Essays on Aquarius Advertising Agency Case Study

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "Aquarius Advertising Agency " is a great example of a business case study. In order for any organization to succeed it must have a very good organizational structure. This is due to the fact that it is the structure that guides every member of the organization in what they do and how they relate with one another. The structure also determines the flow of power and authority within the firm in addition to guiding the relationship between the firm and the outside environment. Members of the organization need to have clearly spelled out roles in order to eliminate confusion and encourage cooperation between various stakeholders (Houston, 2010).

Firms also ought to be flexible enough in order for them to be able to respond to the ever-changing environment promptly. However, it should be noted that the presence of a good organization structure does not necessarily imply organizational success. A good organization structure should be strictly adhered to if it is to be of any help to the organization. However, for Aquarius, this has not been the case. Despite having a weak organizational structure at Aquarius, it has not been strictly adhered to.

The structure has resulted in a lot of bureaucracy and rigidity that robs the agency the ability to promptly respond to the ever-changing environmental needs (Daniel, 2010). Lack of adherence to the laid down channels of communication by specialists only serves to complicate the issue with the accounts executives feeling overlooked. It is for these reasons that the organizational structure of the Aquarius advertising agency needs to be urgently changed and adhered to in the future.

Although there are many alternatives for a new organization structure, Aquarius will be better placed if it adopts a matrix structure as will be explained below.   Key organizational issues of Aquarius agency The current organization structure has created a hostile environment for the company to operate in. consequently, there is communication breakdown within the company where the structure’ s hierarchy is not being strictly adhered to. For instance, other agency specialists bypass account executives. ( Stanley, 2005)This waters down the company’ s reason for having hired the accounts executives to oversee that customers/clients have their needs well catered for by the agency, and have their accounts closed.

By the specialists ignoring the accounts executives, it makes the executives not to be aware of what is happening to customer’ s accounts given to him/her by the company to take care of. By so doing, the clients can either get substandard services or have their services rendered without remitting payments to the company. In both cases, the company stands to lose. Furthermore, the company risks finding itself operate without the executives in the future if the situation is to be allowed to continue.

As such, the situation renders the environment at Aquarius doubtful and unsteady as well. The goals of the Aquarius specialists seem to contradict with the overall organizational goals (Stanley, 2005). Given that each specialist wants to have his or her idea bought by a customer, its hard to meet the overall agency goal. It is clear that Aquarius aims to increase the flexibility with the aim of meeting changes and enabling cooperation between various departments responsible for meeting customer needs. With the current environment of no cooperation between the various stakeholders as well as communication break down between the specialists and the accounts executives, it is hard for the agency to meet its future goals.

However, we're the experts to be decent to adhere to the laid down procedures when engaging clients, the company’ s goals will certainly be met.

References

:

Joe, P.1999, Fundamentals of Organization Structure. Jacksonville, Florida, University of Florida.

Shark, T.2010, Organizational Theory, African human resource journal, 25 (3), 179-182.

Judy, M.2009, Human Resource and Performance appraisal, World economic review, 5(5), 15-21.

John, S. 2007, Fundamentals of Organization Structure, Cambridge University Press, London.

James, K.2010, Practices of Management, Longman publishers: New York.

Ann, N. 2009, Modern organization structures, American Human resources Management, 22(3), 18-25.

Sarah, P. 2008, Organization theory and design, Macmillan, Sydney.

Houston, M.2010. Organization theory. Rutledge, London.

Daniel, M.2010, Human resource management: Improving employees’ performance, Prentice Hall, London.

Maxwell, O.2007, Principles and Practice of Management, A problem solving approach, Oxford university press, Oxford.

Stanley, C.2005, Fundamentals of effective management, Cambridge University Press, London.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us