Download Redesigning Organizations for Success: Shift to a New Paradigm and more Assignments Creative writing in PDF only on Docsity!
Leadership Advance Online – Issue XVI, Spring 2009
Redesigning Your Organization for Success:
Shift to a New Paradigm
Leadership Advance Online– Issue XVI, Spring 2009 by Alphronzo Moseley
A customer is the most important visitor on our premises; he is not dependent on us. We are dependent on him. He is not an interruption in our work. He is the purpose of it. He is not an outsider in our business. He is part of it. We are not doing him a favor by serving him. He is doing us a favor by giving us an opportunity to do so. (Business Growth Quotes, n.d., p. 2)
Mahatma Gandhi, known for his inspirational ideas, uttered these words. If Gandhi has it right, then the customer is the centerpiece of any organization regardless of the century. Jesus exhibited a customer focus as he fed 5,000 people during the 1st century, between AD 65-70. Mark records a scene of 5,000 hungry people who were followers of Jesus. The disciples advised Jesus to send them away, claiming there was not enough food. Jesus asked the disciples, “How much bread do you have? Go and see” (Mark 6:38). Jesus saw these individuals not as outsiders or interruptions to be ignored, but as customers who had needs to be satisfied.
Fast-forwarding to 21st century organizations, the needs of customers remain in the forefront. Jones (1999) says an organization is, “a response to and a means of satisfying some human need” (p. 4). Organizations in the 21st^ century need to make use of raw materials, knowledge, information, money, capital and technology to produce goods and services that will satisfy the insatiable appetite of its customers (Jones, 1999). Some will get it right and some will not. To survive, organizations will undergo change. Many will engage in organizational design in order to balance their strategies, processes, structures, people and rewards, seeking increased performance with paralleled culture change, only to find their customers are still not satisfied.
Why are customers still not satisfied? Could it be that management are stuck on old, 20th century success factors such as size, role clarity, specialization and control, rather than on new, 21st century
2222 Redesigning Your Organization for Success: Shift to a New Paradigm
Leadership Advance Online – Issue XVI, Spring 2009
success factors such as speed, flexibility, integration and innovation? (Ashkenas, Ulrich, Jick, & Kerr, 2002). What role then should organizational design play in 21st century organizations? How will the new success factors contribute to ensuring that customers’ needs are met?
Let us first consider what organizational design is. Jones (1999) defines organizational design as, “the process by which managers select and manage aspects of structure and culture so that an organization can control the activities necessary to achieve its goals” (p. 12). In other words, organizational design is about the why and how of the means chosen. It requires that managers continually balance external environmental pressures against internal pressures derived from technology choices. Moreover, Galbraith (1995) portrays the framework of organizational design as, “the star model” (p. 11) categorized as strategy, structure, processes, people and rewards.
According to Galbraith:
- Strategy determines the direction in an organization
- Structure determines where decision-making power resides
- Processes govern how information flows within the organization
- Policies of people define and influence employees’ skills and overall mindsets
- Reward system is the primary motivator in getting employees to perform according to the goals set by the organization (1995).
Collectively, this framework of organizational design has important implications for organizations. It helps organizations deal with contingencies, achieve competitive advantage, increase its efficiency and increase its innovative abilities for new goods and services (Jones, 1999).
Instead of managers using the organizational design framework as espoused by Galbraith, with focused outcomes as articulated by Jones, they have focused strictly on organizational structure to achieve effectiveness (Ashkenas, Ulrich, Jick, & Kerr, 2002). They focused on how many layers of management they needed, the signing authority at the different levels, the proper span of control, how to strike a balance between centralization and decentralization, the classification of jobs with proper pay levels and how to organize field and international operations. These all culminate into what Ashkenas et al. (2002) refer to as the old success factors of size, role clarity, specialization, and control, all derived from 20th century management.
4444 Redesigning Your Organization for Success: Shift to a New Paradigm
Leadership Advance Online – Issue XVI, Spring 2009
avionics and cockpit. They can act independently because the work of one team will not affect the others (Galbraith, 1995).
