Category: Organizational theory

Key Organizational Theories in IS: Direction of Research

Information systems (IS) research is among the most incorporative branches of science (Wade & Hulland, 2004). In other words, it tends to absorb the theoretical foundations and implications of other disciplines, including management. Various organizational theories can be applied to IS as well. The direction of this level of IS research can be described as the development of new IS perspectives and principles that incorporate various aspects of organizational life (Ravichandran, & Rai, 2004).

Given the dependence of modern organizations on IS, this direction of research is of vast importance as it ensures more effective IS integration. Several examples of organizational theories in IS will be discussed in this paper, including the resource-based view, institutional theory, organizational changes theory, and some other relevant approaches.

Key Theories for Organizational-Level Phenomena in IS Research

One of the major organizational theories that received prominence nowadays is the resource-based view (RBV) or theory (Cragg, Caldeira & Ward, 2011). It was first proposed for usage in the field of strategic management in 1992, and it has been applied in the context of IS occasionally (Wade & Hulland, 2004). RBV defines a number of resources, the right set and allocation of which can ensure the firms competitiveness. The competitive set depends on the industry as well as other specific features (to the point of the possibility of individual customization for a single organization).

The terminology of RBV has been somewhat vague, especially in relation to the major term resource. Wade and Hulland (2004) define resources as tangible and intangible assets and primarily intangible capabilities. For IS research, RBV offers the possibility of relating various types of IS to management strategy by determining their value for it. By providing this information, RBV also offers the ground for comparison of IS with each other and different strategic elements. The major disadvantage of such integration consists in the fact that IS are relatively unlikely to contribute to the competitive advantage directly. The indirect impact on competitive advantage is relatively underdeveloped within the theory.

Liang, Saraf, Hu, and Xue (2007) describe another approach, the institutional theory. It emphasizes the strife for legitimacy in an organizational environment which makes the organization vulnerable to external influences (political and economical as well as that of other companies, and so on). The theory is perfectly applicable to IS: for example, the development of information security policies is most often caused by governmental policies, and in the terms of the adoption of various IT, the mimetic actions of organizations have been noted. The special feature of this theory consists in the fact that it explains the organization-level phenomena from the point of view of external forces, unlike most other approaches that focus on internal ones.

Pavlou, Liang, and Xue (2007) dwell on the principal-agent perspective they derive from the agency theory. The agency approach presupposes regarding the relationship between buyers and sellers from a specific angle: buyers are considered to be principals as they delegate the delivery responsibility to sellers who function as agents (Pavlou et al., 2007, p. 106). The theory was applied to B2C e-commerce with particular emphasis on the information asymmetry (and its reduction strategies).

The authors pointed out that in the terms of IS and organizational theory approach to trust, principal-agent perspective demonstrated the correlation between information issues and uncertainty perception. It was concluded that for the sake of e-commerce, attempts at uncertainty mitigation must be made. The mitigation suggestions of the authors belong to various disciplines including organization theory (trust issues solution), sociology (social presence), marketing (diagnosticity), and IS (information privacy/security).

There is a number of other examples of IS-relevant or IS-applied theories and ideas. The socio-technical systems approach literally presupposes ensuring both the technical validity and organizational validity of an organization as they are considered to be the key aspects of the development process (Ravichandran, & Rai, 2004, p. 384). It is probably one of the most general organization-level approaches in IS.

The collective resource perspective incorporates the trendy emancipatory ideals from management theory into IS study. This approach suggests a more active involvement of workers in the design and use of computer systems (to avoid deskilling the employees) through negotiations with managers. Subramani (2004) discusses the theory of exploitation and exploration and demonstrates how both of these approaches can be used for IS practice. Also, a significant IS-relevant approach is organizational change (transformation, development) theories. IS has always been a transformational object from its beginning (Suter et al., 2013, p. 117). As a result, the challenge of applying transformational theories is always reasonable.

Key Antecedents and Outcomes of Organizational-Level Phenomena in IS Research

Antecedents

The beginnings of organizational-level phenomena trace back to 1938 when Barnard presented the notion of organizations as purposeful systems of coordinated action (Ravichandran & Rai, 2004, p. 386). Since then, organizations and their units became the subject of theoretical analysis. The concept of organization as a system has been developing, and the understanding of its structure was leaving behind the limitations tangible elements as it started to include leadership, processes, policies as the bricks, materials, the right combination of which could improve the companys performance (Ravichandran & Rai, 2004, p. 386).

Outcomes

Nowadays, as the integration of the organizational theory in IS progresses, the practical implications of such a symbiosis are being studied. Liang et al. (2007), for example, propose a line of action for managers that can be boiled down to a more active mediation of IT adoption. An example of an RBV-based framework was presented by Cragg, Caldeira, and Ward (2011). It involves the development of six major and 22 minor competencies that would allow better IS adoption for small and medium-sized enterprises, thus providing them with a strategy and a guide for areas that require specific attention (for example, benefits management or supplier relationship management). The authors also believe that that framework can be used for defining the least developed areas within an organization and targeting them.

The Importance of Organizational-Level Phenomena in IS Research

The primary aim of the integration of organizational level phenomena in IS research consists in the achievement of effective process management and (eventually) performance improvement. Indeed, by understanding the relationships between various organizational elements that include IS, researchers discover ways of more effective management of these elements. As the organizational dependence on IS grows, the effective integration of them becomes more important. Liang et al. (2007) demonstrate that the adoption, implementation, assimilation (wide adoption), and usage of IT components is largely facilitated by the top management involvement and proper institutional infrastructure.

In turn, IT have been providing management support, reducing operational costs, improving customer service, and gaining competitive advantages (Subramani, 2004, p. 47). In other words, it is a fact that the integration of organizational theories in IS means finding the ways of organizational performance improvement, which justifies this kind of research.

References

Cragg, P., Caldeira, M., & Ward, J. (2011). Organizational information systems competences in small and medium-sized enterprises. Information & Management, 48(8), 353-363. Web.

Liang, H., Saraf, N., Hu, Q., & Xue, Y. (2007). Assimilation of Enterprise Systems: The Effect of Institutional Pressures and the Mediating Role of Top Management. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 31(1), 59-87. Web.

Pavlou, P., Liang, H., & Xue, Y. (2007). Understanding and Mitigating Uncertainty in Online Exchange Relationships: A Principal-Agent Perspective. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 31(1), 105-136. Web.

Ravichandran, T., & Rai, A. (2004). Quality Management in Systems Development: An Organizational System Perspective. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 24(3), 381-415. Web.

Subramani, M. (2004). How Do Suppliers Benefit from Information Technology Use in Supply Chain Relationships. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 28(1), 45-73. Web.

Suter, E., Goldman, J., Martimianakis, T., Chatalalsingh, C., DeMatteo, D., & Reeves, S. (2013). The use of systems and organizational theories in the interprofessional field: Findings from a scoping review. J Interprof Care, 27(1), 57-64. Web.

Wade, M., & Hulland, J. (2004). Review: The Resource-Based View and Information Systems Research: Review, Extension, and Suggestions for Future Research. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 28(1), 107-142. Web.

Definition

Despite being used quite often in evaluating the performance of an organization, as well as redefining the companys goals and the means to achieve them, the phenomenon of organizational effectiveness is comparatively hard to nail down. Traditionally, the concept is viewed through the lens of management theories, whence the complexity of the phenomenon stems from. Indeed, the effectiveness of an organization is comprised of a range of elements, particularly, the performance of the staff, the efficacy of the financial transactions and the companys operations in general, the quality of the source materials, the adequacy of the logistics strategy adopted, etc. Therefore, in most cases, the operational definition of organizational effectiveness is stretched to the efficacy, with which an organization meets its key objectives; thus, OE can be defined as the notion of how effectual an organization is in accomplishing the results the organization aims to generate (Manzoor, 2012, p. 37). Much to the credit of the recent researchers, the phenomenon has lately been viewed from the point of view of the companys assets, therefore, relating the concept in question to the internal processes of an organization and not the outside factors: Organizational effectiveness is a term often used to describe an organizations capacity to achieve outcomes efficiently and effectively (Lin & Lin, 2011, p. 364).

Drawing the line between organizational performance and organizational effectiveness, one must also add that the latter is a broader construct that captures organizational performance, but with grounding in organizational theory that entertains alternate performance goals (Richard, Devinney, Yip & Johnson, 2009, p. 718). Therefore, it would be wrong to consider the concept of OE solely as the measure of the revenues that a company has gained over a specific time period; quite on the contrary, the phenomenon should be related to a variety of concepts in order to represent its complexity properly. To be more exact, the evaluation of OE must be carried out with regard for both the internal factors, including the companys assets, the direct and indirect costs, the net revenue, the profit margins, etc., and the external ones, particularly, the competition rates within the specified market, the amount of competitors, the type and structure of the market in question (e.g., in a monopolistic market, the chances for a company to survive the competition are close to nil), etc.

Theories

It should be noted that the phenomenon of OE can be viewed from a variety of theories, including Hanna and Freemans Theory of Organizational Effectiveness, also known as the Theory of Organizational Ecology, the Impartiality Theory, the Participant-Interest Theory, the Four-Factor Theory of Leadership, which allows for predicting OE in a specific organization, and, of course, the Theory of the Firm. It should be born in mind that the theories mentioned above are not the only frameworks that address the concept of OE; quite on the contrary there are a number of other theoretical approaches, which render the phenomenon of OE, the means of measuring it and the methods of maintaining OE in a company. Still, the theories listed above are considered the key ones in assessing OE and identifying the strategies for attaining it.

