Different Kinds of Management Structure Call for Different Types of Handling - Literature review Example

Literature review report based on changing organizational structure Insert your name here Name: Insert your name here Subject: Management Title: Literature review report based on changing organizational structure 28th September 2010 Report: Literature review report based on changing structure Thesis: Management structure is important to organizations in a sense that people know what they are supposed to do at all times. Different kind of management structure calls for different types of handling. 1. introduction 2. Literature review 3. Methodology/ Assessment techniques 4. Findings 5. Conclusions and recommendations Name: Insert your name here Subject: business management Title: Literature review report based on changing organizational culture Date: 28th September 2010 Report: Literature review report based on changing organizational structure Introduction In the case of Sir Richard Branson the potential problem caused by his maverick way of running his business is lack of clear cut organizational structure and culture. Sir Richard Branson is trying to use the model of distribution of authority. This is where decision making is distributed among various departments in a company working closely with each other in doing their different tasks. An organization structure is where different types of components have got different patterns of relationship; this is where there is arrangement between different people and different department among themselves when working together. Literature review Organizational structure and culture is the belief which has been entrenched in an organization over a long period of time. There are organizational cultures which are hard to change and take a long time in changing and there are some which are weak and can be changed in time. Changing an organization culture and structure can be the hardest part a new manager can be faced with especially when he is new in an organization which has had a long standing culture entrenched in it. It may take years for a change to take effect in the organization. The long standing organization structure might either be good for the company or a problem to the company since some of them might be hurting the company in the long run so the manager has to find a way to replace this culture with a much more workable culture which the employees will be able to enjoy. Take the case study of Pfizer. In the book management concept: managing in a global environment on page 202,Jordan Cohen a senior director with Pfizer noticed that the employees who were employed with Pfizer from accredited universities were spending 20% to 40 % of their time on support work which included creating documents, typing notes, doing research manipulating data and scheduling meetings and only 60% to 80% was used on knowledge based work like strategies, innovations, networking, collaborations and critical thinking. So to avoid all this he researched and brought in a better way for the employees to give their maximum attention to their work and not to support work he outsourced these work to a company in India and this left the employees with enough time to concentrate on the knowledge based work needed. It gave the employees enough morale to work since they knew the research and typing part were taken care of. All they have to do is click and communicate. This brought an amazing change to the culture of this company. Methodology/ Assessment techniques Literature analysis was used to single out and define the distinctive characteristics which could not be disregarded regardless of the environmental issues and then this was arranged and designed into knowledge based collaborations Findings This report is going to argue about the need for organizational culture in order for the companies to be able to realize the employees’ full potential. Organizational change is imperative for any organization in order for it to succeed. Research has proved that this is needed for the best outcome from employees in an organization. According to Hannan and Freeman in their article structural inertia and organizational change, they state that most prominent organization theories explain variability in organization characteristics that is diversity through reference to the history of adaptation by individual organization but the argument was still that all forms of changes occur principally at the population level with forms of organization replacing each other as condition changes. Most organization culture should change with the conditions since maybe the culture in one company may not be suitable to another company or the kind of situation the company finds itself in at such a time. Take a case of James McNerney Jr in page 394 of the book management concept: managing in a global environment, who took over as CEO of 3 M company and wanted to bring his old company at General Electric and brought it to 3M he soon learnt that what worked at GE was not working at 3M. His first realization was in order to be effective he has to change the organizational structure of the company 3M before he is able to implement his ways of working. Most companies still use the old and defunct way of working where the boss is the final decision and the customer has to be right at all times. They usually put everyone else’s interest before the interest of the staff members. This usually leaves the staff with a dis-satisfied working environment and no morale to uplift the company since they feel like their work or interest is not that much appreciated. Ross Dawson in his article an argument for heterarchy: creating more effective organizational structure argues that for an organization to be successful there is need for the organization to realize that the heterarchy kind of organizational form that is better than most of the alternative that are present. He argues that this is the first step for any success in organizational change. He quotes Stephenson’s definition of the term heterarchy as the organizational form which is somewhere between hierarchy and network that provides horizontal links that permit different elements of an organization to cooperate whilst individually optimizing different success criteria. He continues to argue that while this is a useful definition, it needs to be understood and accepted by others before the argument for heterarchy can proceed to action. He still goes ahead to quote the most commonly used definition of Carole Crumley’s who suggests that heterarchy is “the relation of elements to one another when they are unranked or when they possess the potential for being ranked in a number of different ways.”