Internal Managerial Conflicts: Jones and Shephard Accountants, Inc.

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Discussions
Summary and recommendations
References

Introduction

The successful design, development, and implementation of projects are very complex and at times daunting tasks for many project managers. The success of projects will to a large extent rely on the interests, support, and commitment of the senior management. This is in order to ensure that everybody in the project team and indeed the whole employees are focused and committed. Jones and Shephard Accountants, Inc. (J&S) remain compounded by various managerial challenges due to wrong decisions and the inability to seek adequate and resourceful consultancy services. Procuring of the three large computers in order to effectively compete with larger companies was done without the necessary preparation. Due is due to the fact that while the top management had the knowledge of oncoming increased assignments and demand in services from outside customers.

Discussions

Jones and Shephard Accountants, Inc. (J&S) was unable to effectively coordinate its internal activities and respond to customer inquiries appropriately. According to Armstrong (2007), “client consultation at all the stages of project development should always be done in order to avoid situations where repeated references to the project requirements are the case or projects are discontinued entirely”. Within this organization, effective consultation with the outside clients was at its poor ratings.

According to Kerzner (2009), “a key factor that significantly influences the selection of a project manager is the stakeholders”. The attainment of all the stakeholder’s involvement has been cited as an important ingredient in the success of projects in organizations. This means that every stakeholder in the organization is seen to own the project. This ensures that there are no complaints about the project’s contents and performance when it is completed. In this context, the stakeholders refer to executive officers, line managers, and employees.

While the director was faced by internal projects X and Y, stakeholders were not consulted on the recruitment of the two project managers, and the process was undertaken with the speed that it was bound to precipitate internal managerial conflict. To achieve success in a project, “modifications should be done within the allocated time period and within budget costs without disturbing the main workflow and changing the corporate culture” (Kerzner, 2009). The director failed to take these into considerations while selecting the project managers. Paramount amongst these is the organization’s culture and workflow considerations. To maintain the corporate culture of an organization, there is a need to hire from within.

The two project managers were described as entirely competent on the job we’re hired from outside, assigned roles and responsibilities within the same rank, worked in a similar division and reported to the same person – (Associate Director). To achieve high levels of performance and excellent work and managerial coordination, “the managers must be willing to manage (and make concessions/trade-offs, if necessary) such that the company’s main workflow is not altered” (Heerkens, 2007). The director’s new project line managers failed to make concessions, overrode each other’s roles and responsibilities, created internal managerial conflicts, and thus completely altered the organization’s workflow. In addition to the above, a number of poor managerial decisions have been made by the director. The Associate Director who is was to retire in a few months’ time was assigned the responsibility of changing the organization’s management matrix. This is an indication of the fact that the organization’s culture may not be sustained and achieving high levels of work coordination may be a mirage to a large extent.

Summary and recommendations

A deep analysis of the organizational structure of Jones and Shephard Accountants, Inc. (J&S) is prone to internal managerial conflicts. This is because the operations manager is responsible for half of the people’s resources indicating a lack of balance in decision making and implementation of policies. The abolition of the Associate Director’s position is likely to see the demotion of the supervisors which will definitely reduce their morale. The best organizational structure for this organization is that which is founded on the concept of management. This is due to the fact the major problem within Jones and Shephard Accountants, Inc. (J&S) is management. Therefore, the urgency is to develop an organizational structure that “operates from the foundational belief that one controls results by controlling resources” (Lewis, 2007).

References

Heerkens, G. R. (2007). Project Management: 24 Steps to Help You Master Any Project. Texas: McGraw-Hill Professional.

Kerzner, H. (2009). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. London: John Wiley and Sons.

Lewis, P.J. (2007). Fundamentals of project management. New York: Div American Mgmt Assn.

Click Here To Order Now!

Internal Managerial Conflicts: Jones and Shephard Accountants, Inc.

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)