Final Project Part Three

.docx

School

Southern New Hampshire University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

580

Subject

Business

Date

Jun 24, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

9

Uploaded by GrandGalaxy5481

Final Project Part Three: Organizational Structure and Culture Report Stacia Benton Southern New Hampshire University MBA 580 Innov/Strat High-Perform Orgs February 11, 2024
2 Final Project Part Three Current Organizational Structure The current structure of the organization consists of a common form of hierarchy within most organizations. Specifically, the company has a matrixed structure design consisting of centers of excellence or expertise (COEs) with functional vice presidents and project managers within each COE. Overall, this type of organizational structure allows for increased control and process efficiencies, which in turn reduce waste in resources and duplication of efforts ( MBA 580 Organization Overview , n.d.). Decisions are made at the top and is often slow. The downside to this type of organizational structure is that with COEs, there can be a lack of connectedness and cross-functional coordination. While the structure of having COEs within the organization and process efficiencies within the organization, this can also lead to rigidness and inflexibility. This type of environment is not always conducive to innovation. There are cases where the COE have their own unique goals and objectives rather than focusing on enterprise-wide initiatives. While innovation may take place within the COEs, it is not always the best use of resources for the organization as a whole due to lack of communication among the cross-functional teams. There also appears to be a lack of consideration within our organization for employee ideas related to innovation. Again, the organization focuses on enterprise-wide initiatives, leaving little time or resources to dedicate to innovation at the employee level. The organization’s current structure is also slow to respond when it comes to changes in market demand. The tall matrixed structure design leaves decision making to high level managers who are “often those farthest from the customer” ( MBA 580 Organization Overview , n.d.). Furthermore, the design of pulling specialists from functional areas to work on specific projects or designs also makes it slower to react and respond to changes in the market demand due to the lack of connectedness to the customer and product teams are not region-specific. This
3 Final Project Part Three makes a difference because market demand may differ from one region to another. According to Accept Mission, innovation is “performed best when collaboration is practiced” (Accept Mission, 2021). While collaboration is practiced within our organization, there can be some confusion as to who is making the decisions as specialists may report to two different supervisors at one time and may also be working on multiple projects simultaneously as well. Not only slows down innovation but also slows down how the company responds to changes in market demand due to lack of structure and communication. Recommendations for Changes to Organizational Structure Our current organizational structure is more traditional and centralized, with most decisions being made at the top of the hierarchy. What we have now come to realize that this type of organizational structure is not always conducive to innovation or does it always encourage a climate of creativity at the frontline employee level. To streamline the innovation process and address the issue of creativity, I would recommend introducing a more hybrid structure to our organization that combines both functional and divisional structures, nearly similar to what we have now. The hybrid model is most successful and suitable when “divisions have differing needs but central coordination is needed” (Toma, 2021). The difference would be that this type of structure would allow for the company to be “more flexible in distributing and assigning roles” and “helps to maintain a healthy relationship across all departments” (Toma, 2021). The hybrid organizational model has its pros and cons, however. Beginning with the cons, having functional and divisional business units can lead to inconsistencies in work and duplication of tasks. Furthermore, the business units may all have different ideas as to what innovation actually looks like for the company or for a specific project or objective. This is
4 Final Project Part Three something that the organization is experiencing now. The hybrid model is, on the other hand, more adaptable and better aligns the business units in terms of innovation strategy, as long as top leaders are effective in communicating what the organization’s goals are. Examples of successful companies that use the hybrid structure include Starbucks, GAP Inc, and even Google (Toma, 2021). Within the hybrid model, I would recommend having the same functional divisions that we currently have, but I would also recommend the additional of a central innovation unit with each functional business unit having its own innovation “lab” so to speak. The specialists within each of the functional business unit would work directly with the central innovation unit. This type of structure would allow each business unit to also innovate within with the governance of the central innovation unit. One of the main reasons why innovation fails within an organization is due to lack of internal communication. The hybrid structure along with central and functional innovation teams supports internal communication from the bottom to the top and vice versa. Employees are given the opportunity to explore innovation but are also given clear direction from the top as to what direction the company is going in. For organizations that use the hybrid model, management still determines the strategic domains and employees can contribute ideas, so these ideas are better aligned with organizational strategy (Accept Mission, 2021) If we move forward with the recommended structure changes, we will become more responsive to market demand. The business units will be able to focus on innovation at each level while still getting direction from the top as far as strategy is concerned. Innovation at the business unit level should be spearheaded by employees who are much closer to the customers and more in tune to customer preferences and demands, therefore making the structure more responsive to the market demand. Overall, hybrid organizational structures “offer greater
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help