Hannan and Freemans Theory of Organizational Effectiveness (the Theory of Organizational Ecology)

According to Hannan and Freeman, OE depends on the environment, in which the members of the company in question operate. Consequently, Hannan and Freeman suggest that the means to sustain the environment, which is favorable for the organizations operation, or, as they put it, organizational ecology, must be designed. Hannan and Freeman identify adaptation as the key mechanism allowing for creating the proper organizational ecology within a particular company. Adaptation should not be viewed as a passive acceptance of the negative factors affecting the company; instead, Hannan and Freeman define adaptation as flexibility in searching the avenues for addressing a particular problem with a limited amount of resources. More to the point, the theory in question helps identify the methods for fighting the so-called organizational inertia, i.e., the obstacle, which blocks the way towards adaptation for an organization (Frenken, 2011).

Participant-Interest Theory

Another theory that addresses the phenomenon of OE, the Participant-Interest Theory (PIT) presupposes that, to achieve high rates of efficacy, an organization must take the interests of its key stakeholders into account (Keeley, 1984). It should be noted, though, that PIT is, in fact, not a single framework, but an entity comprised of several participant-interest theories.

Four-Factor Theory of Leadership

Hannan and Freeman made it obvious that OE should be measured based on a range of factors affecting the companys operations, the organizational behavior of the staff, etc. The Four-Factor Theory of Leadership (FFT) has narrowed the number of issues affecting OE to four. According to the key tenets of the FFT, support, interaction facilitation, goal emphasis, and work facilitation can be used to evaluate the efficacy of the company in a rather accurate manner (Bowers & Seashore, 1966). Indeed, the areas mentioned above address the major processes that occur within an average organization, i.e., the relationships between its members, the production process, the location of the firms goals and their subsequent achievement.

Theory of the Firm

Another way of looking at the OE, the Theory of the Firm (TF) provides a deeper insight onto the nature of entrepreneurship and, thus, helps realize what elements are needed to promote sustainability within the company. Though tending to view the OE through the prism of the companys structure and processes, TF also analyzes the organizations relationship to the market, therefore, making it possible to locate the potential changes in the OE after the integration of the organization into the latter. The significance of the relationships between the company and the market is becoming increasingly high with the rise in the pace of globalization; therefore, with all due respect to the authors of the TF, one must admit that some of its postulates should be taken with a grain of salt; particularly, the consideration of the companys assets should not be isolated from the analysis of the effects of the market and the related forces on the organizations key processes (Fitzsimons, James & Denyer, 2011).

Methods

A variety of methods for improving OE have been suggested so far. Traditionally, the reconsideration of the companys vision, mission and corporate ethics is viewed as the key to improving OE. The introduction of the principles of professional responsibility into the company is also often seen as the first step towards raising the OE rates. Together with professional responsibility, accountability and time management are also listed among the key concepts required for improving OE. Finally, a range of companies considering the satisfaction of their key stakeholders as their top priority often happen to be the firms with the highest OE rates (Amah & Ahiauzu, 2013).

Reference List

Amah, E. & Ahiauzu, A. (2013). Employee involvement and organizational effectiveness. Journal of Management Development, 32(7), 661674.

Bowers, D. G. & Seashore, S. E. (1966). Predicting organizational effectiveness with a four-factor theory of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly, 11(2), 238-263.

Fitzsimons, D., James, K. T. & Denyer, D. (2011). Alternative approaches for studying shared and distributed leadership. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(3), 313328.

Frenken, K. (2011). Firm entry and institutional lock-in: an organizational ecology analysis of the global fashion design industry. EconStor, 0714, 121.

Keeley, M. (1984). Impartiality and participant-interest theories of organizational effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(1), 125.

Lin, Y. W. & Lin, Y. Y. (2011). Health-promoting organization and organizational effectiveness of health promotion in hospitals: a national cross-sectional survey in Taiwan. Health Promotion International, 26(3), 362375.

Manzoor, Q.-A. (2012). Impact of employees motivation on organizational effectiveness. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(3), 3645.

Richard, P.J., Devinney, T., Yip, G. & Johnson, G. (2009). Measuring organizational performance: towards methodological best practice. Journal of Management, 35(3), 718804.

Organizational Theory

Organizational theories have been prevalent over the last century, dominated by sociological perspectives. Haveman and Wetts (2018) hypothesized that the theories emerged through Marx, Weber, and Durkheims works. Marx idealized that organizations were divided into classes of workers, managers, and owners in an organization. Technological advancements were manipulated to exploit workers whom they sought to dominate. These distinctions form the basis of the Marxist theory developing insight into Marxs thinking relative to the proliferating industrial activity. On the other hand, Weber assumed that institutional settings are affected by the social perceptions of power, translating to emphasizing bureaucracy in workplace behaviors as employers are effective when a line of command is established. (Haveman & Wetts, 2019). Therefore, organizations sought to establish power structures that allowed a clear chain of command organizations, vital in building a case for organizational management.

The organizational theories relate to the contemporary theories of the nonprofit field of operations. Foremost, Worth (2021) discussed the nonprofit theory of the commons focusing on protected space for the collective expression of what people find most important in their lives (134). The ideology ties in with the classical theories that emphasize social ideologies directly impact operations, dictating the interaction among workers. On the other hand, the open systems criticize Webers theory expanding that open theory systems common factoring external operations environments for nonprofit organizations. Therefore, social perceptions of power and human interaction are broached as the essentials for institutional structuring. Worth (2021) considered that the employees were representatives of organizations to outside worlds. Thus, the emphasis was on the need to integrate holistic structures in an organization that idealizes workers social environments.

Motivation Theories (Management)

Contemporary understanding of leadership and motivational principles in organizations are embedded in classical theories. These theories are distinguished into two categories content theories and process theories. Maslow presented that workers needs could be organized into a pyramid framework prioritizing the most influential factor at the top of the pyramid (Fischer, 2009). As such, a manager or leader ensures worker satisfaction and motivation such that the motivated workers would produce an optimal performance for an organization. The needs presented in Maslows pyramid from the lowest priority to the most influential factor included physiological, security needs, social needs, ego needs, and self-actualization (Fischer, 2009, p.351). Concurrently, McLelland presented his trichotomy of needs that determine organizational function, including power, affiliation, and achievement. Meeting these needs implies a unified mindset, ensuring directed operations.

Moreover, other theorists support a similar thought regarding organizational motivators. Correspondingly, Bolman and Deal (2017) highlight that organizations must work up the pyramid as the lower sector presents the basic needs. As needs are met, employees are more motivated to provision their needs. As a result, the principles would increase organizational performance as the framework empowers workers to perform optimally when needs are met. Applying the approach to my organization would employ policy reforms that support inclusion and participatory roles.

Case Study

Change management has been acknowledged as an intrinsic feature of modern organizational frameworks. Kurt Lewin incepted the theorization of change management as an integrated modification of social interactions, balancing change and outcomes of organizational activities (Lehmann, 2017). As such, his approach was termed field theory, as Lewin argued the importance of prioritizing group dynamics to ensure success in adapting to change. The characteristics of the group determine the preparedness for holistic flexibility of an organization to change. The organization gains adaptive capacity while enhancing institutional resilience and consistency within different situations or conditions.

New connotations of the concept of group dynamics have been demonstrated, adding to the discourse presented by Lewin. Thus, Staceys theory of organizational management frameworks related to Lewins ideologies as he argued that organizations should incorporate responsive interactions (Lehman, 2017). He highlights the limitations that exist when employees require constant guidance while exhibiting delays. The theory proposes an organizational framework that allows employees freedom of task completion requiring minimal supervision. Lehman (2017) discussed that the idea builds team dynamics founded on trust allowing independence of action but directed to support the holistic performance of the group. Although from different eras, Lewin and Stacey proposed that change management will enable organizational flexibility to vary environments in the dynamic character of the economy as influenced by technological advancements and globalization.

Conclusively, the research presented relevant insight into the importance of employee involvement in the case study. Subsequently, Bolman and Deal (2017) supported the ideology that satisfied and appreciated employees were the key to organizational success. He epitomized the workforce as a valuable asset to an organization, ensuring the completion of tasks and achieving targets. Managing the group is the most vital objective in leadership and managerial roles that enhances their optimal performance. Thus, they must present strategies or policies that prepare the organization for changes. Lehman (2017) stipulates that for Denmark, the preceded strategy development allowed the elimination of uncertainty, offering a straightforward guide.

Denmark expressed such change management application in its emergency organization, establishing a functional system. The restructuring enabled a merger of various organizations as a political transition to meeting their mandates (Lehman, 2017). The merger of more than 87 municipality-based organizations presented a significant demand for applying appropriate frameworks to support political change. Under this circumstance, the political prompt instigated Lehmans case analysis to ascertain best practices for change preparedness. To achieve the goal, the emergency organization strategy was a two-day workshop program as a platform that allowed employees or affected stakeholders to express their challenges through dialogue mechanisms. The mechanism informed the participant of the objective and hypothesis of the merging of the organization giving a clear idea of intentions. In addition, the study conducted a device-based interaction to establish a vote of confidence for the change. Concurrently, the mechanism was insightful, using technology to influence openness (Lehman, 2017). Thus, the approach was conscious of supporting a neutral environment that allowed participants freedom and willingness to articulate themselves.

Consequently, the case study expanded the dialogue from individual to group discussion. In groups, they discussed the results, offering insight into the prioritization factors and underlying elements that may have been overlooked. Consequently, Bolman and Deal (2017) presented human resource management concepts that support the monitoring of interactions offering the most appropriate conditions. However, the critical completion of the case had the potential to optimize participation. The process may have benefitted by allowing involvement in the strategic management team, which used the information gained from the workshops. Therefore, participation in the design of the final mechanism may have increased the ownership of the change.

References

Fisher, E. A. (2009). Motivation and Leadership in Social Work Management: A Review of Theories and Related Studies. Administration in Social Work, 33(4), 347367. Web.

