Organizational Behavior

...

• Designation becomes of more priority, thus politics came into existence

• Polarization has started happening

• More money is now spent on the system planning and development rather than

• With more sub groups and layers build in each team, they have started working as single unit. The responsibilities are defined mainly by the person rather than the company vision and mission.

• With the increasing number of products developed by the company it is becoming requirement to hold the product specific teams for their effective management.

• The source of authority was functional, not managerial expertise and it was very difficult to measure managerial competence.

• Within the multi-functional product teams, there was no system that specified who had the authority to make which decisions. As a result, the conflict between product managers and operations people became more acute.

• There were resource allocation problems, both within product teams and among them.

• No system of profit and loss accountability.

• With this structure, there was more tail than tooth.

• Customer focus also diminished as people became more concerned with internal processes and issues than meeting customer’s needs.

Thus to bridge this gap Ghosh introduced a new structure of business unit which is coordinating activities between product teams and cooperate management team.

Such complex Structure have overgrown the strength of managing employees in the company whereas actual work producing is less. Thus increased the company overhead expenses to a greater extent.

This complex Business unit introduction has not only dismantled the image of Lean company but also diminished the focus on customer. People are more engaged in their internal process handling and monitoring.

Thus the Company wide goal is lost in the regular and business oriented targets. Profit and Loss were not meeting the expectations.

To work out the various problems faced in the Functional Structure, Ghosh Implemented the Divisional Structure.

Divisional Structure

In this structure he created two broad divisions based on the two businesses: Intercarrier Services (ICS) and Cellular Management Information Systems (IS) and to service these two divisions he created another division, that is Operations. Each operation has one head.

This new structure has proved fruitful by increasing accountability of budgeting and planning. The dependence of Ghosh has been reduced and he can now focus on Company wide strategic development.

But this structure probed some of the issues related to resource allocation, which is becoming reason of antagonism between teams, sharing of resources is becoming the conflict of interest Another probe is the restricted/minimal flow of information between the divisions. Thus company is losing on the Innovation.

To Address these issues, he Proposed Quality as the motive and created multi-divisional and multi-product Quality teams. Employee rotation across division helps in free flow of ideas and also developed a centralized product team.

With strong decision sense building, there started play games kind of attitude in the Business units. They tweaked the reports. Thus making it difficult for the management to get the true picture of the Business unit performance

- ‘Structure needs dynamic alignment with its changing contextual circumstances’. Defend this statement by using the case data and context

This Statement holds the crux of the entire case. Structure is defined to get the processes of the company working. To keep people working with Product demand, Company vision as the variable, the structure needs to be defined dynamically. With any of the parameter change, there is a crucial requirement to build a responsive structure, which can handle the new change, thus becoming a dynamic process. Dynamic alignment has to be build very deep in the corporate

culture at every level, whether it is employees, management or the values. If any remain stringent, the process will not be adaptable to the changing needs and Company lose any chance of survival. As we have seen in this case, when company has increased the no of employees, to manage the structure a change has to be built in considering all the parameters like demand, hierarchy, function. Similarly, when there is increased in products have increased, structure has to respond to it for effective functioning of it.

Thus with the changing circumstances like demand, employee, new competition, the structure should respond to each change so that better performance can be incurred out of it. Otherwise stale structure cannot perform to the new needs.

Also one of the crucial element is to convey or imbibe this information in the employees that structure is always changing and they should be open to adopt it.