to the satisfactions of foreign managers.Personnel Psychology, 18, 379–392. Shtub, A., & Karni, R. (2010). Organisations and Organisational Structures. Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP): The Dynamics of Operations Management, 18-31. Sine, W. D., Mitsuhashi, H., & Kirsch, D. A. (2006). Revisiting Burns and Stalker: Formal structure and new venture performance in emerging economic sectors. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 121–132. UNISON. (n.d). Developing responsiveness through organisational structure. Zheng, W., Yang, B., & McLean, G. N. (2010). Linking organisational culture, structure, strategy, and organisational effectiveness: Mediating role of knowledge management. Journal of Business Research, 63(7), 763-771. Read More