IntroductionThe analytical report presented below has been commissioned by our course coordinator Denise Tomlin with a view of helping us to relate to the course learning outcomes of our course. There were minimal challenges faced in coming up with this comprehensive analysis of management and organizational structures in the real world with reference to the case study highlighted on pages 455-6 of the 3rd edition of Managing Human Resources by Raymond stone. The report analyses the organizational structure highlighted in this case study and provide the thoughts of whether this structure is justified or not with supporting evidence.
The report also provides suggestions that could help improve the communication between employees in the workshop department of the company as well as providing a new chain of command organizational diagram that highlights efficiencies made during harder economic times. The report also highlights the benefits of hiring an external coach before finally looking at some contingency plans that a human resources practitioner would implement in this company. The report reaps the benefit of extensive research from books and articles and has a detailed description of the case study highlighting examples from situations in the real world as the writer heavily relies on external material to further support the arguments brought forward.
Question 1Proof that the organizational structure is not justifiedAn organization structure is the framework that highlights an organizations approach to allocation of duties and responsibilities, establishment of communication links and the chain under which authority flows. According to Pleshko L (2007) the purpose of a company’s organizational structure is to successfully meet such set goals as the allocation of tasks, coordination of employee’s efforts in order to meet a common goal and supervision that aims at continually improving on performance with a view set towards near perfection.
The organizational structure can also be deemed successful based on the satisfaction of the concerned stakeholders (Enayati G & Ghasabbbeh MS 2012); in this case the employees, the managers and John himself. A perfect organizational structure has clear pathways through which communication occurs and clarifies the relevant authority and relationships under which the employees report. John’s company has an organizational structure that is successful in some of these tasks but fails in others.
This is an indication that the structure is not justified and some corrections need to be made upon it in order for it to be deemed a success. As highlighted in the paragraph above, one of the major purposes of an organizational structure is devolution of tasks (Raymond 2010). The organizational structure in question has a problem when it comes to allocation of tasks to the employees in the workshop hire of the company’s arm. Ted, the manager in charge of this department is responsible for all the employees in the workshop and is also required to quote the tasks for all the employees.
Ted is renowned for putting in long hours at work and yet he is not able to successfully quote the tasks for all the employees always. This problem is passed down to the other two managers. Matt is in charge of the day to day work in the workshop and Dave is in charge of off-site tasks. Employees at times find themselves with no work to do, or find them allocated work in the workshop and off-site simultaneously.
This highlights a problem in the organizational structure due to a failure in job quoting.