[1] This evokes both the reality of multiple levels, and the communication between levels that is critical in transcending the dysfunctions of pure hierarchies. Richard Branson one of the most successful business men of our time also adds weight to this matter by stating that “almost 100% of running a business is motivating your staff and the people around you. And if you can motivate them then you can achieve anything. And too many companies have put the shareholders first, customer second and staff way last. If you can reverse that and you put your staff first, very quickly you will find that the customer comes first as well and the shareholders comes first as well” Another organizational culture which needs change according to Richard Branson is Decision making. He argues that most companies have forgotten how to make decisions and that is the reason his company Virgin group is a series of independent business with independent managing structure which not only keeps the people focused but also keeps the decision making process fluid. Everyone who is assigned to manage the individual company has also been given the mandate to think and make decision for the company. The virgin group does not have a central place for the think tank instead every company’s runs its own affair and makes its own decision while they are also able to help each other in the process. Conclusion and recommendations To be able to make a company successful a visionary leader is a one that is able to make a decision and make sure that the decision is implemented it does not matter whether the person has to roll up his sleeves and work with the people. Visionary leaders have three major qualities and that is the ability to explain a vision to others by making it clear to the employees. This may be in terms of written or oral communications. Such examples of visionary leaders are Richard Branson and an example can be given of Herb Kelleher who was a former CEO of Southwest airline who is not afraid to even serve in their planes just to show the staff on what the vision is and how it should be done. This usually gives the staff morale enough to serve the customer to the customer’s satisfactions. The second quality for a visionary leader is his ability to not only express verbally his vision and also be able to act in accordance to the vision presented through his behavior. This requires that the visionary leader behaves in the required way that reinforces the vision that he has. The third quality which a visionary leader requires is his ability to put his vision and extends it to apply to different leadership context in the organization. The best perspective for an organization to be successful is its ability to encompass structural changes in its management to involve the changes that are important to the company at the time. All the organization should take this under consideration and be able to remove the old kinds of culture and structure in the organization that stagnates the growth and development of the organization in order for it to grow and be considered successful. It has been proven by researchers and by the successful entrepreneurs themselves that this changes if made to an organization it should be very effective. The change necessary is the change of the old adage that states that customer is always first then comes the shareholders then the staff. It has been proven that if an organization cares for the welfare of the staff, the staff will care for the welfare of the organization by providing excellent services to the company. The organizational structure should also be changed in order to incorporate the company’s staff at the decision making level so that people are able to make effective decisions which will be beneficial to the company at large. The organization should also take into consideration the inclusion of the community which might be affected by the project that it needs to do. This will minimize resistance to the project and enable the organization be able to handle the resistance as it comes while getting support from the larger community. Work cited 1. Hannan T M and Freeman J, American sociological review, vol. 49, No2 (1984) 2. Dawson R, An argument for heterarchy: creating more effective organizational structures, retrieved on 28th September 2010 from http://rossdawsonblog.com/weblog/archives/2009/04/an_argument_for.html 3. Bergman et al, management concepts: managing in a global environment, pearson education, 2009 4. Business directory.com, organizational structure retrieved on 28th September from http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/organizational-structure.html 5. covin j g and slevin d p, the influence of organization structure on the utility of an entrepreneurial top management style, Vol 25, issue 3, pg217-238 (1988) 6. Child J, Organizational Structure, Environment and Performance: The Role of Strategic Choice, Sociology January 1972 vol. 6 no. 11-22 7. Miles E M,Snow C C, Meyer A D and Coleman H J, Jr. Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process The Academy of Management Review Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 546-562 (1978) 8. Hitt M A, Ireland R D, Hoskisso R E, Strategic management: competitiveness and globalization : concepts & case, Cengage learning ( 2009) 9. Aiken M and Hage J, Organizational Interdependence and Intra-Organizational Structure American Sociological Review Vol. 33, No. 6 pp. 912-930 (1968), 10. Ouchi W G, The Relationship Between Organizational Structure and Organizational Control Administrative Science Quarterly Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 95-113, (1977) Read More