Term Organic and Mechanistic in relation to Organizations - Assignment Example

Running header: Evaluation and Analysis case Study Student’s name: Name of institution: Instructor’s name: Course code: Date of submission: Introduction Management exists in almost every type of organization. This is because working with physical, human and financial resources to achieve set objectives will need some level of direction, control, leadership and supervision. All managers typically perform the same functions so as to ensure that business runs smoothly within an organization. Managers are usually faced with a lot of issues that they have to handle on a day to day basis (Gomez-Mejia, David & Robert 2008). These range from representing the subordinates, managing and leading, ensuring cultural diversity, managing the impacts of change, embracing new technology, solving disputes, overseeing the use of time and resources and planning and executing the management functions such as planning, organizing, staffing, coordinating, controlling and directing among many other roles. In the course of doing all these, managers may use different management styles that are all aimed at achieving the goals of the organizations they head and for promoting the overall good of these organizations (Lerman & Schmidt 2006). More and more managers are creating flexibility in the workplace because they have realized the advantages of doing this, especially in regard to the performance of the employees. In many organizations today, young, energetic and committed employees are becoming more and more flexible in the sense that they are very adaptable in their work. Most of them have mastered how to strike a balance between their own personal lives and their duties and responsibilities at work, and they are still very effective and efficient at both. This essay will discuss five questions from the given case study that are related to management within organizations. This is with the aim of understanding several aspects of management such as the roles of managers, flexibility in the workplace, nature of work in organizations, types of commitments to organizations, roles of technology in organizations and the significance of human diversity and cultural issues within organizations. Question 1- Explain the term organic and mechanistic in relation to organizations The term organic organization was created by G. M. Stalker and Tom Burns in the late 1950s. Just like in living things, the term organic suggests that organizations change their processes, roles, and structures so as adapt and respond to their environments. Organic organizations are those that are flexible and they value external knowledge. In an organic organization, the people are usually multi-talented and have the ability to perform a variety of tasks. People are equally leveled and there are no redundant job classifications or descriptions. There are no rigid procedures and communication is very flexible in the sense that it can react very easily and quickly to environmental changes. Organic organizations are very adaptive and flexible in nature. These organizations take into consideration the needs of the employees therefore leading to teamwork and group leadership. Organic organizations are characterized by joint specialization whereby employees work together and tasks are coordinated. They are also characterized by complex integrating mechanisms where task forces and teams are the main orders of operations. There is also a lot of decentralization where authority to control tasks is delegated and communication is mostly lateral, in a horizontal manner. There is also a lot verbal communication. There is a lot of networking where people work in teams and they have different capacities to achieve different goals (Herold, Fedor, Caldwell & Liu 2008). The term mechanistic organization was also coined by G. M. Stalker and Tom Burns in the late 1950s. Mechanistic organizations on the other hand are those organizations which are the direct opposite of organic organizations. This means that there is individual specialization where employees work separately and specialize on one task only. There are usually very simple integrating mechanisms where the hierarchies of authority are well defined. Mechanistic organizations usually practice a lot of centralization where decision making is only left to senior managers. Most communication within mechanistic organizations is usually vertical meaning that it comes from the top heading down. Standards and rules are used extensively in mechanistic organizations where there are standard and well defined operating procedures. There is usually a network of positions rather than a network of persons and one person typically corresponds to one task (Hollenbeck, Moon, Ellis, West & Ilgen 2002). Question 2- Are the workplaces in the case study more organic or mechanistic. Why? The workplaces in the case study are more organic than mechanistic. This is because they exhibit a lot of characteristics of organic organizations than they do with mechanistic organizations. These workplaces are flexible and they value external knowledge. The people who work in them are usually multi-talented and have the ability to perform a variety of tasks. For