Haveman, H. A., & Wetts, R. (2018). Organizational theory: From classical sociology to the 1970s. Sociology Compass, 13(3), e12627. Web.

Haveman, H. A., & Wetts, R. (2019). Contemporary organizational theory: The demographic, relational, and cultural perspectives. Sociology Compass, 13(3), e12664. Web.

Lehmann, S. (2017). Bridging Strategies and Action: Towards a Method for Change Management in Danish Emergency Management Organizations. Journal of Change Management, 17(2), 138154. Web.

Worth, M. J. (2021). Theories of the nonprofit sector and nonprofit organizations. In Nonprofit Management: Principle and Practice (6th ed.). Sage Publishers. Web.

Introduction

Sweeping demographic shifts, technological advances, competition, geopolitical realignments and other related pressures are combining with security concerns, changing customer preferences, expansion urges and organizational governance to generate momentous pressure for organizational change (Kotter 96; Howard 3). A diversity of studies (Haveman 20; Kotter 97; Amburgay 55) have found that organizations need to continually change and reinvent themselves to maintain their competitive advantage in the ever-shifting and continuously more complex business environment of the 21^st century.

In his study on organizational readiness for change, Susanto argues that the ever-shifting business environment generates compelling demand for an organization to continually change and modify its strategy, structure, process, and culture (50). In essence, change has become routine for effectiveness and success in business, but studies conducted over time demonstrate that it does not always guarantee positive outcomes.

Organizational theorists agree that organizational change and transformation can be both adaptive and disruptive (Amburgay 51), not mentioning that it often leads to organizational effectiveness or failure. According to Probst & Raisch, &prior research has shown that organizational changes lead to an immediate increased risk of organizational failure due to the disruption and destruction of existing practices and routines (93-94).

The researchers believe that a certain organizational identity is fundamentally required to undergo change and transformation effectively, and organizations cannot endure without developing a concrete basis that provides guidance and direction during changing times. Indeed, some rudimentary changes, such as sweeping transformation, change of business model, mergers and acquisitions, entering into a different industry or initiating expansion, always lead to the certain destruction of an organizations identity, thus increasing the risks for failure.

Other factors come into play in determining the effectiveness or failure of a change process. A study conducted by Haveman on diversification in the savings and loans industry found that a large proportion of organizational change efforts turns out to be ineffective due to lack of adequate harmonization of fundamental components within the organization that ingeniously act as the foundation for the implementation of the change process (50). It is against this backdrop that this study purposes to identify these components within the framework of organizational theory and discuss how these components act to facilitate change and transformation for growth and expansion in Wal-Mart.

Background

Founded in 1962 by American entrepreneur Sam Walton, Wal-Mart has grown to become the behemoth of departmental discount stores not only in the U.S. but also in other locations globally. The company is undoubtedly the worlds largest retailer and public corporation by revenue, with over 4000 stores in the U.S alone, employing an estimated 1.4 million workers (Ailawadi 577). Overall, the company operates 8500 discount stores in 15 countries around the world, with 55 different flagship names.

It is estimated that more than 127 million customers visit Wal-Mart supermarket chain each week, and the companys 2005 U.S. sales surpassed the next U.S. discount stores combined. Although the company has received more than its fair share of criticisms, particularly from labour groups for its low wage bill (Turock 28), and from small business owners for its tendency to overshadow market competition and driving competitors out of business (Ailawadi et al. 577), its business acumen, competitive advantage, and economic impact are critical factors that cannot be wished away.

Wal-Marts operations are largely organized into three divisions and nine different retail formats. The divisions include Wal-Mart Stores U.S., Wal-Mart International, and the value-added Sams Club, while the retail formats include super-centres, food and drug stores, small markets, general merchandise stores, cash-and-carry stores, restaurant chain, membership clubs, apparel exhibitions, and soft discount stores (Parnell& Lester 14).

Objectives

Taking into account Wal-Marts enormous size, increased differentiation and expansion strategies, business analysts have always been at a loss to explain how the company successfully changes its business processes and practices to fit the current situation in the environmental context, remain profitable, and maintain its competitive advantage against a backdrop of intense organizational complexities (Turock 29).

According to Howard, organizational change is a difficult task to undertake, even in organizations with minimal layers of authority and differentiation (23). Yet, Wal-Mart has remained at the forefront of undertaking changes and structural restructurings to meet the needs of the current economic environment and remain relevant to customers in terms of fulfilling their expectations, especially in maintaining the low price model. More importantly, most of the changes and transformations initiated by the company have been successful against a backdrop of numerous failures in other companies (Parnell& Lester 16). This paper, therefore, aims to:

1. Identify and discuss the various components within the framework of organizational theory that comes into play to facilitate change and transformation for growth and expansion in Wal-Mart.
2. Critically evaluate how these components relate to Wal-Marts strategy and structure in efforts geared towards organizational change and transformation for growth and expansion.

Literature Review

Organization theory concerns itself with a broad allay of topics (7). Still, this paper will focus attention to several topics directly related to change and transformation, which includes external elements, intense competition, strategic or structural frameworks, and speed and responsiveness. It is imperative to note that the concepts related to organizational theory apply to all categories of organizations in all sectors.

Many organizational theorists attest the fact that change and transformation are mostly triggered by an immediate urge to adapt to a myriad of external elements that may arise as a direct consequence of increased competition, shifts in customer expectations, new government regulations and entry into new markets, among others (Howard 7). According to Daft, &organizations are not static; they continuously adapt to shifts in the external environment (7).

Some specific challenges faced by organizations today are globalization, the convergence of technology, extreme competition, thorough ethical scrutiny, enhanced diversity, new regulations, and the need for rapid response (Morgan 27), and managers must be ever ready to position their organizations to adapt to new needs arising from external elements or risk failure.

In globalization, which is an external element, successful organizations have realized that markets, technologies, customers, and organizations are becoming ever more interconnected (Daft 7), and have implemented change and transformation along this paradigm. Sharp companies, according to the author, have made the necessary changes aimed at necessitating outsourcing to take advantage of the global labour force, and have also initiated efforts geared towards a strategic partnership with foreign organizations to gain the much needed global advantage. Available literature also demonstrates that many organizations change their business processes by engaging in cross-border acquisitions, which they view as fundamental to their future competitiveness (Daft 8).

In intense competition, Daft notes that the &glowing global interdependence creates new advantages, but it also means the environment for companies is becoming extremely competitive (8). Customers need low-priced goods and services although operational costs and costs of raw materials needed to produce the goods are increasing by the day. To overcome this challenge arising from the external environment, some organizations have fundamentally changed their business processes to allow for the outsourcing of human capital.

In contrast, others are actively engaged in putting in place strategies that will cut internal costs to enable them to remain competitive in the face of shifting economic environment (Isaksen 9; Morgan 28). Companies can outsource human capital from low-wage countries, where work cost an estimated 50-60 per cent less than when it is done in-home countries (Daft 8).

Another significant challenge for organizations is to have the capacity to respond quickly and decisively to the changes arising within the external environment, organizational crises, and changing customer expectations (Daft 9). Successful companies must always have the capacity to develop new ways to cope with enhanced competition, volatile environmental changes, and shifts in customer demands and expectations.

Today, more than ever before, globalization and convergence of technology have hastened the pace at which organizations must roll out their products and services to beat the competition and remain relevant in the marketplace (McGahan 89). This component, according to Wischnevsky, is critical in efforts aimed at organizational growth and expansion strategies because new markets are always difficult to deal with, and that changes do occur in a moments notice (362).

An organizational structure, according to Miles & Snow, basically entails a depiction of the various types of coordination employed in the process of organizing the actions of people (employees) and departments towards the achievement of a common objective for the organization (3). An organizational structure also not only delineates formal communication channels but also illustrates how distinct actions of employees are linked together (Carpenter et al. 26). Many organizations employ a hierarchical structure, whereby managers are obliged to report directly to those above their positions.

The shifts arising from the external environment have obliged organizations to develop structures that are greatly responsive to these changes in an attempt to maintain a sustainable competitive advantage (54). Miles & Snow think that the structure of the organization expands as the organization grows, and that structure largely determines an organizations capacity to adapt to change (21). According to Carpenter et al., the level of centralization or decentralization of decision making coupled with the layers of authority existing between the top-level management and frontline employees critically determines how organizations can adapt to change (67).

Findings & Analysis

A comprehensive analysis of literature relating to Wal-Mart and how it maintains its competitive advantage in implementing change and transforming its organizational structure (Parnell & Lester 18; Turock 29) reveals that the organization is well aware of the fact that markets and organizations have become increasingly interconnected, and the only viable option is to embrace globalization in change efforts and attempts to maintain its competitive advantage. Although Wal-Mart continues to be accused of giving out jobs that could be done by locals (Lavallee & Bayer 254), the company continues to benefit from its outsourcing strategies especially in terms of expanding its business interests and reducing costs (Parnell & Lester 21).

An analysis done on Wal-Mart by Parnell & Lester found that managers are particularly interested in developing relationships with other companies, particularly in China, Japan, and India, for future competitiveness and business success (15). Whats more, Wal-Mart continues to partner with global firms, such as the U.Ks Asda and acquiring other firms, such as Chinas Trust-Mart and Brazils Brompreco chain, to gain a global competitive advantage (Troy 1-4).

According to Mike Duke, the companys vice chairman, &Wal-Marts goal is to apply its human and financial capital in those markets that offer the greatest growth opportunities and long-term potential (Troy 1). In consequence, it can be safely argued that the components of outsourcing, strategic partnering, and acquisitions demonstrate how Wal-Mart has effectively employed globalization as a key driver of change to expand internationally.