Success FactorSuccess FactorSuccess FactorSuccess Factor 2:2:2:2: FlexibilityFlexibilityFlexibilityFlexibility
The second success factor is flexibility. Ashkenas et al. (2002) is emphatic: “Organizations that move quickly are flexible. People do multiple jobs, constantly learn new skills and willingly shift to different locations and assignment” (p. 7). In order to do what Ashkenas et al. suggest, leaders must close the knowledge transfer gap that 21st century organizations will experience as a result of shifting demographics in the workplace.
Companies are already seeing distinct learning styles in the workplace transcending four generations. Matures or veterans, born 1925-1945, and baby boomers, born 1955-1964, all have a learning style defined by formal classroom instruction and reading printed text. Conversely, the Gen Xers, born 1965-1979, prefer a more informal learning, merged with action learning in which they desire to find real solutions for real problems (Knowledge Transfer, 2008). Furthermore, the Gen Yers or millennials, born 1980-1995, have a highly computer-oriented learning style because they were born in the computer world. They refer to themselves as, “digital natives” (Knowledge Transfer, 2008, p. 2), valuing team learning, while enjoying new social media like blogs and virtual collaboration environments. Gen Yers would perform best in a team structure that caters to the transformational leadership style. Transformational leaders empower workers and instill a sense of engagement and commitment. These type of leaders also encourage workers, “to challenge the status quo and to provide the inspiration that nurtures risk-taking behavior” (Sherman, Rowley, & Armandi, 2007, p. 4).
For example, McDonough Bolyard Peck Inc., a consulting engineering firm in Fairfax, VA, is tackling this knowledge transfer issue in several ways. It has an informal mentoring program that supports individual development, involving half of its 160 staff members. Furthermore, according to Rubis (2008), the company provides other informal learning opportunities by sponsoring, “twice-monthly lunch-and-learn sessions” (p. 2) on topics such as cost-estimating software.
According to Salopek (2008), communities of practice (CoP) are experiencing a renewed popularity in the workplace as a learning tool. IBM uses a CoP for over 100 professionals, called the Global
Leadership Advance Online – Spring (^2009 )
Leadership Advance Online – Issue XVI, Spring 2009
Instructor Community, which focuses on, “content sharing, tips and techniques, and up-to-date materials for the worldwide learning staff” (p. 1).
Success FactorSuccess Factor 3:Success FactorSuccess Factor3:3:3: IntegrationIntegrationIntegrationIntegration
Integration is the third success factor. Jones (1999) defines integration as, “the process of coordinating various tasks, functions, and divisions so that they work together and not at cross- purposes” (p. 56). Organizations must be adept at shifting directions and ensure change become instituted into the bloodstream. This requires disseminating new initiatives quickly, while at the same time mobilizing the right resources for things to happen. The focus then should be on accomplishing work processes or business and less on the production of specialized pieces of work (Ashkenas et al., 2002).
Besides the focus being on work processes, like it or not, technology will still serve a major role in bringing functions together for information and knowledge sharing. For example, Xerox uses computer systems in finding new ways for different functions to share memos, reports and databases. Wal-Mart’s home office actively uses television technology to show each store how to display products for sale (Jones, 1999).
In order to get coordination of tasks and functions to work together and not be at cross-purposes, will require that 21st century organizations become inherently modular, adaptable organizational structures. They must become learning organizations. Handy (1990) says that learning organizations are, “places where change is an opportunity, where people grow while they work” (p. 212). To be effective learning organizations, organizations must constantly adapt to their environment. Hence, organic structures are more favorable to learning organizations. Sherman, Rowley and Armandi (2007) argue that, “organic structures have decentralized authority and power and rely on informal/social systems and a wide span of control” (p. 3).
To take this a step further future organizational architectures must then be inherently modular. This allows for major change, without major disturbances, within the organization where the focus is on collaboration with others to create an integrated whole. Xerox, Microsystems, SMH and ABB are examples of modular, adaptable organizational structures (Nadler & Tushman, 1997).
Leadership Advance Online – Spring (^2009 )
Leadership Advance Online – Issue XVI, Spring 2009
world leader in kitchen and cleaning appliances, has moved manufacturing operations from high- cost Sweden and Germany, to lower cost structures such as Poland, Mexico and Thailand.