example, James Marburg is seen to be very flexible and adaptable to his work and personal interests at the same time. He has the ability to balance between work and his personal hobby, which is rowing (Hollenbeck, Moon, Ellis, West & Ilgen 2002). The workplace that James Marburg works for is the one that allows him to be flexible and work from any location provided that he performs his duties well. He can work from the comfort of his boat when he is taking breaks during the rowing sessions. He does not have to work from the office like in traditional organizations. This is a characteristic of an organic organization because it can adapt to the changes in the environment. It is also very flexible unlike the mechanistic organizations which do not give their workers such freedoms. In fact, in mechanistic organizations, standards and rules are used extensively in mechanistic organizations where there are standard and well defined operating procedures. This kind of organization is very rigid and does not give one the freedom to work from home or any other place away from the office (Gerstner 2002). Kate Hobson is another example of a woman who shows us that the workplaces in the case study are organic and not mechanistic. Her organization allows her to work from home and gives her very flexible working hours that she comfortable with. The organization has also provided her with a mobile laptop and has given her access to wireless connection, meaning that she can do her work from any remote location without having to go to the office (Hollenbeck, Moon, Ellis, West & Ilgen 2002). This gives her the time to rest and an opportunity for her two broken legs to heal slowly without strain. Mechanistic organizations would not have allowed such an occurrence because they are usually very rigid and inflexible. She can choose whichever days she has the capacity to go to work and this can change on a weekly basis. It does not have to be permanent. This flexibility and adaptability is one major characteristic of an organic organization (Dickens 2005). Question 3- Main developments that have enabled more flexible work arrangements to flourish There are various developments that have enabled more flexible work arrangements to flourish. One major factor is technology. With technology, workers can be provided with laptops or other computers and they can work from any remote location that they are in without having to go to the office (Hollenbeck, Moon, Ellis, West & Ilgen 2002). This is also aided by wireless connections to the internet. The employees can still be in touch with their offices and fellow employees without having to be physically together. They can communicate and send each other files, documents and any other pertinent information that one may need to execute their duties (Kotter & Dan 2002). One does not have to be at the office because they can still get work done away from the office. People have the ability to keep in close contact with each other despite the fact they are in totally different locations (Charan 2006). Technology has enabled people to carry their offices to where they are. Offices have now become mobile and people can work even when on holiday. Most workers today can work even when they do not have the physical capacity to go to the office. A good example is Kate Hobson from the case study. She has broken bones in both her feet and going to work on a daily basis would be a difficult task (Porter & Siegel 2006). Despite this fact, the organization has not laid her off from work. She still works for the organization from the comfort of her home because she has the capacity and ability to perform her duties well despite her injuries. This is because of technology. She has her own laptop and access to wireless internet connection, meaning that she can keep in touch with her colleagues at work and have work done without having to be at the office (Avery & Zabel 2001). Question 4- Main benefits to the organization of introducing flexible work arrangements for employees With flexible work arrangements, organizations are also benefitting. It is not only the employees that benefit from such arrangements. Organizations benefit in the sense that their workers are more fulfilled and satisfied because they have been allowed the freedom to work from any place of their convenience. This means that the organizations trust them enough to get meaningful work done even when they are not in the office. When workers are treated like this, they will be more motivated and encouraged to perform exceptionally well for their organizations and even for themselves (Hollenbeck, Moon, Ellis, West & Ilgen 2002). They will feel the need to perform so as not to let the organization down since it has entrusted them with a lot of responsibility and power. When this happens, the results of these employees will be better and therefore the organization will benefit more from the good results of each employee (Repenning 2002). When the employees are motivated and satisfied, they tend to be loyal to their organizations and perform very well towards ensuring that their organizations achieve the set goals and objectives (Adair 2007). Question 5- One motivation theory that could explain worker willingness