What is Organizational Structure?
1. Organizational structure refers to the functional system which comprises certain external and internal policies sketched that governs the workflow including the sharing responsibilities, handling of information, coordination and others. Moreover, the organizational structure is the communication framework, control system, designing and structuring of instruction and commands. It also cultivates the allocation of responsibilities, power structure, the ultimate framework as well as elucidating the departmental relationships. The internal environment of the organizational structure comprises employees, corporate culture and management. It is the corporate culture that influences employee behaviour. Again on the contrary, the leadership styles and their structures influence the employees directly. The structure depends on the styles used by the leaders such as traditional or progressive. However, the mission, vision, the internal environment comprising stakeholders especially the management and the employees define the organizational structure of any company. Moreover all these aspects are correlated. The internal environment structure of the organization influences its responses and reaction towards the external environment. For example, the organization might externally experience certain technological developments but may not put them into action unless it treasures efficient, skilled and compatible work force, proper management policies and healthy working environment (Zheng et al., 2010).
Strategy refers to the actions and the policies that are designed by the organizations to attain the long term objectives. Moreover, the strategy of any organization keeps changing to stay at par with the changing environment and the changing requirement of the stakeholders. It is the strategies that hold the organizational structure intact. The strategies are such designed that it strives to earn the competitive advantage for the respective organizations thus aligning with organization’s structure (Silva et al., 2010).
In case of several organizations, it is noted that the functions pertaining to marketing department are decentralized (decision making flows from top to middle level and lower level) that have been the reasons for several problems. Especially in case of professional sports, a very less connection might be observed between the sports promotional, public relations affair to the sport information department. This sort of structural errors led to strategic issues. Therefore, though there might be decentralization set within the company’s culture and structure, but the harmonious coordination must be cultivated through effective strategies that might not only add mileage to the company’s performance but also earn its competitive advantage (Yusof et al., 2008).
Taking into consideration, the case of Atlanta Braves which is a renowned baseball team, it was noted during the year 2004, that the sports organization put a conscious effort to rekindle the spirit through fan experience thereby restructuring the respective marketing department through the incorporation of a specific “stadium group” that was responsible for concentrating on the in-game presentation. Similarly, during the end of 1990, the Major League Soccer (MLS) comprehended the aspect of creating a sturdy base comprising Hispanic fans must be anticipated through a well thought change in regards to the marketing structure. However while the idea was conceptualized, only one personnel was traced to be working for the respective objective and multitasking in areas regarding Hispanic media liaison and community relations. Hence he was made the director of Hispanic marketing department and community development thus assisted by few more personnel under him. Therefore MLS reshaped the structure to follow the strategy so that both complement each other and are aligned (Aldrich, 2008).
How Organizational Structure influences Strategy
Again on the contrary, the objectives set by the Coca Cola company is to lead in providing branded beverages internationally thereby earning profits, exhibiting developments and also to be regarded as the leader when it comes to quality and taste. Nonetheless the company also visualizes creating brand loyalty which can only be attained through the implementation of effective strategies. The strategies are to accelerate the growth of carbonated soft drinks of the company, widen the design of products whenever possible thereby coming up with new kinds of beverages in the international market such as tea, juices, energy drinks and so on. The company provides of quality consumer service through the knowledge of customer needs and also to stimulate efficiency and cost effectiveness through proper implementation of technology and effective strategies for human resource management system. Hence, to incorporate these strategies effectively, the organizational structure must be such designed that it fulfils the requirements and strategies of the company. Therefore Coca Cola has been known to frame flexible organizational structures where flexibility in decision making, sharing of concepts as well as control can be observed. This building of the flexible organizational structure lends the possibility to Coca Cola effective teamwork among its workforce as the same is being stimulated within the working atmosphere. For instance, the Coca Cola branch that is in Great Britain involves the team members from different departments to take decisions accumulatively whenever any new product gets launched in the respective country. Therefore it is to be concluded that the strategies and structure are the two faces of the coin which must complement each other and thus it must be aligned (Raman, 2007).
2. Strategic lenses are considered as strategic management. There are 4 angles that can be observed through these lenses which are design, experience, variety and discourse. Under the lens of design, strategy is viewed as logical determinism which signifies that with the effective assessment of the internal as well as the external factors, available resources, the best and effective strategy is designed. Further it is corroborated by the management books that the design lens exhibits that strategy is incorporated by the top management through the application of vigorous planning and evaluation to the down level. However many proposes that design lens alone might not prove to be sufficient in forming successful organizational strategy and thus the experience lens comes to play (Katikireddi et al., 2014).
Four Strategic Lenses
Further the design lens appears to implement a rather rational approach as it entails collecting information, analytical presentation of the surrounding, both internal and external and others. For example, in case of Primark which is an international retail brand, it can be noticed that how effective strategic leadership viewed through design lens and rationality leads to success and earns competitive advantage for the company. The target market of the company is under the 35 years age bracket which has led to use cost leadership strategy by the company. It is often hailed as the brand that sells products that can be easily afforded by the people belonging to the middle class segment or above middle class segment of the global society. Cost leadership also refers to the company’s selling the similar products in the target market at prices lesser than its competitors. It is a rational strategy that has been taken by Primark through the incorporation of design lens (Jones et al., 2009).
