The paper "Organization Designing" is a wonderful example of a Management Case Study. With globalization taking place rapidly and every firm is scrambling for customers in new markets, change is needed in the way of operation so as to gain market advantage. George & Jones contend that due to competition created by globalization, firms have taken it upon themselves to restructure and review organizational roles so as to improve efficiency and service provision (22). Like in any other change process, such practices have been met with resistance in some quarters of the company.
This is the case that happened at Royce Consulting firm which was considering doing some changes which were approved by employees but the managers opposed it. The managers worked on the client, and changes proposed were to develop a “ hoteling” system where a manager would just schedule the offices when needed as opposed to having a permanent office. As such, this paper will assess where Royce Consulting opposed the “ hoteling” system and how organizational culture affects the situation and decision. The paper will also assess why conflict exists between departments at Custom Chip, Inc. Royce Consulting Why managers at Royce oppose “ hoteling” concept although it is a financially superior system In the fast-paced and ever-changing business environment, Royce Consulting is continuously seeking means to achieve and sustain efficiency (Isern & Pung 17).
Though there exists no single element which makes a firm effective - no undisclosed factor - some conceptions apply globally. Jones (42) claims that one basic thing is to set up an appropriate organizational structure for success by making sure arrangements in the organization dynamic in relation to core strategy, purpose, and culture.
New goals and insights can be designed to give the structure a new look. According to Jones (47), Organization design is defined as the practice of re-shaping organization roles and structure, or the alignment of the process, structure, metrics, talent, and rewards with strategies of the organization. It builds the structure within which Royce Consulting operates. It is the outline which later turns out to be the organizational “ engine” . As such, the organization considered that their old structure could not fit into new business and economic environments and as such could not give them a business advantage.
The change was imminent. However, any change process is normally met with opposition and conflict as had happened at Royce Consulting. Leadership is normally concerned with change. What about if it’ s the leader who opposes change? However, managers (leaders) are also social beings who feel threatened when change disrupts their positions. Isern & Pung argue that opposition to change comes out in numerous ways, from petty sabotage, foot-dragging, and inertia to rebellions (71). Royce Consulting managers opposed redesigning of the organization and the “ hoteling” system because they believed they would lose control of their offices.
Change often interferes with autonomy and was likely to make managers feel that they have lost control of their offices (Jacobites 455). It is not simply political, but just who holds the authority. The managers’ sense of autonomy is frequently the first privilege to go away when experiencing a potential change that is coming from somebody else. The managers were also afraid of losing files that they were in control of. The changes proposed that files would be stored in a centralized place.
The company was also to adopt new technology and even an electronic filing mechanism. It can only be assumed that such managers were baby boomers who had no grasp of new technology as such would find it difficult to cope (Jacobites 561).
Cameron, K.S. & Quinn, R.E. Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: The competing
values framework. Reading, Ma: Addison-Wesley. 2011. Print.
Conger, J. Effective Change Begins at the Top. In: M. Beer and N. Nohria (eds.), Cracking Code
of Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. 2000. Print.
Dale, K. & Burrell, G. The Spaces of Organization & The Organization of Space -Power, Identity & Materiality at Work. Sage publishers. 2008. Print.
George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior (5rd).
New York: Pearson Education, Inc. 2007. Print.
Hartnell, C. A, Ou, A. Y & Kinicki, A. Organizational Culture and Organizational
Effectiveness: A Meta-Analytic Investigation of the Competing Values Framework's
Theoretical Suppositions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 21.1 (2011): 56-64. Print.
Isern, J. & Pung, A. Harnessing energy to drive organizational change. McKinsey
Quarterly 1 (2000): 16-19. Print.
Jones, G. R. Organization Theory, Design, and Change. New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company. 2004. Print.
Jacobides., M. G. The inherent limits of organizational structure and the unfulfilled role of
hierarchy: Lessons from a near-war. Organization Science, 18.3 (2007): 455-477. Print.
Nickols, F. Four Change Management Strategies. Distance Consulting. 2010. Web. 20 June.
Quinn, R. & Sonenshein, S. Four General Strategies for Changing Human Systems. In: T.G.
Cummings (ed.), Handbook of Organizational Development (pp. 69–79). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications. 2008. Print.
Ravasi, D. & Schultz, M. Responding to organizational identity threats: Exploring the role of
organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49.3 (2006): 433–458. Print.