Essays on Organisational Behaviour: Paradoxical Twins Case Study

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "Organisational Behaviour: Paradoxical Twins" is a perfect example of a case study on management. The case study of the Paradoxical Twins gives an opportunity of evaluating the structure and organization of business from different angles. Complex behaviour exposes us to different circumstances, environments and social and personal relationships. The two corporations Omega and Acme electronics that are considered in this study initially had the same structure of the organization, under different management. However, since they were sold to different investors, each company consequently has its own company policies and procedures. This analysis will apply and emphasize various relevant theories to the identification of issues in the aspects of organizational management within the two companies’ structures.

The main case is that the new president of Acme Electronics, John Tyler, and the new Omega Electronics president, Jim Rawls, are directly accountable for the success or failure of the respective companies. Both leaders come from different backgrounds, and their leadership and management styles are completely different from each other. John Tyler’ s style had been more aggressive and firm as compared to that of Omega’ s Jim Rawls.

According to one of Acme’ s employees, John Tyler was described as a ‘ one-man-band. ’ This leadership style can be referred to as a Legitimate Power, meaning that John Tyler does not share much of the information regarding the going on in the company. However, this greatly demoralizes employees of the company, as they like to participate in decisions that are made by the company’ s management (Kettl & Fesler, 2005). The firms’ structures The organizational design of Acme is in the form of a mechanistic structure. This is where employees are induced to carry out themselves in a predictable and accountable manner.

All workers in this organization have been assigned tasks that they have to perform, and are not allowed to take on extra tasks unless the management says so. On the other hand, Omega’ s organizational structure takes the organic form and the internal organization can be characterized by free-flowing, adaptive, and looser. This structure of an organization is designed to enhance flexibility so that workers can introduce change, and adapt quickly to the changing or shifting conditions (Elliott, 2001).


Barry, D. & Whitcomb, H. (2005). The legal foundations of public administration. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Clegg, S., Kornberger, M., & Pitsis, T. (2005). Managing and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Elliott, J. (2001). Measurement of responsibility: A study of work. New York: Routledge.

George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2000). Essentials of Managing Organizational Behaviour. USA, New York: Prentice Hall.

Kettl, D., & Fesler, J. (2005). The politics of the administrative process. Washington DC: CQ Press.

Miner, J. (2002). Organizational Behavior: Foundations, Theories, and Analyses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Mullins, L. J. (1999). Management and Organizational Behaviour. (5th Edn.). London, Prentice Hall.

Scott, W., & Davis, G. (2006). Organizations and organizing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Thompson, J. (2003). Organizations in Action. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Yulk, G. (2002). Leadership in Organizations. (5th Edn.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

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