Organizational Chart of Any Company - Essay Example

Coca cola Company Name Instructor’s Name Date Organizational chart This is a chart representing the structure of a particular organization in terms of position or ranks (Daft 65). This chart generally displays the managers and employees who constitute an organization as well as the relationship between employees in an organization. These relationships may be: Line-direct relationship amid superior and assistant. Lateral; this is a relationship between various departments on the similar hierarchical level. Staff -relationship amid the managerial subordinates and other areas. The subordinate is in a position to give advice to the line manager. Nevertheless, they acquire no power above the line manager dealings. Functional – relationships amid professional position and other areas. The professional will usually have power to persist that a line manager establishes any of their orders. In several large companies such as Coca Cola, this organizational chart is always large, complicated and it is mostly dissected in minor charts for every individual department in the organization (Daft 79). The chart is normally divided into sections with every portion representing a specific rank for instance in a Coca Cola company the chief executive officer is placed at the top most section with his assistants under him followed by other ranks according to the division in departments up to the least employee (Elliot & Ali 113). This organizational chart is generally ideal for giving out the organizational considered vision, defining responsibilities, relationship, and dependencies, as well as permitting the management to organize the team members with clear titles, line of authority and roles (Daft 66). It also discloses the sections of the company that requires improvement and possibly additional or less employees. There is no document in any organization, which carries such kind of important information, so brief and very easy to comprehend as an organization chart. Benefits In Coca Cola Company an organizational charts is a very effective means to communicate employee, organizational and enterprise information. It makes it simple and easier for people to comprehend large quantity of information as a diagram picture not as a table of names and figures. They offer the largest value when applied as framework for administrating change and communicating up to date organizational structure (Daft 90). Since Coca Cola Company is a multinational corporation, when the chart is fully utilized, it permits the managers to make relevant decisions concerning resources, give a framework for administering change and communicate equipped information across the globe. With the presence of dissimilar departments in this company, the chart provides all the managers with particular departmental information, which are used as a baseline for budgeting, planning and workforce modelling. This becomes easy to work together on vital personnel and structural decisions for there is an overall picture along with the minor views that constitute the bigger picture. The company’s chart may be used to offer scenarios back to finance; human resource and executives for assessment and approval, the different managers also make use of this organizational chart to pass information and petition for response from their workers to create plans. The organizational chart, on the other hand, has some limitations especially in big companies like Coca Cola (Hitt, et al, 241). For instance, the chart does not show anything concerning the leadership styles adopted such as autocratic style or democratic, it shows ‘formal relationships’ but displays nothing on the pattern of social relationships that develops. In some large organizations whose employees are changed regularly, the organizational chart becomes out of date very quickly. Chain of command The chain of command, sometimes referred as scaler chain, is the prescribed line of authority, responsibility and communication in an organization. In Coca Cola Company, the chain of command is normally illustrated on an organizational chart that recognizes the superior and staff relationships. By making use of the chain of command, and its noticeable authority relationships, the standard of unity of command is sustained (Elliot & Ali 141). The unity of command simply dictates that each subordinate staff should report to only one superior. In the Coca Cola Company and several other organizations, the chain of command standard is highly valued and practiced. The managers’ category is compared to that of a deliverer of orders, and the staffs perform them under the supervision of the manager (Hitt, et al, 61). The negotiations and meetings contact managers and their assistants might improve or destroy the efficiency of the undeviating report relationships in the chain of command. Problems related with the chain of command come about when an assistant bypasses a manager in providing of information or when asking for a decision. This act demoralizes the authority and ranking of the manager who was bypassed (Daft 77). If such kind of practice is permitted to go on for example in a bureaucratically organized company, confidence of the managers will automatically go off. The urgency and occurrence of such situations might, of course, alleviate the impact and incompatibility of such contacts. With the fast changing environment and rising insecurity that organizations face in this twenty first century, a number of organizations adopt structures that put emphasis on flexibility and rapid reaction to change (Graubner 43). These kinds of organizations try to put decision-making authority, with some who are in position of responding to the environmental essentials. Thus, such organizations could have cajoled decision-making, communication and hierarchies system that do not totally hold on to the unity of command or chain of command principles (Elliot & Ali 102). For example, in the condition of matrix organizations, workers normally have two supervisors or managers, going against the chain of command and unity of command doctrine. To be successful, individuals working in such organizations gain knowledge of power sharing, making use of open confrontation to solve issues, and to make use of every directions in the organization to distribute information. The additional organic structures are not strictly bound to chain of command standard, although it is also a significant organizing standard in a good number of organizations (Marie, 2010) Span of control This simply explains the number of employees that are effectively manageable by the superior in organization. It is of two types namely: Wide span of control; where one supervisor or a manager monitors a great number of employees, which results to flat organizational structure. Narrow span of control; where one supervisor or manager monitors few subordinates, which gives rise to tall organizational structure. Wide span of control is less expensive as compared to Narrow span of control as there is quite a number of superior, and for that reason, there are more communication problems among different levels of management (Daft 121). The Wide span of control is excellent suited when the recruits are not extensively spread geographically, for this makes it easy for the managers to get in touch with the assistant and to control them. As Coca Cola company, is widely spread across the globe, wide span of control cannot operate excellently (Huber 45). The span of control relies upon different factors, which are; skills together with managers’ competencies, workers skills and potential, nature of work, type of interaction among the managers and staffs, organization’s nature etc (Hitt, et al, 161). Type of structure The Coca-Cola Company’s process for decision-making does not suit into its structure or value, vision and mission. Their process for decision-making is more centralized and once compared to the whole lot going on at The Coca-Cola Company; there is no compatibility (Graubner 23). The Coca-Cola Company has an organic structure while their values together with mission advocate creativeness and employee participation. The way out to progress their decision-making and impose their organic structure is by putting into operation a strategy for organizational education. They can commence by shaking things a little bit regularly by changing managers for dissimilar departments on a seasonal basis. This will cause the managers to think beyond the obvious when making decisions (Jones, 2007). This also will implement a learning organization and implant the organic culture into individuals mind frame. For this reason, The Coca-Cola Company will have the capability to work out major problems more speedily and become a mighty community in return. Another applicable way The Coca-Cola Company can compact their decision-making proficiency to their structure is by ensuring some employees are involved (Elliot & Ali 162). The company should put into action an open door procedure in which any member of staff can go to their supervisor or manager and propose ideas for solving various issues. This will let the management to be aware of minute issues before they become outsized. Organizational design The Coca Cola design has been real, stable and simple. The competitive ability at coke might implant innovative technology (Daft 78). The organizational design to develop or access competitive capability in activities like product’s processing are corresponding to the business advancement. Efficiency of Coca Cola’s design will permit investments in their development and research since the company has an idea of investing into developing particular contrary aptitude of the management. They can link to the comprehension sources of competitive benefit for Coca Cola’s design such as towards the association amid coke’s environmental opportunities and threats as determined by this company’s noticeable SWOT analysis (Rubin 2000) References Daft Richard. Organization Theory and Design, 10th Ed. London: Cengage Learning, 2009. Elliot Jeffrey & Ali Sheikh. The State and Local Government Political Dictionary. New York: Wildside Press LLC, 2007. Graubner Michael. Task, firm size, and organizational structure in management consulting: an empirical analysis from a contingency perspective. London: DUV, 2006. Hitt Michael, Ireland Duane & Hoskisson Robert. Strategic management: competitiveness and globalization : concepts & cases, 8th Ed. London: Cengage Learning, 2009. Huber Diane. Leadership and nursing care management. New York: Elsevier Health Sciences, 2006. Read More