However, the company does not engage in blind expansion or acquisition strategies as it can be demonstrated by the broad repositioning of its portfolio of international operations by selling loss-making stores and concentrating on profit areas. In July 2006, Wal-Mart sold its 85 stores operating in Germany to Metro AG, and earlier in 2005, the company had sold off its 16 loss-making stores operating in South Korea to Shinsegae (Troy 1).

The retail business is intensely competitive, and Wal-Mart has implemented change strategies that reinforce this fact. To remain competitive, managers realized that they need to continue with Wal-Marts tradition of low prices while expanding into emerging markets to increase the companys revenue base (Parnell& Lester 23). Being the worlds largest retailer by size and revenue, Wal-Mart has managed to put in place mechanisms to mitigate intense competition by establishing a strong network of global suppliers (Parnell & Lester 17). The companys sheer size has given it an upper hand when it comes to dictating how it buys products from suppliers, not mentioning that it has well-established frameworks to allow outsourcing, thus benefiting immensely from low-wage countries (Turock 30).

More importantly, managers at Wal-Mart have put in place strategies that allow for mopping up of the exigencies occurring in the external market, such as the promotion of cheaper store brands and philosophy of not passing the higher costs incurred in operations to customers (Ailawadi et al. 579). In this context, it can be safely argued that the components of the network of global suppliers, frameworks to allow outsourcing and the mopping up strategies allows Wal-Mart to successfully negotiate change and transformation as it re-engineers its business and expand into other critical focus areas.

In responding quickly and decisively to shifts in the external environment, Wal-Mart has taken time to develop and internalize a mindset that is inarguably needed in terms of expecting the unexpected, in addition to allowing some leverage and independence for field managers to make critical decisions on matters that may impact negatively on the company if not addressed with speed (McGahan 90).

This implies that Wal-Marts organizational structure allows managers the leeway to make critical decisions on how to act and drive business in the field provided the decisions made aligns with the companys broader objective of remaining a market leader (Probst & Raisch 95). As such, it can be argued that Wal-Mart utilizes an open form of leadership, a factor that has ingeniously allowed it to manage rapid and shifting demands arising from the environment successfully. This is a critical ingredient in expansion strategies.

Although it is evidently true that the organizational structure may influence the capacity to adapt to change (Miles & Snow 29), Wall-Mart has a large structure judging from its size and differentiation yet it excellently adapts to change and transformation. However, upon a deeper analysis of the organization, Parnell & Lester found that the company utilizes an exceedingly decentralized structure to provide a framework for effectiveness in decision-making (17).

Available literature reveals that a decentralized structure is not only able to adapt to change quickly, but resistance to change is minimal due to the fact that everyone has the opportunity to contribute. Despite the huge size of Wal-Mart, the company uses a flat organizational structure as opposed to a tall structure, implying that only a few layers of authority are present between top-level management and frontline employees (Parnell & Lester 18).

This not only enhances efficient decision-making processes but also ensures that changes within the external environment are noted in time to ensure appropriate action is taken. In this perspective, it can be argued that Wal-Marts decentralized structure and flat authority structures have worked well to ensure the company is able to handle change and transformation as it expands into other regions.

Conclusion

The major focus for this paper was to identify and discuss the various components within the framework of organizational theory that comes into play to facilitate change and transformation for growth and expansion in Wal-Mart. Through a critical review of literature and analysis, it has been revealed that outsourcing, strategic partnering with global firms, acquisitions in key markets, a strong network of global suppliers, internalization of a mindset of change responsiveness, leverage and independence of field managers, and open form of leadership have all acted to facilitate change and transformation for growth and expansion in Wal-Mart.

Of course, there are other issues such as corporate culture and huge investments in technology (Turock 30), but these are outside the scope of this paper. It is imperative to note that these components relate well with Wal-Marts decentralized organizational structure and flat authority structure to streamline decision-making processes and ensure the company maintains its focus in remaining a market leader and offering goods to customers at extremely discounted prices. These components can, to a large extent, be credited for enabling the company to expand into many regions globally and still maintain its competitive advantage (Isern & Pung 19).

Recommendations

Certainly, Wal-Mart is on the right track, especially in using organizational theory to manage its change and transformation. The international business portfolio is raking in more profits for the company (Troy 3), and it is up to Wal-Marts management to maintain the pace. It is up to the management to realize that successful companies have in the past fallen from grace to grass (Isaksen 10), and its their main responsibility to be on the lookout for challenges that may slacken the pace of growth of the company or hinder it from achieving its business goals.

More still needs to be done to make Wal-Marts critics realize that strategies such as outsourcing and relying on blue-collar employees are core business strategies rather than attempts to take advantage of the labour force. This can be done through education and awareness. Additionally, strategies need to be put in place to guard against excessive growth that may be counterproductive in terms of enhancing the chances for the company to lose its identity and the desired state of affairs. Lastly, the management needs to develop ways to deal with burnout and uncontrolled change.

Works Cited

Ailawadi, K.L., Zhang, J., Krishna, A., & Kruger, M.W. When Wal-Mart Enters: How Incumbent Retailers React and how this Affects their Sales Outcomes. Journal of Marketing Research 47.4 (2010): 577-593. Web.

Amburgay, T.L., Kelly, D., & Barnett, W.P. Resetting the Clock: The Dynamics of Organizational Change & Failure. Administrative Science Quarterly 38.1 (1993): 51-73. Web.

Carpenter, M., Bauer, T., & Erdogan, B. Principles of Management. Flat World Knowledge, Inc. 2009.

Daft, R.L. (2008). Organizational Theory and Design, 10^th ED. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning. 2008.

Haveman, H.A. Organizational Size and Change: Diversification in the Savings and Loan Industry after Deregulation. Administrative Science Quarterly 38.1 (1993): 20-50. Web.

Howard, A. Diagnosis for organizational change: Methods and models. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. 1994.

Isaksen, S.G. The Climate for Transformation: Lessons for Leaders. Creativity & Innovation Management 16.1 (2007): 3-15. Web.

Isern, J., & Pung, C. Driving Radical Change. McKinsey Quarterly. Issue 4 (2007): 24-35. Web.

Kotter, J.P. Leading Change. Harvard Business Review 85.1 (2007): 96-103. Web.

Lavallee, T.M., & Bayer, M.A. Globalization and Local Governance: Implications from Wal-Marts Expansion. International Studies Perspectives 7.3 (2006): 254-266. Web.

McGahan, A.M. How Industries Change. Harvard Business Review 82.10 (2004): 86-94. Web.

Miles, R.E., & Snow, C.C. Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process. London: Stanford University Press. 2003

Morgan, M. Unmasking Transformation. Industrial Engineer 40.9 (2008): 26-30. Web.

Parnell, J.A., & Lester, D.L. Competitive Strategy and the Wal-Mart Threat: Positioning for Survival & Success. SAM Advanced Management Journal 73.2 (2008): 14-24. Web.

Probst, G., & Raisch, S. Organizational Crisis: The Logic of Failure. Academy of Management Executive 19.1 (2005): 90-105. Web.

Susanto, A.B. Organizational Readiness for Change: A Case Study on Change Readiness in a Manufacturing Company in Indonesia. International Journal of Management Perspectives 2.1 (2008): 14-61. Web.

Troy, M. Around the World of Wal-Mart. Retailing Today. Web.

Turock, A. Driving Wal-Mart Growth Engine. Progressive Grocer 83.2 (2004): 28-30. Web.

Wischnevsky, J.D. Change as the Winds Change: The Impact of Organizational Transformation on Firm Survival in a Shifting Environment. Organizational Analysis 12.4 (2004): 361-377. Web.

Article Critique

The key notion of the article is the perception model that is based on the rational behavior of the customers. Even though the theory of rational behavior is reliable, a certain number of assumptions do not work well with the organizational theory. The supporters of the rational choice theory believe that it is contingent on two main aspects – transitivity and consistency. In other words, the theory of rational choice can be characterized as a tendency to assume the possibility of the appearance of certain preferences (which can be equal or unequal) among the customers. The academics claim that the probabilities inherent in the rational choice theory are dependent on various prospects. The key prospect is the connection between the customers’ behavior and decision-making principles. The author of the article states that altruistic behavior is not characteristic of the rational choice theory because it would require the theorists to expand on the topic of human motivation. The current article critique reveals the key ideas of the rational choice theory and points out the major differences between the latter and the organizational theory.

Main Ideas of the Article

According to Zey (1998), the rational choice theory was a successor of the organizational theory and was developed as a subdiscipline. Both these theories are based on the essential ideas of human nature and social organization. The author of the article provides extensive evidence concerning the outlooks of the rivals (Hobbes and Rousseau) when it comes to humanity and their views on behavioral patterns. Zey (1998) describes Hobbes’ position as a proactive necessity for a strict social order whereas Rousseau’s ideas support the idea that humanity is only contingent on the basic resources and essential human needs.

The author of the article claims that there are numerous fundamental differences between organizational theory and the theory of rational choice. The key difference, according to Zey (1998), lies in human nature and individual behavioral peculiarities. Furthermore, the adepts of the rational choice theory believe that humanity is just an instrument within the framework of the designated theory. Zey (1998) concludes that the central focus of the rational choice theory is the customers’ self-interest and sees social action as an important aspect of the institutional structure, cultural values, and goals.

Even though rational theory studies are considered to be problematic, they are defined as an effective tool used to predict social actions and generalize the assumptions that make the basis of the rational choice theory. The author of the article thoroughly describes the methodology used to test the eminence of the rational choice theory. Zey (1998) also concentrates her efforts on finding the key differences between the organizational and rational choice theories. As described by the author of the article, the ultimate variance lies in marketplace control and corporate roles within the organization. In addition, the act of decentralization should be considered an event with a negative connotation because it generates serious inequalities. The author of the article also considers individual behavior to be an outcome dependent on macro conditions as they represent the preferences of rational clients.