and enthusiasm to work from home productively without supervision One motivation theory that can be used to explain the willingness of workers and their willingness to work productively from home without supervision is the Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. When an individual is trusted enough to be able to deal with work related issues without being supervised, they are more fulfilled by their work and have the ability to fulfill other more difficult duties and responsibilities without being supervised. Managers are usually faced with a lot of issues that they have to handle on a day to day basis (Hollenbeck, Moon, Ellis, West & Ilgen 2002). These range from representing the subordinates, managing and leading, ensuring cultural diversity, managing the impacts of change, embracing new technology, solving disputes, overseeing the use of time and resources and planning and executing the management functions such as planning, organizing, staffing, coordinating, controlling and directing among many other roles (Anand & Daft 2007). According to the Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, when one basic need is fulfilled, there is room for the others to be fulfilled as well. This is the same with the workplaces that allow their workers to work from the convenience of their homes without supervision (Ambrose & Cropanzano 2000). Conclusion More and more managers trust their employees today by allowing them the freedom to plan their own work schedules as long as work gets done efficiently and effectively. In many contemporary organizations, it is a common practice to find employees working from the comfort of their homes or any other place of their convenience and still producing the desired results. Managers have realized the importance of creating a flexible work environment for their workers. A flexible work environment enables workers to fulfill both their personal desires while at the same time achieve the objectives of the organization. This has proven to be an effective way of managing organizations because employees are more satisfied and fulfilled by the fact that they can work at their own convenience. When they are given the freedom to achieve results without having to work within a controlled and defined environment, they feel more comfortable and are able to achieve more. References Adair, J 2007, Leadership for innovation: how to organize team creativity and harvest ideas, Kogan Page, London. Ambrose, ML & Cropanzano, RS 2000, ‘The effect of organizational structure on perceptions of procedural fairness’, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 85, pp. 294-304. Anand, N & Daft, RL 2007, ‘What is the right organization design?’, Organizational Dynamics, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 329-344. Avery, C & Zabel, D 2001, The flexible workplace: a sourcebook of information and research, Quorum books, West Port, USA. Charan, R 2006, ‘Home Depot’s blueprint for culture change’, Harvard Business Review, vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 60-70. Dickens, A 2005, The flexible workplace pocketbook, Management Pocket Books, United Kingdom. Gerstner, LV 2002, Who says elephants can’t dance? Inside IBM’s historic turnaround, HarperCollins, New York. Gomez-Mejia, LR, David, BB & Robert, LC 2008, Management: people, performance, change, 3rd edn, McGraw-Hill, New York. Herold, DM, Fedor, DB, Caldwell, S & Liu, Y 2008, ‘The effects of transformational and change leadership on employees’ commitment to a change: A multilevel study’, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 93, pp. 346-357. Hollenbeck, JR, Moon, H, Ellis, APJ, West, BJ & Ilgen, DR 2002, ‘Structural contingency theory and individual differences: examination of external and internal person-team fit’. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 87, pp. 599–606.  Kotter, JP & Dan, SC 2002, The heart of change, Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston. Lasica, JD 2005, Darknet: Hollywood’s war against the digital generation. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ. Lerman, RI & Schmidt, SR 2006, Trends and challenges for work in the 21st century, U.S. Department of Labor Website, viewed on 15 October 2011, http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/history/herman/reports/futurework/conference/trends/trendsI.htm. Nelson, GL & Pasternack, BA 2005, Results: keep what’s good, fix what’s wrong, and unlock great performance, Crown Business, New York. Porter, LW & Siegel, J 2006, ‘Relationships of tall and flat organization structures to the satisfactions of foreign managers’, Personnel Psychology, vol. 18, pp. 379-392. Repenning, N 2002, ‘A simulation-based approach to understanding the dynamics of innovation implementation’, Organization Science, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 109-127. Sine, WD, Mitsuhashi, H & Kirsch, DA 2006, ‘Revisiting Burns and Stalker: formal structure and new venture performance in emerging economic sectors’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 49, pp. 121-132. Wanberg, CR & Banas, JT 2000, ‘Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace’, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 85, pp. 132-142. Read More