MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATIONS
Organisations are quite complex, and social systems that try to seek towards making the best use of employees consider it as a valuable resource, mainly in the globalised, dynamic, and competitive environment (Burnes 2009). They also possess different identities that are shaped and developed through the mix of how they select to create, market, and present the business in the world. They also possess the type of services offered and culture, which emerge as the result of it. Therefore, companies are arranged systematically in the framework, which tries to create the unified as, well as an organic body, which links with central business assets, people, intellectual property, and knowledge in designing, with the aim of attaining particular goals (Burnes 2009).
This report is based on the case of Charles, who is opening their project management company, and needs to be advised about the organisational structure, leadership styles, management functions, and perception of the company towards the UK current business environment. In the present globalisation world, business factors are changing, and this requires the company to bring changes in their operations and focus on innovation and customer satisfaction (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008). Therefore, it’s important that the right organisation culture should be followed that befits the company in the long term, and supports in creating a healthy environment within the company, which benefits both employees and customers (Cole and Kelly 2011).
A. Explain three different types of Organisational structure Highlighting advantages and the limitations of each, Choose 1 for Charles.
Below are three different organisational structures:
1. Matrix organisational structure
In this organisations are designed for attaining particular outcomes through the help of specialists coming from various functional areas of the company.
Figure of Matrix organizational structure
This kind of organisations is mainly used by those who want their business to be rapidly adaptive to changing the external environment (Cole and Kelly 2011). Matrix structure includes functional managers and product managers. Functional managers are responsible for collecting specific resources like production, inventories, marketing, quality control, and scheduling. Business group managers are given charge of products, and they are even authorised to prepare for product strategies (Cole and Kelly 2011).
Issues with this structure are the adverse impact of dual authority, which is similar to project organisation. Functional managers sometimes lose their authority, as product managers are offered an individual budget for buying internal resources (Clegg, Kornberger and Pitsis 2011).
2. Line Organizational structure
The line organisation holds vertical and direct relationships were existing among various levels of the company (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008).
Figure of Line Organisational culture
Some of the benefits of this structure are that line structure clarifies the authority, responsibility as well as accountability in relationships. Line structure also tries to promote flexibility and the decision-making process (Clegg, Kornberger and Pitsis 2011).
There are a few drawbacks of this structure like when the companies get big; line organisations get more ineffective (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008). It also improves flexibility and speed, which might lead to failure to have specialised knowledge (Clegg, Kornberger and Pitsis 2011).
3. Functional authority organisational structure
It includes two jobs, such as line position, which includes a direct chain of command, who is responsible for attaining organisational goals, and next is a staff position, which offers advice, expertise and helps for line position (Fineman, Gabriel and Sims 2010).
Figure of Functional authority organizational structure
The benefit of this structure is that line managers are not experts in all functions, but staff personnel who are experts in all fields are offered with functional authority (Fineman, Gabriel and Sims 2010).
The drawback of this structure is that it leads to the occurrence of conflicts, which lead to a violation of principle unity of command and keep authority at a high organisational level (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008).
For Charles's organisation, matrix organisational structure is best as through this structure organisation can emphasise on hierarchies and wrong recruitment decisions are often inevitable (Fineman, Gabriel and Sims 2010).
A. Define modern/contemporary management?
Contemporary approaches in management offer management practice, which relies on current trends like theory z concepts, globalisation, excellence models, McKinsey’s 7-S approach, quality issues, and production (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008). As the companies are operating in the global economy, it’s required that managers should think globally, as competition is increasing (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008). Therefore, knowledge about global perspectives is significant.
Theory Z concepts- it's incorporated in Americana and Japanese culture and stress over the requirement to study as well as adopt appropriate management practices from worldwide (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008).
McKinsey’s 7-S framework- includes 7 organizational factors like strategy, which determine scare resource allocation, next is structure, which determines hierarchical level; systems determine corporate reports, process, routines, and procedures; staff determines HR groups, and style defines the way in which managers try to attain goals of the company (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008). It also includes superordinate goals, which determine the organizational need for installing the members, and skills determine the ability of people in the company (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008).
B. Explain the four management functions; discuss leadership styles and recommend 1 for Charles.
Below are management functions:
Planning- Planning includes establishing goals and creating a blueprint for attaining them (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008). It’s important that managers should create goals and emphasise efforts put by staff, motivate them, and offers standards against measuring performance (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008).
Organizing- it explains resource allocation for attaining goals.
Leading- with influencing the subordinates for achieving goals, managers can never be active. No matter how well the resources are organised, they can only be attained if staff work to make it (Hayes 2010).
Controlling-it is explained as a systematic process, in which managers monitor staff activities for making sure that they are in aligning with the objectives of the company (Hayes 2010).
Autocratic vs. Democratic Leadership- Autocratic leaders try to take control of decision-making and express their interest in recommending staff members (Hayes 2010).
Paternalistic Leadership- this is a hybrid style related to autocratic and democratic styles. It also permits faculty input and makes final decisions on which think is appropriate (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008).
Laissez Faire Leadership- managers adopt this style so that staff can be given freedom and autonomy (Hayes 2010).
The autocratic leadership style tries to resonate with the connected, empowered as well as sceptical employees and customers and leads the company towards loyalty, innovation, growth, and profits (Drafke and Murtaugh 2009). Due to technological advancements, the ripple effect is created for transforming the market; therefore it’s recommended that Charles should adopt this leadership style. The autocratic style is brilliant and offers leaders a huge range of options that match with a huge variety of assets of the company, which are created today (Drafke and Murtaugh 2009).