In addition to understanding how technology will drive solutions for delivering better service and the many outside forces that will drive new organizational structures like the Shamrock, deriving innovations will involve organizational design in a more expanded role. Guillory (2007) argues that 21st century organizations must adapt to unpredictable, accelerated change. He insists that, “the best way to adapt to change is to create it” (p. 1). He says employees in future organizations must possess both creative and innovative abilities. He defines creativity as, “the conception of a new idea and innovation as the implementation to bring about a tangible process, product, or service” (p. 1). Additionally, to nurture this creativity, the organization must put in place the right reward system to motivate the required behavior. Nadler and Tushman (1997) insist there must be a high degree of, “consistency between linkage mechanisms and patterns of rewards,” (p. 106) otherwise the organization sends the wrong signals resulting in frustration, confusion and poor performance.
In conclusion, 21st century organizations must shift from rigid to permeable processes and structures and create a new paradigm for organizational success. Customers are demanding a new paradigm in which speed, flexibility, integration and innovation, the new success factors, will replace the old success factors of size, role clarity, specialization and control. The old factors even failed the test in the 1st century when Jesus fed 5,000 hungry customers. Organizational design will play a major role in crafting the right organizations in the 21st century, in terms of its strategy, structure, processes, people and rewards, in order to meet and even succeed future customer demands. Mahatma Gandhi was right after all: “A customer is the most important visitor on our premises; he is not dependent on us. We are dependent on him. He is not an interruption in our work. He is the purpose of it …” (Business Growth Quotes, n.d., p. 2).
AbAbAbAbout the Aout the Aout the Aout the Authoruthoruthoruthor
Alphronzo Moseley is a professor of program management at the Defense Acquisition University, Fort Belvoir, Va. An Air Force veteran, he has more than 26 years of experience in various leadership and management positions in the acquisition of military systems. He holds B.S. and M.S. degrees in electrical engineering, and is a doctoral student in the Doctor of Strategic Leadership program at Regent University.
Email: Alphronzo.moseley@dau.mil
8888 Redesigning Your Organization for Success: Shift to a New Paradigm
Leadership Advance Online – Issue XVI, Spring 2009
ReferencesReferencesReferencesReferences
Ashkenas, R., Ulrich, D., Jick, T., & Kerr, S. (2002). The boundaryless organization: Breaking the chains of organizational structure. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Business Growth Quotes (n.d.). Retrieved October 31, 2008 from http://www.woopidoo.com/business_quotes/business-growth.htm Daft, R. (2007). Organization theory and design (9th ed.). Willard, OH: Thomson South-Western. Gailbraith, J. (1995). Designing organizations: An executive briefing on strategy, structure, and process. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Gerth, A., & Rothman, S. (2007). The future IS organization in a flat world. Information Systems Management, 24 (2), 103-111. Retrieved October 16, 2008, from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document ID: 1273895281). Guillory, W. (2007). The Future Perfect organization: Leadership for the twenty-first century – Part I. Industrial and Commercial Training, 39 (1), 52-58. Retrieved October 16, 2008, from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document ID: 1204169681). Handy, C. (1990). The age of unreason. Boston: The Harvard Business School Press. Jones, G. (1999). Organizational Theory: Text and Cases (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Kazanjian, K. (2007). Exceeding customer expectations: What enterprise, America’s #1 car rental company, can teach you about creating lifetime customers. New York, NY: Doubleday. Knowledge transfer is critical to companies' competitive edge, as large numbers of boomers retire. (2008, August 22). US Fed News Service, Including US State News, p. 2. Retrieved October 7, 2008, from ProQuest Military Collection database. (Document ID: 1538050341). Nadler, D., & Tushman, M. (1997). Competing by design: The power of organizational architecture. New York: Oxford University Press. Rubis, L. (2008, July). Engineering people as well as projects. HRMagazine, 53 (7), 34-36. Retrieved October 7, 2008, from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document ID: 1506792721). Salopek, J. (2008, July). Knowledge in numbers. T + D, 62 (7), 24-26. Retrieved October 7, 2008, from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document ID: 1510530581). Sherman, H., Rowley, D., & Armandi, B. (2007). Developing a strategic profile: The pre-planning phase of strategic management. Business Strategy Series, 8 (3), 162-171. Retrieved October 7, 2008, from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document ID:1374488601). Sourcingmag (n.d.). Outsourcing - What is outsourcing? Retrieved October 19, 2008 from http://www.sourcingmag.com/content/what_is_outsourcing.asp
