Words: 2798
| |Case Study: | |The Comparative analysis of LawrieTech. com and Coca-Cola | |Company | | Contents Introduction 3 Question 4 Teamwork and Teamworking 5 Organisational Design and Structure 9 Organisational Culture 14 Conclusion 17 Reference 18 Introduction LawrieTech. com is one of the software engineering companies in Scotland, which is developing and supplying software system for controlling electricity supply. LawrieTech. om has 240 employees who service clients in 13 countries, which are include US, France and India. Coca-cola Company is the largest manufacturer, distributor and marketer of nonalcoholic beverage concentrates and syrups in the world. Finished beverage products bearing their trademarks, sold in the US since 1886, are now sold in more than 200 countries. Question Read the two organizational case studies and provide a comparative analysis of them in written essay format. In particular the areas of comparison should cover the main topics as below: 1.
Teamwork and Teamworking 2. Organizational Design and Structure 3. Organizational Culture 1. Teamwork and Teamworking Team is a combination of people within an organisation with skills, who are working together to achieve desired goal. Teamwork is the activity of working well together as a team with a collective of individual skills, talents and effects. There are four types of teams have been identified in LawrieTech. com and Coca-Cola Company. One of the team that had been identified is self-managed team, which also known as autonomous team.
Team is empowered to make decision about planning and scheduling of work, allocating tasks, controlling quality of work and evaluating performance which is essential to manage them on daily basis. Both LawrieTech. com and Coca-Cola Company exist in self-managed team. Staffs of LawrieTech. com are “expected to liaise directly with clients and have a mandate to do what it takes to find solutions to their clients’ problems”. LawrieTech. com has to ensure members of teams are in the”…right mix of skills and capabilities in order to meet the very exacting demands of clients”.
According to McClelland’s acquired needs of power theory, members will have a mandate to control other persons, to influence their behaviour, and to be responsible for other people to fulfill their needs and self-satisfaction. Hence, “staff turnover is minimal and every year LawrieTech. com is inundated with the CVs of eager young graduates”. Coca-Cola Company is a large company which has “…axed 6,000 employees”. Coca-Cola will be an autonomous team because they are given authority to re-design structure and make decisions that adapt to the country’s culture and needs. Coca-Cola produces over 300 brands worldwide” and “the bottling and distribution system is also adapted to local needs”. Besides, “they have restructured with a management team coordinates a new, nimble, and entrepreneurial network”. In addition, Coca-Cola “…. has positioned itself for growth by moving key decision making closer to local market”. Virtual team is one of the team which had identified from both companies, where teams are using computer technology to tie together physically dispersed members in order to achieve a common goal.
They can share information and ideas, make decisions, and complete tasks by using communication links. They can include members from the same company or link an organization’s members with the employees from other organization like suppliers and joint partners. (Stephen P. Robbins & Timothy A. Judge 2005) LawrieTech. com has “set up a ‘Knowledge Transfer’ on the intranet to share and discuss ideas”. “Staffs are encouraged to communicate with other teams members”.
Fully used of this network connection to let staffs to exchange information and ideas to each other to improve the resources of problem solving. Coca-Cola Company has existed on virtual team as it is “…fostering deeper connections to consumers” with their organization website. Through the network connection Coca-Cola “… has been very sensitive to local market conditions”, and also “…recognizing the importance of international sales”. They are using the network connection to control and communicate with the other teams who are located in other countries around the world.
Besides, Cross-functional team is the members come from different functional units and other part of organization with expectation of sharing information and ideas to solve organization’s problem. This team often functions as self-directed teams responding to broad, but no specific directives. Decision-making within a team may depend on consensus, but often is led by a manager or team leader. LawrieTech. com exists on cross-functional teams; however, Coca-Cola Company does not exist. LawrieTech. com’s employees are “…organized into flexible teams”. “Each team has the right mix of skills and apabilities” to fulfill clients’ needs to achieve their intention. Members are “…expected to liaise directly with clients and have a mandate to do what it takes to find solutions to their clients’ problems” and “…meet the very exacting the demand of clients”. Both LawrieTech. com and Coca-Cola have existed on employee involvement team, where groups of employees who meet outside their regular assignment to uncover, apply expertise to improve workplace matter. This team often formed a quality circle where they will meet about once a week to discuss their work, identify problems, and present possible solutions to management. Michael P. Dumler & Steven J. Skinner 2008) LawrieTech. com has organized “regular staff social events and outings which all enjoy”. Also, “although they have job titles, no member of staff has a specific job description suggesting that anything is possible”. They will discuss and share ideas together to improve their problem solving skill capabilities to fulfill their clients’ needs. Coca-Cola Company has existed on this team as well. “The larger the company is, the harder it is to continue to grow at a steady pace”.