Conclusion

This article presents an extensive amount of evidence concerning the fundamental characteristics of the rational choice theory and its divergence from the organizational theory. The author of the article took into consideration the two opposing points of view to evaluate the performance of the theory within an organizational environment. The key finding of the study is that the rational choice theory is not broad enough to describe social relationships. Therefore, it cannot be effectively applied to the principles of human activity to develop a sufficient predictive model.

References

Zey, M. (1998). Basic characteristics of rational choice model versus organizational theories. In Rational choice theory and organizational theory: A critique (pp. 33-53). New York, NY: Sage Publications.

Introduction

An organization’s external environment is very relevant on how the organization is structured and conducts its operations, thus, it shapes the organization as a whole. An organization needs to understand that the environment is highly dynamic and ever changing; what happened yesterday in the corporate world or public sector may be completely different from what is happening now.

As the environment changes a lot of ambiguity introduces concerns for the individual working in these organizations. Organizations which do not appreciate change may end up being replaced or even being declared bankrupt and eventually closing down (Brayden, Teppo & Whetten 2010). For adaptive and versatile organizations, the environment can be an opening of opportunities and generation of new ideas.

However, for organizations which resist change the environment can bring a lot of challenges and have detrimental consequences on the organization as a whole. Furthermore, organizations which do not embrace environmental changes may most probably end up not optimally and efficiently utilizing their resources, hence performing dismally. It is against this background that we intend to conduct a research on how the environment shapes organizations.

Problem Statement

The research seeks to inquire about the organisational environment and how it influences an organisation’s operations and what are its impacts on its structuring. In order to get a clearer perspective, the project shall look at how organisations cope with the environment and the measures taken.

The data for the research is collected from both primary and secondary sources. The primary sources include interviews from the relevant personnel and Authorities while the secondary sources include information from past documentations and works of other authors.

Aims and Objectives

The aims and objectives of the research project are focused on the analysis of the research problem. In particular, these aims and objectives will be achieved by answering the major research question and the set of minor sub-questions presented in the following list:

1. What involves the organisational environment?
2. How organisations maintain to cope with environment?
3. Does the environment bring with opportunities or its only challenges?

Research Hypothesis

Further on, the achievement of the aims and objectives of the proposed research will become possible to a great extent thanks to either confirming or rejecting the two hypotheses derived from the topic of this study. So, the first hypothesis is:

H1: the environment plays a crucial role in the way organisations operate and how they are structured. This hypothesis is developed as an assumption to that the environment influences the competitiveness of the organisation and leaves to the management to come up with survival tactics.

Needless to say, before the actual research is carried out, it is impossible to claim that this assumption is absolutely true. Therefore it is necessary to collect and analyse organisational literature and primary information in order to be able to either confirm or reject it. Accordingly, the second hypothesis can be formulated as a contradictory point to the first one:

H2: the environment does not dictate the way organisations are shaped, in terms of structures and functioning, but organisations operate according to their own doctrines and ambitions.

Research Methodology

Based on the above considerations, the methodology for the research include a combination of the survey and a case study, while the aims of both will be to identify the role of the environment in the organisation shape. The research uses the method of longitudinal study to collect and analyse the organisational environment.

The data collection methods include a review of primary and secondary sources of information regarding the environment. To add credibility and reliability to the research findings, qualitative and quantitative methods have been be used for data collection and analysis. The research respects ethical standards of scholarly work.

Literature review

Theoretical framework

Population ecology, developed by Hannan and Freeman argues that organizations which operate in a given environment must change as the environment changes. The population ecology theory is based on the following four assumptions:

1. An Organization develops structures that make certain consistency and answerability.
2. Consistency and answerability needs organizational routines, which are highly reproducible.
3. This reproduction of structures which are more or less the same is the grounds of organization inertia. Inertia is deemed a result of variety.
4. The environment will choose institutions with high inertia.

The institution theory in contrast suggests that organizations which are forced to change can do so successfully and automatically by imitating other successful organizations. This may therefore require companies to change their strategies and tactics in order to adapt to the environment, this is somehow similar to camouflage (Pettus, Yasemin & Mahoney 2009). Organizations are known to mimic each other and therefore company’s operations are characterized by high levels of competition.

For instance, a country like China where multinational corporations are competing for limited resources, market and are outsourcing their manufacturing operations to ease the production process and cut on costs. It is therefore important that organizations know that it may be necessary to approach other parties who share the same view as them in order to realize advantages.

Therefore, it can be deduced that corporations, institutions and organizations which do not change will eventually be forced either to do so or face the possibility of coming obsolete and finally closing their doors.

The environment

Campbell, Stonehouse & Huston (2002) opines that organizations are not islands and therefore cannot exist by themselves, organizations are open systems and therefore they are highly dependent on each other for survival.

Organizations need raw materials which they themselves do not produce and therefore, they may be required to enter into contractual agreements that will enable them get raw materials which will be processed into services and products (Brayden, Teppo & Whetten 2010).

Companies set strategies which control various variables within the internal environment with the aim of making a company successful and adapt to the task and societal environment and carry out its activities be it business or non business successfully.

The environment

Kourdi (2009) categorizes the organizational environment into 3 broad categories:

1. Social environment
2. Task environment
3. Internal environment

Social environment

The superset of all environments, the societal environment, consists of economic forces, technological forces, sociocultural environment, political forces and legal forces.

These elements of the environment are not static, rather dynamic. The changes in the environment may occur independently or even be initiated by activities of other organizations. It may therefore be necessary to carry out a SWOT (strength, weakness, opportunity and threat) analysis to understand the full impact that the environment may have on business and the overall strategic structure.

A good example, is a natural disaster like a tsunami or frequent earthquakes which may influence how organizations carry out business from time to time on the other hand an organization like the government or even regulation agencies such as the central bank or the federal bank who set monetary and fiscal policies may also initiate or trigger change within the environment.

Furthermore, the political legal environment is also always changing with continuous law reforms that take place and therefore this may demand that companies reformulate their strategies and tactics so that they can prosper in the environment which they exist in. Not forgetting the economic environment which consists of variables such as interest rates and forex rates that are always changing and have a big impact on the overall financial performance of organizations.

Task environment

The second environment, the task environment, consists of all stakeholders such as shareholders, suppliers, employees, competitors, trade associations, regulatory bodies, activists, creditors, special interest groups, the government, and the media among others. Shareholders have different demands and therefore the organization must carry out their operations with an aim of creating equilibrium between all interested parties.

As the economic environment changes, so does the living standards therefore life may become extremely expensive and therefore the demands of the employees, creditors and shareholders may also change and hence, it is the responsibility of managers and organizational leaders to manipulate strategy so that the organization can achieve its goals and satisfy the need of all publics.

Internal environment

The internal environment which exists within organization and also plays a vital role in ensuring the organization is highly dynamic and in line with the outside environment consists of various elements such as the organization structure, the organizational culture and furthermore organizational structure (Kourdi 2009).

Socio-cultural parameters such as age, regional shifts in population and other parameters are always changing and never static and therefore organizations may need to rigorously re-define consumer needs and wants as time passes by. Therefore it is important to have a good organization structure and a healthy organization structure (Brayden, Teppo & Whetten 2010).

Organizations influence on environment

Organizations also influence the way that the environment behaves, for instance when the overall industry participants become highly competitive then the overall environment changes and other organizations which do not become competitive may close doors unless they also mimic these other organizations.

A good and relevant organization that has reshaped the environment and industry within which it exists is Apple. When Apple decided to concentrate on research and design and furthermore became a technological leader in the Electrical appliances industry other companies were left with no option but to also play along or either face extinction (Teece 2008).

When Apple introduced the iPod, iPod and the iPhone that were highly differentiated and furthermore highly advanced in technology and therefore other companies within the same industry were left behind. Other companies such as Samsung, Nokia, and Microsoft had no other option to follow the same path that Apple had initiated, because consumers were now aware of the overall technological advancements and demanded for highly convenient and technologically advanced products.

Factors shaping competition within the environment

By taking a look at the Porter’s Five Forces model and match them with the particular environments within which organizations operate in can be useful in strategic decision making within organizations.

Theoretically, the model highlights five very important aspects like, the threat of new entry in the market especially in this globalised business era, there are many new brands coming into the market, and therefore an organization or institution especially if they are business oriented has to improvise new techniques to lure new customers and retain the old customers.

The threat of substitute products cannot be forgotten because consumers can migrate from one brand and move to the next best available substitute. The bargaining power of the Customers can also make it difficult for existing business organizations set the floor and ceiling prices therefore affecting the overall revenues that the company will achieve within given business cycles (Campbell, Stonehouse & Huston 2002).

The bargaining power of the suppliers on the other hand may make it hard for companies to get raw materials at the lowest possible costs within the industry and therefore also affecting the level of profits and revenues received by industry participants. The intensity of corporate rivalry amongst all industry participants which can lead to increased price wars and more frequent product innovation can also affect the overall business structure of companies.

Responses to environmental changes

As environments change either autonomously or due to the influence of other organizations within the environment, such as government legislation, companies are usually forced to realign their corporate strategies which are overall organizational strategies that may usually involve stabilizing business, growth and expansion and finally retrenchment or strategy ( Kourdi 23-66).

The second kind of strategies that may be forced to change as the environment changes are business strategies which often have to do with formulation of either cooperative or competitive strategies that a company may pursue in order to realize its overall corporate objectives.

Finally, a changing environment may demand that organizations adjust their functional strategies which are responsible for nurturing a distinctive competence for the organization therefore differentiating it from other organizations by maximizing their resource production.

Alliances aimed at improving business administration

The dynamic environment may force organizations which are normally rivals to come together to pursue common goals when the economy changes and capital becomes difficult to raise organizations may enter into strategic agreements that will allow them efficiently utilize resources and at the same time see that they achieve their mission and vision (Porter 1990).

