Organization Designing - Case Study Example

Name Course Tutor Date Organization Designing Introduction 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 resistant in some quarters of the company. This is the case that happened at Royce Consulting firm which was considering doing some changes which was approved by employees but the managers opposed. The managers worked on the client, and changes proposed was 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 affect 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-pace and ever-changing business environment, Royce Consulting is continuously seeking means to achieve and sustain efficiency (Isern & Pung 17). Though there exist 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 the success by making sure arrangement in the organization dynamic in relation to core strategy, purpose and culture. New goals and insights can be designed to give structure 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 operate. 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 environment and as such could not give them business advantage. The change was eminent. 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 disrupt 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 the autonomy and was likely to make managers feel that they have lost control of their offices (Jacobides 455). It is not simply political, but just who hold the authority. The managers’ sense of autonomy is frequently the first privileges to go away when experiencing a potential change which 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 (Jacobides 561). The managers also opposed the “hoteling” concept because it was expected with a lot of uncertainties. They felt a change like moving off the cliff blindfolded, hence opposed it. In any organization, set up managers and even employees usually prefer remaining stalled in misery as opposed to taking unknown decisions (Dale & Burrell 106). This is justified with the statement, “Better the devil you know than the angle you do not know.” To prevail over inertia needs some sense of security as including an inspirational vision. How organizational culture affect the situation and decision Ravasi and Schultz (44) define organizational culture as the behavior of staff that is part of the company and the connotations which employee reacts to their activities. Culture is composed of the values, working language, vision, symbols, habits and systems of the organization. In the recent past, both practitioners and academicians have been concentrating on the topic of organization culture and whether it does in fact affect its change (Hartnell, Ou & Kinicki 57). Just as defined organizational culture is deeply rooted into the operation of the organization, therefore it is very difficult to change. Cameron & Quinn postulates that Organizational culture holds the principles of conservatism and stability; in that case, the organization members will consider change as harmful, both for them and the entire organization (49). Changes are normally rarely in rooted culture, but if they take place, they become comprehensive and radically (Cameron & Quinn 53). They are often carried out with a greater level of resistance and opposition from and a rather less degree of involvement by the resisting members of that organization. At the time change was proposed, Royce Consulting had a well defined and stable organizational culture which was passed to new recruit all the time. The values consisted of high job involvement and expectations. The managers felt part of the culture and systems, therefore changing the culture would create distraction and lower performance. This is because mangers would not cooperate ones their autonomy is interfered with. The outcome if the partners to ahead with their plan From the case study, it is understood that the partners generally supported plans for creating change and believed that the managers would follow suit. This means their plans was to allow change to take place despite few reluctance on centralized concept and managers’ resistance. In 2010, Nickols claimed that organizational change is in fact good for the health of the organization because it enable the firm to gain competitive advantage. Nickols maintained Change in an organization takes place as a response to the ever-changing business environment, a reaction to an existing crisis situation and is prompted by the good will of a leader. If the partners go ahead with the change process, Royce Consulting would realize its projected growth and manager productivity. Centralization of the files ensures that there is control over those files and cannot be manipulated. The filing system was also to be made electronically. Another change that was proposed was the upgrading of office technology by adoption of notebook computers with proprietary software. Embracing technology will create efficiency and lower cost of operations. Recommendation to the partners Businesses in current fast-paced environment are seeking competitive advantage through change (Conger 97). However, to change, there are certain aspect that the business must lose. Such aspect is organizational design and organizational culture. In the past, managers have created a rigid culture where managers have their own office and a title that should be respected. Similarly that culture has alienated offices, managers do not share their offices with staff. As a result, this has alienated employees from participation in decision making. Hence, I would argue the partners to support the creation of dynamic culture that organization will have not to do away with but will just improve on it. Royce consulting has had decentralized file rooms which make it difficult to access the information about the company. For that reason, I would recommend partners to support the creation of centralized file room to make it easy to control and access office file. Centralization of the files also makes it hard to be manipulated by dishonest officers. Also, if the partners want to sustain competition, they must be updated with pace of change especially technology. However, resistance and opposition are normally with social being with different skills and expectations (Conger 104). To suppress resistance the partners must seek the support of the managers, engage in the benefits of the change and give them opportunity to air their opinions. Custom Chip, Inc Why conflict exist between departments at Custom Chip, Inc. Conflicts looks to naturally exist in the organizational settings since firms operate with different norms, goals and process (Quinn & Sonenshein 78). The contemporary organizations for majority firms are very diverse since they are filled with individuals with diverse skills, knowledge, characteristics and attitudes. According to Dale & Burrell, Managers comprehend that the employees of a company are its greatest asset which cannot definitely be replaced (85). The conception of emotional intelligence is getting importance rapidly as organizational behavior is an issue of an increasing organizational interest and employees are social beings who have emotions. In the context of Custom Chip, Inc, a conflict existed due to role conflict, diverting time and energy on other things, group