Therefore, “products are developed to meet the varied taste preferences of consumers”, and “Coca-Cola produces over 300 brands worldwide in addition to its flagship brands”. 2. Organizational Design and Structure Organizational Design It can be defined as the creation of roles, processes and formal reporting relationship in an organization. One can distinguish between two phases in an organization design process, which are organic design and mechanistic design. Organic organization operates with minimum bureaucratic features and with a culture that encourages workers empowerment and participation.
However, mechanistic organization is an ideal organization form, and operated with bureaucratic features, like clear cut labour divisions, strict hierarchy and authority, formal rules and promotion based on competency. Organic organization has a flat structure with maximum two levels of management, which called decentralized authority. Supervisors tend to have a more personal relationship with employees. However, mechanistic organization is a centralized authority with narrow span of control, more specialist positions, and homogeneous, functional departments. (Stephen P.
Robbins & Timothy A. Judge 2005) The Gibson, Ivancevich, and Donnelly (1995) stated, “While the mechanistic model seeks to maximize efficiency and product, the organic model seeks to maximize satisfaction, flexibility and development” (p. 542). LawrieTech. com exists on organic design as it is a decentralized authority and there is only two levels management, which is section and team. Meanwhile, the company encourages the empowerment and participation of staffs for problems solving. It is more to be informal or personal type organization as they only have few rules in the organization. Ties are banned from the office”. Also, “…staffs work in flexi time” and they can “…approach their employer, Iain, for a chat” except in the meeting hour. There is “…informal and relaxed atmosphere in the office”. There are wide span of control, which only has two levels of management. LawrieTech. com is also an organization with full of intellectual capital, where there are collective brainpowers of workforce that can be used to create value. Therefore, all tasks are shared, “Although they have job titles, no member of staff has a specific job description suggesting that anything is possible”. Staffs are organized into flexible teams”. Thus, LawrieTech. com has many task forces and is considered as a small enterprise, because it only has “…employed 240 workers”. However, Coca-Cola is a mechanistic organization since it processes as a centralized authority, where there are “twenty-four division and operations presidents…” and it has more structured. Coca-Cola is a large company, where “…CEO, Douglas Daft axed 6,000 employees”. In addition, it has many rules and regulations as “twenty-four divisions and operations presidents report to the chief operating officers”.
Coca-Cola Company has few task forces, because their shibboleth is one company, one group. Employees are organized into departments and tasks are specialised within their organizational structure, as they have “… group of individuals, along with Coca-Cola employees and partners worldwide, are responsible for implementing the six strategic priorities” and they are “… very sensitive to local market conditions”. The span of control is narrow, as “twenty-four divisions and operations presidents report to the chief operating officers”.
Organizational Structure It is a hierarchical concept of subordination of entities that collaborate and contribute to serve one common aim. The structure of an organization is usually set up in one of the variety of styles, dependant on their objectives and ambience. It will determine the modes in which it shall operate and will perform. (Stephen P. Robbins & Timothy A. Judge 2005) There are six types of structure have been identified in both company. First of all, LawrieTech. com exists on team structure, but Coca-Cola is less exists on this structure.
Team structure is defined as it greatly use permanent and temporally teams to solve problems, complete special projects, and accomplish daily tasks. It often uses cross-functional teams. For examples, LawrieTech. com’s staffs are “…organized into flexible teams”. “Each team has the right mix of skills and capabilities in order to meet the very exacting demands of clients”. “… regular team meeting” is held where members can exchange ideas and communicate with other team members. It helps them to mix easily.
Secondly, network structure has been performing within both companies. It is a central core that is linked through networks of relationships with outside contractors and suppliers of essential services. Furthermore, the company own only core components and use strategic alliances or outsourcing to provide other components. LawrieTech. com is a network organization, where it has”…set up an intranet, ‘Knowledge Transfer’, to let staffs share and discuss ideas”. “Staffs are organized into flexible teams” to complete their tasks with perfect mix of skill capabilities.
Coca-Cola Company also exists on network structure as well, because employees are organized into departments with using network connection to link to each other and “…recognizing the importance of international sales”. Besides, divisional structures delineate team who works on the same product or process, serve similar customers, and located in the same area or geographical region. It is more common in complex organization and in avoids problems associated with functional structure. LawrieTech. com and Coca-Cola have existed on it at the same time, but LawrieTech. com only base on customer structure.
For examples, LawrieTech. com’s “…. business strategy involves the development of high specification customer-driven programmes with intense levels of after-sales services”. Its intention, that all of a worker has skills and capabilities to fulfill their clients’ needs. Coca-Cola Company also exists on this structure, which based on customer and geographical. As an example for customer structure, “products are developed to meet the varied taste preferences of consumers”. Coca-Cola tries to adapt to local needs, where “…all bottlers are local companies either independently owned or only partially owned by the Coca-Cola”.
There would be the functional structure in Coca-Cola, yet LawrieTech. com does not exist. Functional structure lies in putting like specialists together, which minimizes the number necessary while allowing the pooling and sharing of specialized resources across products. (Stephen P. Robbins & Timothy A. Judge 2005) Coca-Cola is trying to “…achieve profitability through economies of scale and by capitalizing on its existing distribution”. Boundary-less organization is the eliminating of internal boundaries among subsystems and external boundaries with the external environment.