An example of an inter-organizational rivalry is that of Porsche and Volkswagen the two companies later pursued a joint venture and together made the now very successful Tuareg high end SUV vehicle model. Many companies all around the world especially those operating in multinational environments are when faced by an extra ordinary event they may be forced to enter into agreements with local existing companies so that they can conduct business smoothly.

Coca-cola for example withdrew from the Indian market for almost 19 years because of resistance and anti-Americanism and this is why American companies which are looking into expanding their business operations to Asia are often forced to enter into Strategic alliances and either acquire existing companies so that they can be accepted by the local communities and thus therefore conduct business more smoothly and efficiently.

Companies do not enter into any type of alliances just blindly (Campbell, Stonehouse & Huston 2002). An extra ordinary event is a triggering event that initiates the change of strategy or business perspective that may lead organizations, companies or even institutions to form strategic alliances that will enable this organizations achieve their goals and objectives both in the short-run and long-run. Most extra-ordinary effects arise from changes in the environment that the company operates in.

When companies are faced by these ambiguities in the environment they therefore decide to adopt other techniques and strategies either cooperative or competitive so that they can achieve their set goal’s and targets. Many companies have multiple business units which strategically operate in order to achieve their strategic objectives (Teece 2008).

Strategic business units always use various business techniques in order to survive. Among them may include joint ventures, acquisitions, product sharing, turnkey operations, and franchising, licensing and management contracts. Using the General Electric business screen that was developed by General electric to measure and evaluate performance of strategic business units within the organizations and consequently make appropriate decisions.

The G.E. business screen includes 9 cells which are used by organizations especially corporations to mane conclusions concerning Industry attractiveness and business strength. A strategic business unit which for example has low market attractiveness and also a poor competitive position normally require be divesting or liquidating by selling out but another option may be simply entering into strategic agreements such as mergers or joint ventures to boost the company’s competitive position (Jones 2010).

While on the other hand business units which enjoy an extremely strong competitive position and also strong market attractiveness may often require more investment and growth in order to take advantage of the brand superiority a good example is a product Smirnoff vodka which expands its product portfolio by increasing the range of flavors under its brand. Lastly companies which somehow have an average market attractiveness and competitive position may be required to trade carefully (Campbell, Stonehouse & Huston 2002).

Once a corporation has a crystal clear picture and can with certainty conclude the likelihood of a business unit perform either good or dismally then the corporation can decide to either divest or enter into a relationship with other corporations so that the overall business objectives are achieved.

SiemensBenq, Sony-Erickson, Volkswagen and Shanghai motors joint ventures are good examples of successful joint ventures that have recently taken place. Volkswagen realized that it was almost impossible for it to pursue the Chinese market without partnering with a local company that had a better understanding of the Chinese market needs.

Therefore, Shanghai motors was the best partner for Volkswagen, the joint venture went ahead to sell over 1 million units of Volkswagens in China. It is therefore quite clear that organizations that exist in an environment are not closed systems and therefore the happenings of the outside environment have a huge effect on hoe the organization functions( Kourdi 155).

The Economic Melt-down and effect administration

The recent economic meltdown of 2007-10 is a good example of how the environment shapes organizations. Many organizations were forced to restructure and adopt new models of doing business.

Experts from the corporate world were forced to use more creative strategic techniques to cushion the rapid effects that arose from the economic meltdown. Using superior research techniques companies were able to formulate strategies that would aim at stabilizing their business models and furthermore assure them of constant and consistent revenue streams.

Therefore, massive corporate restructuring and chances in the overall organization structure followed with an aim of reducing the amount of expenses within these companies while some companies were forced to enter into cooperative agreements with other companies or even governments (Jacob Weisberg). Lehman brother is an American bank which was taken over by Barclays bank in order to continue operating or else it might have been forced to close down for good even.

Conclusion

From the information obtained it can be held that the environment is a vital part of any organization and significantly impacts on the organization’s competitive attractiveness. The environment influences both the social, cultural and economic aspects of the organization, which are key pillars in stabilizing the organization. Dynamic and versatile organizations transit swiftly through changing times and as seen they survive even harder times, while static organizations are more vulnerable to the environment.

The environment influences the organization’s value, stability, structure and the strategies adopted. It is therefore unrealistic, to argue that organizations do not need to change their way of doing business and overall governance simply because of environmental change.

Recommendations

Therefore, organizational leaders and managers should become more versatile and flexible in formulating and implementing strategies and tactics that will enable their organizations adapt to changing times towards achieving their objectives and mission. This can be done via continuous research and environmental scanning, which can give a clear picture of various complexities and ambiguities existing in the organizational environment.

Reference List

Brayden, K. G., Teppo, F. & Whetten D. A. (2010). Perspective – Finding the Organization in Organizational Theory: A Meta-Theory of the Organization as a Social Actor. Journal of organization science volume 21 issue 1, p. 1-20.

Campbell, D., Stonehouse, G. & Huston, B. (2002). Business Strategy an Introduction, 2 edn. Linacre House, Banbury Rd: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Jones, G. (2010). Organizational theory, design, and change. Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall.

Kourdi, J. (2009). Business Strategy: A Guide to Effective Decision Making, 2 edn. New York: Economist books.

Pettus, M. L., Yasemin K. Y. & Mahoney, J. T. (2009). A theory of change in turbulent environments: the sequencing of dynamic capabilities following industry deregulation. International Journal of Strategic Management, Volume 1, Number 3, p. 186-211.

Porter, M. (1990). The Competitive advantage of nations, illustrated edn. Northampton, MA: Free Press.

Teece, D. J. (2008). Technological know-how, organizational capabilities, and strategic. Kuala Lumpur: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.

Weisberg, J. (2010). What Caused the Economic Crisis? The 15 best explanations for the Great Recession. slate.com. Retrieved from https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2010/01/the-15-most-persuasive-explanations-for-the-economic-crisis.html

Key Organizational Theories in IS: Direction of Research

Information systems (IS) research is among the most incorporative branches of science (Wade & Hulland, 2004). In other words, it tends to absorb the theoretical foundations and implications of other disciplines, including management. Various organizational theories can be applied to IS as well. The direction of this level of IS research can be described as the development of new IS perspectives and principles that incorporate various aspects of organizational life (Ravichandran, & Rai, 2004).

Given the dependence of modern organizations on IS, this direction of research is of vast importance as it ensures more effective IS integration. Several examples of organizational theories in IS will be discussed in this paper, including the resource-based view, institutional theory, organizational changes theory, and some other relevant approaches.

Key Theories for Organizational-Level Phenomena in IS Research

One of the major organizational theories that received prominence nowadays is the resource-based view (RBV) or theory (Cragg, Caldeira & Ward, 2011). It was first proposed for usage in the field of strategic management in 1992, and it has been applied in the context of IS occasionally (Wade & Hulland, 2004). RBV defines a number of resources, the right set and allocation of which can ensure the firm’s competitiveness. The competitive set depends on the industry as well as other specific features (to the point of the possibility of individual customization for a single organization).

The terminology of RBV has been somewhat vague, especially in relation to the major term “resource”. Wade and Hulland (2004) define resources as tangible and intangible assets and primarily intangible capabilities. For IS research, RBV offers the possibility of relating various types of IS to management strategy by determining their value for it. By providing this information, RBV also offers the ground for comparison of IS with each other and different strategic elements. The major disadvantage of such integration consists in the fact that IS are relatively unlikely to contribute to the competitive advantage directly. The indirect impact on competitive advantage is relatively underdeveloped within the theory.

Liang, Saraf, Hu, and Xue (2007) describe another approach, the institutional theory. It emphasizes the strife for legitimacy in an organizational environment which makes the organization vulnerable to external influences (political and economical as well as that of other companies, and so on). The theory is perfectly applicable to IS: for example, the development of information security policies is most often caused by governmental policies, and in the terms of the adoption of various IT, the mimetic actions of organizations have been noted. The special feature of this theory consists in the fact that it explains the organization-level phenomena from the point of view of external forces, unlike most other approaches that focus on internal ones.

Pavlou, Liang, and Xue (2007) dwell on the principal-agent perspective they derive from the agency theory. The agency approach presupposes regarding the relationship between buyers and sellers from a specific angle: buyers are considered to be principals as they “delegate the delivery responsibility” to sellers who function as agents (Pavlou et al., 2007, p. 106). The theory was applied to B2C e-commerce with particular emphasis on the information asymmetry (and its reduction strategies).

The authors pointed out that in the terms of IS and organizational theory approach to trust, principal-agent perspective demonstrated the correlation between information issues and uncertainty perception. It was concluded that for the sake of e-commerce, attempts at uncertainty mitigation must be made. The mitigation suggestions of the authors belong to various disciplines including organization theory (trust issues solution), sociology (social presence), marketing (diagnosticity), and IS (information privacy/security).

There is a number of other examples of IS-relevant or IS-applied theories and ideas. The “socio-technical systems approach” literally presupposes ensuring both the “technical validity and organizational validity” of an organization as they are considered to be the key aspects of the development process (Ravichandran, & Rai, 2004, p. 384). It is probably one of the most general organization-level approaches in IS.

The collective resource perspective incorporates the trendy emancipatory ideals from management theory into IS study. This approach suggests a more active involvement of workers in the design and use of computer systems (to avoid deskilling the employees) through negotiations with managers. Subramani (2004) discusses the theory of exploitation and exploration and demonstrates how both of these approaches can be used for IS practice. Also, a significant IS-relevant approach is organizational change (transformation, development) theories. IS “has always been a transformational object from its beginning” (Suter et al., 2013, p. 117). As a result, the challenge of applying transformational theories is always reasonable.