A. Identify the most appropriate Organisational culture for Charles's organisation, compare and contrast with other corporate cultures.
The most suitable corporate culture for Charles project Management Company is pragmatic culture (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008). The success of the project depends on customer satisfaction, and pragmatic culture emphasises it (Drafke and Murtaugh 2009). Customer satisfaction is the main aim of staff. These companies tried their client as God and adopt certain sets of rules. Every public servant strives towards satisfying customers and expects maximum business from it (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008). As every client is different, these workplaces are distinct from the normative cultural environment, because here the staff is adhering to rules (Drafke and Murtaugh 2009). Whatever is demanded by customers, they are given that. This organisational culture is different from other cultures as its primary focus is towards long-term orientation. It prepares a culture plan and creates attempts for short-term gains (Drafke and Murtaugh 2009).
B. Define perception and explain how the idea of judgment fits into the Organisational Culture.
Perception is considered as the identification, organisation, as well as interpretation of information for the purpose of representing and understanding the business environment (Mullins and Christy 2013). It is perceived by the managers that the organisational culture can be considered as the negotiated reality, in which organisational members try to present the balanced perspective among pragmatic as well as purist culture. Usually, organisational culture can be separated from workplace culture (Mullins and Christy 2013). Charles perceived that corporate culture can help him in understanding the realities of the company and the external market, in which he plans to do business (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008). Charles perceived that the individual’s behaviour has no link with the external environment, rather they believe in it (Mullins and Christy 2013). It’s the perception of the employees about the situations ongoing in the company, by which they behave. The views of Charles fit with the selected organisational culture. It is noted that even management of the company cannot manipulate the perceptions, rather they can only change their behaviour in the way staff members might want to negotiate about the new realities of business (Mullins and Christy 2013).
A. Outline the strategic Objective of this Organisation
Organisational Objectives- Charles Company ensures a culture of inquiry and collaboration, which is linked to the brightest staff in the industry (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008). The company multidisciplinary is the catching phrase for the business (Robbins and Judge 2014). The objective of the enterprise is that specialists should work within the interdisciplinary team, and try to promote the cross-fertilisation of thoughts or ideas and employees should take personal responsibility for safeguarding the whole objective of a project (Robbins and Judge 2014).
Management function- The management function of the company is undertaken by the people, time, and cost of the team (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008). They ensure that efficient commencement is conducted of the project, its progress, and results derived from the project. The project manager at Charles Company is highly responsible for conducting planning as well as management of projects (Robbins and Judge 2014). They are also accountable for focusing towards designing, planning authority, procurement of material, budget, changes, contractors, customers, and focus on the lifecycle of a project, management of documentation, along with various other areas that can ensure that timely project reaches at the desired conclusion (Robbins and Judge 2014). Project management at Charles Company also complies with the health, safety, sustainability, and insurance conditions, and even emphasise legal aspects, which is the base of the project (Robbins and Judge 2014).
Organisations culture- Charles Company in the UK had attained the acclaim for creating the best entrepreneurial culture, which fits in the corporate framework (Vandeveer and Menefee 2010). The basis of this culture is to clearly capture the phrases, which are chanted by the company like initiating the experimental doodling. The company focus on hiring people, who are talented, experienced, and talented (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008). The company follows the culture of freedom and autonomy, which helps the managers in encouraging the technical staff to give 15% of their total time on projects while selecting and initiating them (Vandeveer and Menefee 2010). Under extreme situations, the culture of a company depicts the counterculture in its different values and norms (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008).
Perception of the organisation in the current UK environment- the UK had currently come out of recession, and the UK economy is looking forward to prospects (Vandeveer and Menefee 2010). In the phase of globalisation, global competition has increased among the companies. Therefore, Charles Company also views the global prospects and tries to work accordingly (French, Rayner, Rees and Rumbles 2008). In the UK economy, there is a high corporate tax, which impacts business (Henry 2011). In the UK economy, due to an increase in taxation, consumer demands for both products and services are decreasing (Vandeveer and Menefee 2010). Therefore, it’s important that Charles firm should come up with different offers and innovative in its products, which creates demand in the market.
It can be concluded that organisational culture plays important role in the company, as it decides the way decisions are taken in the company and simultaneously implemented. In this report, the case of Charles is selected, and it’s advisable that managers of the company should focus towards building competitive culture, which can be competitive in the global market.
Burnes, B. 2009. Managing Change, 5th Edition. Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd.
Clegg, S., Kornberger, M., and Pitsis, T. 2011. Managing & Organizations: An Introduction to the Theory & Practice, 3rd Edition. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Cole, G.A., and Kelly, P. 2011. Management Theory and Practice, 7th Edition. Andover: Cengage Learning EMEA.
Drafke, M., and Murtaugh, J. 2009. The Human Side of Organizations 10th ed. Prentice Hall
Fineman, S., Gabriel, Y., and Sims, D. 2010. Organizing & Organizations, 4th Edition. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
French, R., Rayner, C., Rees, G., and Rumbles, S. 2008. Organizational Behaviour. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Hayes, J. 2010. The Theory and Practice of Change Management, 3rd Edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.
Henry, A.E. 2011. Understanding Strategic Management, 2nd Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mullins, L.J., and Christy, G. 2013. Management & Organisational Behaviour 10th ed. Prentice Hall
Robbins, S.P., and Judge, T.A. 2014. Essentials of Organizational Behaviour 12th ed. Prentice Hall
Vandeveer, R., and Menefee, M. 2010. Human Behavior in Organizations 4th ed. Prentice Hall