Studies - Case Study Example

Case Studies Introduction At the very heart of it all, the two cases can be used as examples of how to run the operations of an organization with the application of Theory X of HR management and Theory Y of HR management (Boxall and Purcell, 2003). While GBC seems to be running closer to Theory X, Semco is aligned with Theory Y (NetMBA, 2005). Both the establishments are focused on improving themselves as well as their output and the both seek to provide good value for money for all their clients. However, the case of Semco is more interesting than the case of GBC simply because it is completely opposite to the typical expectations of a company being run in Latin America (Welch, 2005). On the other hand, the case of GBC gives the image of typical disillusion which the public has with local government and the way in which local governments are run across the country (Boxall and Purcell, 2003). Both setups require skilled labour and experienced professionals but the methods and means by which labour is handled at both organisations is quite different since one is focused on trusting their employees and workers while the other is focused on conflict. Approaches to Teamwork The approach taken to teamwork is very different for the two companies and it would be easiest to describe the approach taken by Semco and then compare it to the approach of GBC. Semco as a whole is a very friendly company to the extent that a person could see it as being simply too friendly (Welch, 2005). Managers are evaluated with letter grades coming from those whom they manage and representatives from the company employees are elected to positions rather than be appointed based on performance and merit. Essentially, Semco is a democratic company which is exemplified by how subordinates can choose their managers, their working hours, even the amount of profit which needs to be shared with the employees. The control of the company is given to the employees to such an extent that they are empowered to make the company a success or a failure (Torrington and Hall, 1995). By allowing employees to examine the books, run all aspects of management and have a vote on all important decisions, the power within the company does not remain limited to one man or a group of individuals. Team work is certainly pushed as an idea within the company since all individuals are given ways and means in which they can be a positive influence on the company as well as their particular departments. The team formation process is also helped significantly by team interviews which allow current members of the company to evaluate any person who is up for a promotion or is to be hired by the company. Teams also allowed to develop a product in its entirety from thought to finish while members of the team are given a lot of leeway in how and what they work on. On the other hand, GBC presents a completely different picture since individuals are not allowed to become empowered because individuals within the setup have differing agendas. The leadership is at odds with the workers while the workers do not trust the leadership. It is a vicious cycle where political infighting and a lack of confidence in individuals or groups makes teams very weak and inherently flawed before they even start working. While Semco has a more or les flat hierarchy and allows employees to liaise directly with many suppliers and distributors, the close architecture of the GBC means that bureaucracy is the order of the day for the council (Torrington and Hall, 1995). Individuals within the same team may have conflicting duties, conflicting interests and even different motives for being in the team. Instead of working cooperatively, the organisation has placed workers in a position where they might be at an advantage if they undermine the work done by others. Organisational Structure and Design The multiple layers of bureaucracy and decision making process at GBC is a crippling imposition on the structure of the organisation. According to Welch (2005), there is an advantage of having such a system since it allows a decision to be made with careful evaluation and no officer can commit the GBC to a certain point of view. However, it also has the severe disadvantage of nearly immobilizing the GBC. Similarly, the distance between the management and the workers, as well as the lack of communication between the two parties means that there are a lot of misunderstandings and confusions which lead to problems within GBC. The words used in the case clearly show that the workers are frustrated and with frustration they face low morale that is largely due to the way their organisation has been structured. In opposition to that, Semco has a simplified organisational structure which allows questions to be posted to the senior management. Every individual is made to contribute since they can access their managers and senior members of the staff who are encouraged to cut the chain of command and discuss matters with different teams. Open book financing, open management and democratic principles of organisation simply mean that employees are more open about what they feel and may even be encouraged to give more to the company than they get from it. However, with this freedom of structure there is also the issue of management and accountability. In a strict hierarchy a person would know who their immediate manage is and who they need to answer or report to. With a relaxed architecture, control would be difficult to establish and it seems that Semco has chosen the path of getting things done quickly rather than ensuring that a proper procedure or a set of standard operating guidelines is used in the company. Cultures It seems that the biggest difference between the companies is the difference of cultures as one company is working on the culture of trust and confidence; the other is going with mistrust and a lack of confidence. Semco allows employees to make decisions, take part in the management process and evaluate conditions as they see fit. Even the workspace and working hours can be adjusted as per the requirements of the employees which means that they can do almost whatever they want if they are able to give the company the results it needs. However, there is also a significant risk associated with having such a culture since the CEO of the company is quite aware of the fact that the system being followed at his company can be abused greatly. An employee who wishes to cheat the system may put in less work that what is required of him/her and take a lot more out of the company than s/he deserves. However, while trust is an issue for the CEO, the company as a whole seems to enjoy this position of trust because it shows that the employees are valued members rather than just numbers who are working at a factory production line. GBC also has trust issues as a fundamental part of the equation but the trust issues for GBC come due to the cultural and political infighting which is taking place between the company’s executive leadership and the 3500 workers who are supposed to work with the leadership rather than against it. The organisation can not bring itself to terms with the different viewpoints and backgrounds which it is composed of and this is leading to the difficulties it is facing. For example, a culture which leads itself to being hierarchical will not be able to make decisions quickly and Semco which is functioning more like a small company is able to take decisions and enact them as soon as they become validated. A culture with several layers of decision makers might remain stuck in the evaluation process and not be able to do anything at all for the customers or even for the employees as in the case of GBC. Conclusion I feel that neither of the two setups will be successful in the long run because both organisations will have to find a happy medium rather than remain on the fringes. Being excessively liberal for a company is almost as bad as excessively bureaucratic in the long run because there will be times when control would need to be tightened for SEMCO and the company may well find that it is impossible to take away the liberties which it had given to its employees previously. Similarly, if the GBC does not give its employees the liberties and empowerment they deserve, it is very unlikely that they shall be greeted with success in their future endeavours. If I had to select one company to work for, or a company who I think would be more successful than the other, then I would have to say that Semco is closer to the right path than GBC. Works Cited Boxall P. and Purcell J. (2003) Strategy and Human Resource Management, Palgrave & Macmillan: New York. NetMBA. 2005, ‘Theory X and Theory Y’, Internet Centre for Management and Business Administration [Online] Available at: http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/mcgregor/ Torrington D. and Hall L. (1995) Personnel Management: HRM in Action, 3rd Ed. Prentice Hall: London. Welch, J. 2005. Winning. HarperCollins: New York. Read More