Assignment Objectives
Develop a practical understanding and application of specific actions, processes, and techniques needed to move into the "next generation" of organizations.
Assignment Details It is the end of the day, and you are meeting in Jared's office to talk about his conference with the vice presidents.
"It sounds like your meeting about organizational structure went well," you say. "Yes," he says. "We talked about how we can change the infrastructure so that it helps organizational culture run efficiently and consistently. Everyone is getting the same message now about how structure and culture need to work in a healthy company." "That's great," you say. "What else can I do for you?" "You know, it would help if I had something that explained the link between culture and structure. I need to talk to the board about the changes we're making, and I will be talking to staff about what they can expect to happen over the next 6 months. You're a better writer than I am, and I could use a well-written explanation for my discussions." "Okay," you say. "Thanks. Is there anything else?" "Yes," he says. "Based on the problems that CMA has had, what changes would you suggest for the company?
I want to include your recommendations in the agenda for the next quarterly meeting with the board." "Sure," you say. "No problem; I can include those in my report." "Thanks," he says.
HIS SITE WILL HELP AS WELL https://class.ctuonline.edu/_layouts/MUSEViewer/MUSE.aspx?mid=1833942
Scenario: Cameron Mechanical & Automation, Inc. (CMA)
Cameron Mechanical & Automation, Inc. (CMA) is a fictional company that has been in business and operating in the Silicon Valley since 1998. The company began as a successful Internet-based company (dot-com) and experienced great success with the introduction of high technology. The company also experienced decline with other dot-coms in 2001. As a result, CMA restructured and focused on its primary products; that is, computer components. The early changes in the company were done quickly to downsize. Although many other companies failed during this time, CMA managed to move forward.
CMA rebounded and continued to manufacture and sell its components to computer manufacturers worldwide. The company structure was divided into product divisions, with each division focused on specific components. For the company, this structure was meant to streamline sales and delivery worldwide.
In 2008, the economy had an effect on company profits, but the chief executive officer (CEO), Jared Smith, was in a position to focus on several internal strategic areas, including structure, work design, motivation, conflict, and company culture as a whole. To stay profitable, the company had to eliminate several management positions in an effort to flatten the organizational chart. Many of the responsibilities fell to the employees, and many people resisted the change.
As the economy recovers, CMA continues to rebuild. Since 2012, the company has been divided into a functional structure that includes four departments: Research and development (R&D), marketing, production, and finance. Each department is headed by a vice president who has responsibility over each of the functional areas. The company currently sells components to computer manufacturers. As technology continues to advance, the CMA R&D department and its vice president, Kevin Adams, are feeling pressure to keep up with the competition. However, because of the differentiation and separation between the departments, the CEO is concerned that communication is hampered.
In the last employee satisfaction survey, the CEO became aware of growing feelings of mistrust between employees and managers. Hiring practices are also under scrutiny and criticism, because allegations of nepotism have been leveled at the company. For these reasons and others, employee turnover and absenteeism is on the rise in all four divisions. Staffing problems have made it difficult to meet customer expectations as the demand for company products grows.
Because of the current structure and culture, the vice presidents who run each division of the company have autonomy and are able to use different leadership styles. For example, the vice president of marketing, Jim Stevens, uses a more democratic leadership style, while the vice president of production, Melissa Simons, is adamant that her autocratic or transactional style is the only way to get results. Each leadership style has advantages, but the lack of consistency between divisions may be causing problems for the company as a whole. Further, the CEO is concerned that the workforce may not be as diverse as it should be, but he is not sure how to address the issue.
The CEO has hired you as an external organizational development consultant to help him identify problem areas and to understand where changes should be made within the company. Over the next few weeks, you will also be working with the CEO and managers in all four divisions of the company to help establish these changes. Your various responsibilities will also include talking with employees at each level of the company to get a better understanding about underlying problems.
So far, you are seeing inconsistencies in leadership practices in each of the departments, and you are concerned that while the company is trying to improve its communication protocol, the different leadership styles may be creating confusion. For example, when you talked to one of the production employees, Sonja Diaz, she explained that she had many ideas for helping to streamline the production process, but feels she cannot share them because of the transactional leadership. In the marketing department, one sales rep, Jerry McVie, felt that he was not being challenged with his current goals and is even considering leaving the company to join one of the competitors. Lack of communication between the divisional leaders might also be the cause of conflict between the departments because they operate in silos. This separation between divisions may also be having a negative effect on middle management staffing issues.
Message : 1,200 words, APA formatted (with minimum of 3 references) CITED IN THE PAPER