The paper "Organizational Model at Kodak" is a great example of a management case study. Since its inception in 1889, Kodak has been in the production of images and photographs to date. The film production company in the United States has for the longest time contributed 90% of its shares to the market by producing a film that has been in use for a very long time (Allen 2004). Over the years, Kodak has adopted very many strategies that have ensured that it has continued to grow to what it is today.
The strategies have ensured that they have changed and incorporated the best financial and HRM procedures that will translate to sales and company expansion. The journey has not been easy for the company. This is because on several occasions it has recorded heavy losses and stiff competition. It is because of these problems that the company has had the ability to diversify some of the goods and services that are on offer. This includes the introduction of the sale of digital photographs and prints. The entrance of competition from Fuji Film created very many financial headaches for the company.
This was despite the fact that Kodak was an acclaimed brand for many people all over the world. The aspect of new products and services offered by Fuji Film proved to be very essential to many consumers. This was especially the case when the aspect of price was brought into the picture. This is one of the reasons as to why the company started recording losses in many areas. It can also be observed that the company has faced challenges from many other companies that create the same goods that they are creating.
This means that with the introduction of digital cameras, the aspect of the film became redundant. This was also made complex by the introduction of mobile phones that had inbuilt cameras that were very clear. As Kodak ventured into printer formation, they had to consider companies, for example, HP which had been in the market for long. This did not make the introduction and incorporation of these strategies any easier for the company (Carlson 2002). Organizational Model The organizational model at Kodak is a representation of each and every person that is mandated to carry out certain duties and responsibilities for the company.
This includes the CEO and 11 directors. The CEO is tasked with the duty of ensuring that he offers financial, material and emotional direction for the company. This is through the formulation and execution of policies and legislations that are instrumental to the growth of the company. He does this with the help of the 11 directors that work under him. Under the 11 directors, there are very many individuals that work in respective capacities for the benefit of the organization.
The company has a Chief Customer Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Information Officer and a Chief Technical Officer. With the help of the director of communication affairs and printing solutions, activities are effectively coordinated in the company (Fey 2000). The company has for the longest time utilized the systems management theory where each and every department is tasked with certain responsibilities. The responsibilities are then effectively coordinated to ensure that the company’ s overall objectives are met.
This is one of the reasons as to why it has been possible for the activities and duties to be carried out at each and every level. The coordination has ensured that nothing in the company is left out or unattended to. This is one of the advantages of the management theory in place at Kodak (Black 2001).
Aiman-Smith, L, Bauer, TN & Cable, DM 2001,‘Are you attracted? Do you intend to pursue? A recruiting policy-capturing study’, Journal of Business and Psychology, vol. 16, pp. 219- 237.
Allen, D, Van Scotter, J & Otondo, R 2004, ‘Recruitment communication media: impact on pre- hire outcomes’, Personnel Psychology, vol. 57, pp. 143-171.
Arthur, J 1994, ‘Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance and turnover’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 37, pp. 670–687.
Black, SE & Lynch, LM 2001, ‘How to compete: the impact of workplace practices and information technology on productivity’, Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 434-445.
Boudreau, JW & Berman, RL 1991, ‘Using performance measurement to evaluate strategic human resource decisions: Kodak’s experience with profit sharing’, Human Resource Management, pp. 393-410.
Cappelli, P & Neumark, D 2001, ‘Do “high performance” work practices improve establishment- level outcomes’, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 737-777.
Carlson, KD, Connerly, ML & Mecham, RL 2002, ‘Recruitment evaluation: the case for assessing the quality of applicants attracted’, Personnel Psychology, vol. 55, pp. 461-490.
DeGraff, JE, 2010, "The Changing Environment of Professional HR Associations", Cornell HR Review.
Eisenstat, RA 1996, ‘What corporate human resources brings to the picnic: four models for functional management’, Organizational Dynamics, Autumn, pp. 6-14.
Fey, CF, Björkman, I & Pavlovskaya, A 2000, ‘The effect of human resource management practices on firm performance in Russia’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1-18.
Gonzalez, M 1997, ‘Synchronized strategies’, Journal of Business Strategy, pp. 9-11.
Huselid, M 1995, ‘The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance’, Academy of Management Journal, vol. 38, pp. 635–672.
Laabs, JJ 1993, ‘Hewlett Packard’s core values drive hr strategy’, Personnel Journal, December 1993, pp. 38-48.
Merkle, JA, 2009, Management and Ideology, University of California Press, California.
National Academy of Public Administration, Alliance for Redesigning Government 1998, Creating high performance government organizations: a practical guide for public managers, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco.
Ulrich, D 1996, Human resource champions: the next agenda for adding value and delivering results, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.
Yeung, A, Woolcock, P & Sullivan, J 1996, ‘Identifying and developing HR competencies for the future: keys to sustaining the transformation of HR functions’, Human Resource Planning, pp. 48-58.