conflict, little recognition from the managers and different departmental goals. At Custom Chip, Inc, conflict manifested itself due to role of conflict where employees received conflicting demands from the other departments. In this aspect, they were told to serve on other time-consuming things and simultaneously asked to improve production in the work unit. During engineering activities, floor managers could stop the product engineers to ask them six questions and four calls. At the same time, they are expected them to deliver on time. Some engineers could see this as a waste of their time and even putting pressure on them to deliver. Such diversion of employees’ time, usually results to organizational conflicts. The company had three groups, including product engineers, application engineers and manufacturing team. All these teams depend on the work of another to perform. Every team has its own problems ranging from skills to attitude and this determines how they do their work. A delay from one team, say application engineers will obviously delay the work of the manufacturing team. As a result, this will lead to organizational conflict. Application engineers also claim that those who neither feel nor recognized for their work are told to resign. This is a sign that the company does not involve employees in their decision leading to low morale. At the same time, employees are less valued as important asset of the organization. Jacobides posits that (467) Humans have emotions and feel better when recognized to work positively; failure to this will lead to conflicts. Different departments in Custom Chip, Inc all have different goals. From this, it is clear that every department is pooling in different directions creating conflicting organizational goals. Workflow dependence among departments With competition increasing in every sector of the economy, every employ must cooperate to improve the performance of the organization (Conger 101). Every employ are also called upon by the managers to drop personal interest and concentrate on the organizational goals. Effective and efficient workflow is a prerequisite for effective departments of an organization (Dale & Burrell 127). Apart from structure, organization is also divided into departments which carry out different operation, but coordinated to achieve the corporate goals. These departments include product engineering, application engineering and manufacturing. Custom Chip, Inc has created three departments which help produce semiconductors used in radio frequency gadgets. There is a relationship between the three departments to produce high quality semiconductors. Product engineers, research and designs semiconductors which they deliver to manufacturing engineers. Manufacturing engineers produces what application have designed while application engineers ensure that the product meet the specification of the customer. However, the conflict has been witnessed between these departments. Most of the time product engineers have to stop what they are doing to answer six questions from manufacturing; a situation which make product engineers think that Manufacturing engineers are questioning their competence. Similarly, there is a conflict between manufacturing and application departments. Applications engineers feel they do not get recognition for helping manufacturing engineers solving their problems. Lastly, the three departments have their own departmental goals which make it hard to pursue common organizational goals. Recommendation to the management From the case there are two things were observed; the company is facing downtown situation and also there departmental conflicts. As stated, the most appropriate ways to beat downtown economic situation is the cost reduction (Quinn & Sonenshein 67). Without laying–off the staff, cost reduction can be realized through increasing the rate of production while lowering at a shorter time. In 2010 Nickols affirmed that employees have a critical role in making sure that production efficiency is increased. As such, what the management has to do is to put in place strategies that help reduce organizational conflicts while improving degree of motivation. One of the conflicts that arise is the role conflict where manufacturing engineers have to stop product engineers from their work and ask them six questions. This is a waste of time from a company that wants to increase its market delivery. Therefore, should direct should one of the engineers as supervisor whom manufacturing floor engineers can ask those questions about testing and quality. Another thing that cause ruffle is the group conflict. This is where one department seems to question the other about its work. The situation makes it look like one department is superior that the other. The managers must therefore hold talks with all the departments and inform them that no department is above the other and workflow and recognition of other people work is essential in achieving organization objectives. Finally, the managers must involve the three departments in discussion and communicate to them. Discussion will ensure that every department makes organizational goal the first priority over the departmental goal. Why I would recommend a change in Custom Chip, Inc The current organizational design is not efficient enough because it is marred with organizational conflicts. As started earlier, organization design is the practice of re-shaping organization roles and structure, or the alignment of the process, structure, metrics, talent and rewards with the strategies of the organization (Jones 47). Currently, the roles are conflicting making manufacturing team to look superiors and above other departments. For instance, most of the time, manufacturing flow managers have to call the product department and ask six questions concerning the products. For that matter, I would recommend the manager to re-draw the organization structure putting every department in the same level and stating their roles. I would also recommend a change in Custom Chip, Inc so as to provide reward and recognition system. The present situation depicts less motivated employees. For instance, applications who feel less recognized for their work are told to resign instead of being motivated. Organizational design should also be changed to bring new talents and training them to offer meaning and competitive services. This is because currently, manufacturing department claims that they do not have the capacity to document appropriate manufacturing steps. Conclusion These two case studies have demonstrated there is a hypothetical basis that organizational design and culture affect change. With time, employees and managers become rooted in the organization design and culture making it difficult to create and trying to create results into conflict and even dissatisfaction. Organizational change is necessary in this competitive environment, and even with resistance must be adopted. It is the management that has to put preventive measures such as employee’s involvement and dynamic organizational design and culture to minimize opposition. Works Cited 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. 2014. 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. Read More