Key Antecedents and Outcomes of Organizational-Level Phenomena in IS Research

Antecedents

The beginnings of organizational-level phenomena trace back to 1938 when Barnard presented “the notion of organizations as purposeful systems of coordinated action” (Ravichandran & Rai, 2004, p. 386). Since then, organizations and their units became the subject of theoretical analysis. The concept of organization as a system has been developing, and the understanding of its structure was leaving behind the limitations “tangible” elements as it started to include leadership, processes, policies as the “bricks, materials,” the right combination of which could improve the company’s performance (Ravichandran & Rai, 2004, p. 386).

Outcomes

Nowadays, as the integration of the organizational theory in IS progresses, the practical implications of such a symbiosis are being studied. Liang et al. (2007), for example, propose a line of action for managers that can be boiled down to a more active mediation of IT adoption. An example of an RBV-based framework was presented by Cragg, Caldeira, and Ward (2011). It involves the development of six major and 22 minor competencies that would allow better IS adoption for small and medium-sized enterprises, thus providing them with a strategy and a guide for areas that require specific attention (for example, benefits management or supplier relationship management). The authors also believe that that framework can be used for defining the least developed areas within an organization and targeting them.

The Importance of Organizational-Level Phenomena in IS Research

The primary aim of the integration of organizational level phenomena in IS research consists in the achievement of effective process management and (eventually) performance improvement. Indeed, by understanding the relationships between various organizational elements that include IS, researchers discover ways of more effective management of these elements. As the organizational dependence on IS grows, the effective integration of them becomes more important. Liang et al. (2007) demonstrate that the adoption, implementation, assimilation (wide adoption), and usage of IT components is largely facilitated by the top management involvement and proper institutional infrastructure.

In turn, IT have been “providing management support, reducing operational costs, improving customer service, and gaining competitive advantages” (Subramani, 2004, p. 47). In other words, it is a fact that the integration of organizational theories in IS means finding the ways of organizational performance improvement, which justifies this kind of research.

References

Cragg, P., Caldeira, M., & Ward, J. (2011). Organizational information systems competences in small and medium-sized enterprises. Information & Management, 48(8), 353-363. Web.

Liang, H., Saraf, N., Hu, Q., & Xue, Y. (2007). Assimilation of Enterprise Systems: The Effect of Institutional Pressures and the Mediating Role of Top Management. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 31(1), 59-87. Web.

Pavlou, P., Liang, H., & Xue, Y. (2007). Understanding and Mitigating Uncertainty in Online Exchange Relationships: A Principal-Agent Perspective. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 31(1), 105-136. Web.

Ravichandran, T., & Rai, A. (2004). Quality Management in Systems Development: An Organizational System Perspective. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 24(3), 381-415. Web.

Subramani, M. (2004). How Do Suppliers Benefit from Information Technology Use in Supply Chain Relationships. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 28(1), 45-73. Web.

Suter, E., Goldman, J., Martimianakis, T., Chatalalsingh, C., DeMatteo, D., & Reeves, S. (2013). The use of systems and organizational theories in the interprofessional field: Findings from a scoping review. J Interprof Care, 27(1), 57-64. Web.

Wade, M., & Hulland, J. (2004). Review: The Resource-Based View and Information Systems Research: Review, Extension, and Suggestions for Future Research. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 28(1), 107-142. Web.

Introduction

Technology can be described as the advancement of skills, machinery, and equipment to enhance productivity in various sectors of the economy. Technological input refers to raw materials or information transformed into a more meaningful form. Technology can be used to improve all organizational departments. Its impact on production and manufacturing processes has profound effects on an economy because most machines are technologically operated, and their use involves technical knowledge and skills. The focus of this paper is to evaluate the impact of technology on organizational theories. The article will also establish the influence of organizational theories in several contexts. With effective skills and emerging opportunities, an organization or company can be able to succeed in the social, political, and economic sectors. Technology can enhance organizational efficiency by exploiting three mechanisms, which are the technical, internal, and external ones. The mechanisms enhance a technologically enabled environment. The technical approach employs technology to enhance efficiency and operational cost with a significant reduction of expenses. Joan Woodward’s theory explains that technologies are differentiated by operational difficulties.

According to her, the technical complexity affects the organizational model horizontally, vertically, or diagonally based on the structure of the organization. Charles Perror’s idea explains the prevailing disparities between regular and irregular results of resource variability and analyzability. James Thompson’s concept illustrates how the interdependence of roles influences the organizational hierarchy and technology. He engages the deeper aspects of technology and budgetary restructuring through a concept known as a specialism. Woodward, Perror, and Thompson employ three models to show the effect of technology on organizational design, which include technical complexity, task interdependence, and routine-complex tasks. All three models are essential in a successful contemporary organization. The organizational design is defined as the process of improving the growth of an organization by employing strategic measures of management. The staff of the organization evaluates the design to determine the strategies and possibilities of strengthening the organization and achieving its goals. It usually is formal as it brings together people, information, and technology within an organization.

Organizational designs are based on hierarchy and units dealing with similar responsibilities. The hierarchy outlines roles, missions, and chain of command in the organization. Authority can flow from upwards to downwards, assuming the vertical structure with other commands flowing across the organization, taking the horizontal model. The organizational design process begins with the establishment of a strategy. The strategy is made from precise and accurate ideas on the goals, mission, and vision of the organization. The strategy determines the objectives and the mission statement of the particular organization with an accurately administered strategic plan. An organizational structure is formed by the functions, operations, and positions of various members within the organization. The structure may be expressed visually by a chart, which shows multiple positions, roles, and responsibilities within an organization and their relationships. The chart defines the organization along departmental lines, and effective authority is structured for everyone to acknowledge.

Complexity theory by Joan Woodward

Technical complexity is equated to the nature of programs and control mechanisms in an organization. High technical challenges are usually experienced when management activities are programmed and predicted in advance. Low technical complexity depends on individual skill and not on machine power. The model differentiates technologies based on their technical complexity. Joan Woodward groups technology into three types, which are small, large, and continuous process models. She demonstrates that the difference in the size of structures in an organization can elevate complexity and advancement in technology. Joan is known for her famous contingency theory. The unit of production is composed of unified items in small portions. Mass or large scale production is based on large units and process production, which involves processing resources such as oil and refineries. Joan was born in 1961 and died in 1971but her theoretical contributions to knowledge are still subjects of scholarly studies in various fields of study. She argues in her theories that as one moves from unit to process production, there is an increase in managerial authority. She believes that an increase in the complexity of technology facilitates an increase in administrative and clerical personnel. For the first-line managers, the span of control increases as they move from unit to mass production. The span can also reduce the movement from mass to process production. In mass production, technology and design influence the output of a particular organization. Better design and efficient technology present an increase in production. Mass production enhances the nature of job designs with high specialization, low range, and market depth. Professor Joan argues that good organizational design is accomplished by high complexity, centralization, and formalization.

Woodward develops research which is employed in different fields in an organization. Technology is significantly advanced and can be improved by the use of robots, computerized tools, and machinery. Joan argues that technical complexity brings disparities in technologies. Complexity influences competition, which is then developed among various organizations, and each of them strives to be better, faster, and effective. A competitive organization creates standard products and services, and the benefit is enjoyed by the consumer who enjoys what is presented to him.

Routine and non-routine task model by Charles Perror

Charles Perror’s theories were focused on the structure of departments and their technologies. The theories were based on ideas outside the technical domain. Charles happened to challenge various organizations to think beyond the technical realm, with his concern being on task variability and analyzability. He displayed the need for each department, having a production process alongside a distinctive form of technology. He evoked units like human resource management, legal engineering, and finance in his examinations (Shettleworth, 2010).

Task variability and analyzability

Charles dealt with the challenge of problem analyzability and argued that the analysis of work problems involved the use of procedures and technical knowledge that was standardized. He argued that no analyzable problem would be solved by wisdom, intuition, or experience as opposed to other theories of management by Henry Fayol or Fredrick Taylor, which supported experience and intuition in management. Perror, in his research, concluded that various departments exploited different dimensions, and their differences were based on work outflow technology. Each department was expected to tackle a particular line of activities. Though these departments were limited, their roles were different and equally were the expected results. According to Perror, the process of organizational management and structure was dependent on workflow technology and the amount of work done. The technology applied determined the structure and managerial particulars in a given organization. Perror challenged managers to approach the task of departmental design to meet technological requirements. His theories were able to bring out the structural differences in various departments. Charles Perror’s theories proposed that the difference that occurred between routine and non-routine units of tasks was as a result of variations and analyses of tasks. He came up with four types of technologies to support his argument, which included craftwork, routine manufacturing, non-routine research, and engineering production (Jones, 2007). Technology, in this case, was employed in the three stages of production, which constituted value creation, input access, and output conversion. Input mechanisms used technical protocol and knowledge to improve the links between external stakeholders and society. They employed time management skills to improve efficiency. The output systems used technology in the distribution of resources to external stakeholders, which included quality assurance, sales, and marketing.

The systems theory by James Thompson

James Thompson is referred to as a system theorist due to his contribution to system technology. He insists on the need for effective input into the technical subsystem to earn an effective output (Jones, 2007). Effective outputs, according to him, are labor, raw materials, and markets. On the other hand, a probable output involves quality goods and services, profits, and waste minerals

Task interdependence

James underscores the importance of departmental interdependence. In this case, each department is dependent on others, resources, and other requirements to make an accomplishment. Departments should not work without integrating others in the organizational hierarchy. This theory shows the importance of all departments in the organization. Little interdependence leads to minimal outcomes in interactions, needs, associations, consultation, and exchange of ideas and resources. The overall effect of little interdependence is minimal production output. With high interdependence, there is bound to be high exchange and interaction and, therefore, high productivity. Interdependency is grouped into three categories, and these include pooled reciprocal and sequential interdependencies. Pooled interdependency comprises of minimal interdependency among several units. In the pooled system, work never flows in units. Each unit contributes towards the organizational goals independently.