The experience lens observes any successful and effective strategy as the resultant achieved by any employee or experiences gathered from a collection of employees of the organization who have helped to form and design decision thereby putting to use their experiences. They are the individual experience and the collective experience to the work culture, experience that employees develop over time and apply in differing situations.
Therefore the experience lens impact the strategy of any organization either through the collection of experiences formed out of environment and work culture or through personal cognitive models of the employees about the set patterns of the situations dealt by the organizations. For instance while Primark opened its 77000 square feet new outlet in Boston, it clearly stated that it want to keep its business within the four concrete walls of the outlets rather than going digital. The company stresses on the aspect that the products it sell are heavily discounted and thus does not prefer to sell online which is an unique experience applied by the company through experience lens. It might seem clueless; however, the company sells most of its products below $30 and has been observed to make a quick turnover. Therefore it is the experience of the reps and the managers clubbed together which has made the company to take decisions like this (Mariani, 2007).
Variety lens is the approach and requirement to put stress on innovation and variety within the organizations. Strategies viewing from the variety lens can come up as ideas and responses of the people on how they handle situations within the organization and in the external environment. Therefore it is again the variety of ideas that usher from experiences of the work force of any organization. For instance, while Primark opened its outlet in Boston during 2015, it came up with an innovative idea called Primania that is filled with craziness, energy and a sense of frenzy. The company has been putting up enormous LED displays that exhibit #Primania where the customers upload their snaps after wearing Primark’s clothes through Instagram. To add mileage to it, the company is maintaining a free wifi facility within the store, spacious trial rooms’ where the customers can easily change along with their friends and pose for selfies and upload in Primania. Therefore it gives a picture of innovation and variety while viewed through strategy lens implemented by Primark to boost its sales and brand image (Werther & Chandler, 2010).
Design Lens
Discourse while viewed through strategy lens ushers as the choices out of differing possibilities and later instilling confidence regarding the choice made. The main focus is the language that is used to communicate with different stakeholders of the company and the sustenance of the messages conveyed, used and communicated. Through the effective usage of discourse lens the managers are able to establish legitimacy. In Primark, it is often noted that though the company poses that it is building effective online communication but still the company has been observed to use a monologue tone while communicating online with its customers. It is also noted that the company has not been responding to the questions of its customers in Facebook. Again on the other hand, Primark is not seen to use Twitter so that it can communicate well with its consumers. However, the company knows well how to communicate and maintain its discourse with its employees and thus has been displaying its trend setting in cost leadership strategy (Kavale, 2012).
Further legitimacy through its communication with its stakeholders can be identified as the financial assistance lend by Primark to the downtrodden women of Bangladesh after combating the infamous Rana Plaza incident in Bangladesh
Exploring strategy through strategy lens must always be cultivated within any organization as it applies vast knowledge, research and competitive advantage (Aldrich, 2008).
References
Aldrich, H. (2008). Organizations and environments. Stanford University Press.
Chen, C. J., & Huang, J. W. (2007). How organizational climate and structure affect knowledge management—The social interaction perspective.International Journal of Information Management, 27(2), 104-118.
Jones, B., Temperley, J., & Lima, A. (2009). Corporate reputation in the era of Web 2.0: the case of Primark. Journal of Marketing Management, 25(9-10), 927-939.
Katikireddi, S. V., Bond, L., & Hilton, S. (2014). Changing policy framing as a deliberate strategy for public health advocacy: a qualitative policy case study of minimum unit pricing of alcohol. Milbank Quarterly, 92(2), 250-283.
Kavale, S. (2012). The connection between strategy and structure.International journal of business and commerce, 1(6), 60-70.
Mariani, M. M. (2007). Coopetition as an emergent strategy: Empirical evidence from an Italian consortium of opera houses. International Studies of Management & Organization, 37(2), 97-126.
Morton, N. A., & Hu, Q. (2008). Implications of the fit between organizational structure and ERP: A structural contingency theory perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 28(5), 391-402.
Raman, K. R. (2007). Community—Coca-Cola Interface: Political-Anthropological Concerns on Corporate Social Responsibility. Social Analysis, 51(3), 103-120.
Silva, N. D., Hutcheson, J., & Wahl, G. D. (2010). Organizational strategy and employee outcomes: A person–organization fit perspective. The Journal of psychology, 144(2), 145-161.
Werther Jr, W. B., & Chandler, D. (2010). Strategic corporate social responsibility: Stakeholders in a global environment. Sage publications.
Yusof, A., See, L. H., & Yusof, A. (2008). Spectator perceptions of physical facility and team quality: A study of a Malaysian super league soccer match.Research Journal of International Studies, 8(2), 132-140.
Zheng, W., Yang, B., & McLean, G. N. (2010). Linking organizational culture, structure, strategy, and organizational effectiveness: Mediating role of knowledge management. Journal of Business research, 63(7), 763-771.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