It is also a combination of team and network structures with the addition of “temporariness”. (Stephen P. Robbins & Timothy A. Judge 2005) Due to the identification on the above, LawrieTech. com is a boundary-less organization. As it has been exist on team structure as well as network structure. Teams are “…organized into flexible teams” to achieve the perfect match of skill and capabilities. They are exchanging ideas with each other through the ‘Knowledge Transfer’. Coca-Cola Company is not a boundary-less organization since team structure is less performed in it.
Finally, matrix structure is a combination of functional and divisional structure for increasing the advantages and minimized the disadvantages of each used in manufacturing, service industries, professional fields, non-profit sectors and Multinational Corporation. Coca-Cola is a matrix organization as it has simultaneously existed both functional and divisional structures, but LawrieTech. com is not a matrix structure. For examples, Coca-Cola attempts to “…achieve profitability through economies of scale” and also develop product to “…meet the varied taste preferences of consumers”.
Besides, they aim to “…adapt to local needs” by “the bottling and distribution systems”. 3. Organizational Culture Organization culture can be defined as a system of shared meaning by people and groups in an organization and that control the way they interact with each other and with stakeholders outside the organization. (Stephen P. Robbins & Timothy A. Judge 2005) At first, LawrieTech. com has been present in people orientation. People orientation is the degree of value and respect for people. “LawrieTech. om seeks to employ the best graduates available who can bring the skills and attitudes that are consistent with the company’s business philosophy and, indeed, their philosophy on life. ” LawrieTech. com concern to the staffs’ working performance in their daily tasks with joyful. Through the identification, Coca-Cola does not have people orientation. Team orientation is one of the organizational cultures in the case studies. It is the degree to which work activities are organized around teams rather than individual. (Stephen P. Robbins & Timothy A. Judge 2005) In LawrieTech. com, “staffs are organized into flexible teams”. Each team has the right mix of skills and capabilities in order to meet the very exacting demands of clients”. Members are “…liaising directly with clients” and to fulfill the clients’ needs with taking decision themselves. “…Regular team meeting” set up to improve the relationship between each member of other teams. Coca-Cola has also less team orientation, as it is less performed as team structure. According to case studies, innovation and risk taking is performed in both companies. It is the degree of the company willing to experiment, take risks, and encourage innovation.
In LawrieTech. com “…staffs are able to express themselves” and be creative in their work. Also, they have a mandate to do what it takes to get problems solving to serve to their aim. Coca-Cola Company is a manufacturer company, it needs to have more innovation and risk taking to achieve its desired goal. “Products are developed to meet the varied taste preferences of consumers” and they have produced “…over 300 brands worldwide in addition to its flagship brands”. Coca-Cola Company introduces aggressiveness in its company. Stephen P. Robbins & Timothy A.
Judge (2005) stated aggressiveness is “the degree to which people are aggressive and competitive rather than easygoing” (p. 512) Coca-Cola “growth in sales has been fueled both internally and through acquisitions and licensing agreements”. Also, it has developed products “…to meet the varied taste preferences of consumers”. Nevertheless, LawrieTech. com is not an aggressiveness company. Coca-Cola has introduced outcome orientation, but LawrieTech. com does not exist. Outcome orientation is the degree to which management focuses on results or outcomes rather than on the techniques and processes used to achieve those outcomes. Stephen P. Robbins & Timothy A. Judge 2005) Coca-Cola is an organization which achieving their aim without focusing on undertaking the ways. It is more focus on their image and profit, so its top management “…axed 6,000 employees” to restructure their organization and also reduce their unnecessary cost for maintaining its financial. Likewise, Coca-Cola is “…recognizing the importance of international sales, has been very sensitive to local market conditions” for their profit and gain. Conclusion Coca-Cola Company and LawrieTech. om are not being able to compare with each other, because both are not in the same line organization. Coca-Cola Company is a manufacture line company, but LawrieTech. com is a customer line organization. Employees of LawrieTech. com are working together as a team and fulfilled with needs of power for self-satisfaction and confidence. However, employees of Coca-Cola Company should be more disciplined as there are full of rules and regulations, and they need to follow instructions from top management to complete their daily tasks.
Reference Books 1. Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge (2005) Organizational Behaviour. 12th Edition. United States of America: Person Prentice Hall. P. 300-303, P. 478-485, P. 490-494. 2. Gibson, J. L. , Ivancevich, J. M. , & Donnelly, J. H. , Jr. (1995) Organizations: Behavior, Structure, Processes. 8th Edition. Boston, MA: Irwin. P. 542. 3. Michael P. Dumler and Steven J. Skinner (2008) A Primer for Management. 2nd Edition. United States of America: Thomson South-Western. P. 168.