Pooled interdependency is employed in mediating technology, thus providing services, products, or links in the external market and environment. Sequential interdependence involves a case whereby one department output becomes another department’s input sequentially. The level of interdependence is higher than in the pooled system. Sequential systems are linked with long technologies. Horizontal mechanisms of integration are crucial in this system. Long linked technology is associated with big organizations that use sequential systems like assembly lines. For instance, manufacturers of heavy appliances, automobiles, food processing, and mechanical assemblies are associated with long linked technology (Hergenhahn, 2005). The long linked technology needs high coordination of the tasks to be effective. Reciprocal interdependence refers to the top interdependence level, which exists when the output of a single unit is used as input of another unit with the output of the second unit acting as input for the first single unit. This system occurs in structures with intensive technologies. Intensive technologies supply various products or services for a client’s demands. Due to its reciprocal nature, intensive technology requires high management needs. It is reciprocal when interdependent units work as a cluster in closely and well-coordinated groups. Thompson presents different ideas on structural priorities to justify the different interdependency levels. They include reduction of cost of coordination under the nationality norm, group system within an organization, integration of various groups in cases where reciprocal interdependence cannot fit into intragroup systems, grouping the units in which the organization is obliged to place interdependent units together in a localized and autonomous structure and coordination of the grouped the units homogenously to enable unit standardization.

Organizational structure

The organizational model is comprised of activities like coordination, task allocation, and supervision aimed at a particular goal or achievement. Organizations are structured into different classes based on their objectives. The structures outline the method of operation and evaluation criterion of an organization. It can be formal or informal organization and may include the following types:

1. The pre-bureaucratic structure, also known as an entrepreneurial structure which lacks standardization strategies and is found in smaller organizations dealing with little tasks.
2. The bureaucratic structure that has some degree of standardization and is suited for complex and larger organizations.
3. Post bureaucratic structure which constitutes efficient, cultural, and matrix styles of management.
4. The functional structure that involves the performance of tasks by employees along with departmental specifications.
5. Divisional structures also called product outfits that divide society into departments that engage in specific matters of the organization.
6. Matrix structures that categorize workers according to the various roles that are played by them in an organization.
7. Network structures that perform tasks that can be done cost-effectively and efficiently.

The concepts of technical complexity, task variability, analyzability, and independence used by Woodward, Perror, and Thompson employ an organizational structure with functional and network mechanisms running most of the organization. In the case of life insurance and solar technology companies, the organization has to be structured in a manner that befits its purpose (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). As for the type of organization displayed in a chart, the various roles played by different individuals are always outstanding, and one can identify them by observing the chart. In this case, formal and vertical communication becomes more pronounced, and the structure is mostly the network type due to the need for doing things efficiently and effectively. Most video game productions are small scale targeting a particular market. With different departments in the video industry, the organization can use the functional structure with various departments handling different tasks like video shooting, editing, and others. A drive through a coffee house happens to take the pre-bureaucratic structure based on its size. Standardization is mostly not an issue since it targets little markets, and it is mostly an activity that does not consume a lot of time.

Conclusion

Woodward, Charles, and Thompson have one goal in common, which is organizational change. Change is the ability to transform one form of structure or activity into another in an organization. Their theories suggest that an organization has to change in terms of technology by adopting effective designs and structures for the technological criterion involved.

The ability to embrace an effective design and structure places an organization in a better scope to adopt the various scientific and technological measures in the field of production (Given, 2008). Both small scale and large scale organizations are encouraged to improve their managerial capacity by embracing technology within their administrational structures. The ideas as propounded by the three theorists hence make a significant contribution to the need for technological integration in organizations.

References

Given, L. M. (2008). The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. Los Angeles, USA: Sage Publications.

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, USA: Aldine Publishers.

Hergenhahn, B.R. (2005). An introduction to the history of psychology. Belmont, USA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Jones, G.R (2007). Organization theory, design and change 5th edition. New Jersey, USA: Pearson Education.

Shettleworth, S. J. (2010). Cognition, Evolution and Behavior (2nd Ed). New York, USA: Oxford University Press.

There are numerous perspectives on how people and organizations are managed. However, McGinnis (n.d.) assumes a uni-dimensional approach. While there are other important organizational and people management skills, McGinnis (n.d.) asserts that organizational managers ought to have cognitive skills to help them understand the behavior of employees within the healthcare industry.

In defining organizational behavior, McGinnis (n.d.) provides a brief history and asserts that organizational behavior has developed from a scientific study of management to an interdisciplinary subject that incorporates other disciplines such as psychology, communication, sociology, among others. McGinnis (n.d.) asserts that this enables organizational managers within the healthcare industry not only to improve their understanding of employees’ behavior but also to motivate them to attain the organization’s goals and objectives.

McGinnis (n.d.) asserts that organizational behavior is largely influenced by how people perceive the world around them rather than how they understand the facts about that world. In light of this, McGinnis (n.d.) argues that the biggest challenge facing managers within the healthcare industry is having all employees share a similar worldview that enables the organization to achieve its goals.

There exist numerous mental distortions of the world around us. McGinnis (n.d.) provides theoretical models through which managers ought to understand and harmonize those cognitive biases. There are two major theories that explain how employees receive information about the world around them. Expectancy theory purports that people see the world around them based on what is expected of them. As such, what a manager expects from employees plays a vital role in motivating employees to achieve work-based goals.

Additionally, McGinnis (n.d.) proposes the attribution theory, under which she explains that the performance of an employee can be attributed to an employee’s personality and disposition. Expectations and attributes are influenced by one’s schemas. This implies that organizational managers are tasked with the challenge of developing shared schemas within the workforce, which allows the attainment of the organization’s goals.

To develop shared schemas, organizational managers ought to develop certain mental images that enable employees to gain an understanding of how the world functions. McGinnis (n.d.) refers to these as mental models and explains that these models help people to use readily available information, about expectations and attributes, in reasoning. In light of this, managers ought to develop certain mental images (mental models) about the world within which the organization operates. These models act as guides on how people think and act. Therefore, managers can change and improve the way organizations operate by altering employees’ mental models, which effectively alters how employees perceive the world within which the organization operates.

To change employees’ mental images, McGinnis (n.d.) explains that organizational managers ought to appeal to employees’ perceptions. Since perceptions concern how people interpret ambiguity, the challenge facing organizational managers is to ensure that employees interpret ambiguities in a way that enables them to develop a shared sense of the world around them. To illustrate this, McGinnis (n.d.) uses an example in which the prevailing mental models amongst staff members within a healthcare facility resulted in low occupancy rates. Staff members thought that low occupancy was a result of the location of the facility.

However, after conducting a market survey, the manager realized that the limited range of services caused low occupancy. As such, the manager altered employees’ mental models to the extent that the new reality was concerned. This effectively enabled the facility to improve its occupancy rates. Therefore, organizational management becomes effective through understanding the human thinking process.

Reference List

McGinnis, S. (n.d.). Organizational behavior and management thinking. Web.

The organization theory perspective that I find myself most attracted to is social network theory. The essence of this perspective as I understand it is that each participant (individual, group, organization) is an actor in a complicated network of relationships that form a ground for mutual benefits. The multiple events in my background and aspects of my personality that I feel lead me to be predisposed toward this perspective are when I first worked part-time in a cafeteria in the central part of the city, CoffeeIn. I was working there as a waiter. The thing is that the body of the cafeteria functions well if the ties of inter-organizational relationships are strong. It means that each member of the personnel knows his/her job and asks for help from those specializing in this or that type of work to be done. Even though they are not such people to fulfill the particular task, a company can easily rely on those actors who are related to two or more networks (middlemen).

In this respect, the aforementioned organization provided really strong communication with partners and inside the cafeteria and, thus, information was always reaching people who should analyze it and provide feedback instead. Moreover, the construct of the company was grounded on the separation of individuals working in it into groups that specialize in some definite areas of work provided upon customers’ requests. It concerned completing orders and providing the best level of service. In fact, the relationships provided within the company every single day are well-done due to the appropriate functioning of it in three main dimensions concerning the social capital. These are: structural, relational, and cognitive (Hatch and Cunliffe 333). Each day employees were highly motivated to come in time and start working in accordance with the previously scheduled timetable maintained and assigned by a senior manager. The cognitive aspect was where a company laid more emphasis.

The organization theory perspective that I find myself least attracted to is organizational identity. The essence of this perspective as I understand it lies in the self-evolutional steps that an individual should go through concerning the business he/she is into, the current stage of progress, and considered goals. The multiple events in my background and aspects of my personality that I feel lead me to be predisposed toward this perspective were when we were trying to reshape the landscape design around the place where the cafeteria is situated. The contractors were a highly valued firm in this field of activities. They had a distinct plan and terms for the completion of this work. However, the direct executors of such specific kinds of work were not capable to implement the peculiarities of the initial design in reality. There was either a kind of mismatch in the qualification of workers or a lack of information coming straightforwardly from the designers. Thus, they had no idea what had been desired by the cafeteria’s senior manager at the very beginning of the project.

In conclusion, one cannot just rely on some unique theoretical framework in organizing the work process. It is a diversity of principles and theoretical interpretations in cooperation with people that makes the whole work process thrive. Hence, the bilateral outlook on the aforementioned organization theory perspectives should be considered in terms of their particular overlapping in the workspace. At least, it makes the development of relationships within a company grow positively. The explanation to it lies in the following proverb: a problem shared is a problem halved. The more means for the realization of coherence in the workplace are implied, the better.

Works cited

Hatch, Mary Jo and Cunliffe, Ann L. Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic, and Postmodern Perspectives. Ed. 2. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, USA, 2006.