Enterprise Organisational Management Model has always been one of the kernel problems to modern management science. Within this field, the essential question the researcher needs to solve is how to determine an enterprise company structure to cope with change of the monetary environment development. Using the development of information population and knowledge-based economy, the modern corporations are facing unprecedented environmental change and brutal competition. Therefore, to select a proper organisational model is quite crucial to a firm. In this essay, I will focus on both organisational perspectives: mechanistic and learning perspective and analyse two perspectives based on my experience. The purpose of the article is to provide theories of mechanistic and learning in relation to making use of multiple companies' case. I agree with the affirmation that the mechanistic organisational model can be highly useful, but it is not always effective. However, I have my question about the assertion that the principal challenge for modern organisations are to replenish new way and ideas to mechanistic principles. For me, the major obstacle is how the company changes their composition somewhat than mere present fresh ideas based on mechanistic framework. In the next first part of essay, I will describe the advantages and weakness of mechanistic perspective and why it cannot fit the development of society on the basis of cases. The next part is to present a new perspective-learning point of view and applying some ideas to demonstrate how companies become learning organisation, such as five self-discipline and dual loop learning. Finally, I will conclude how these models will help me in the future.
In the industrial age, the traditional mechanistic model in venture company is quite effective company form. In those times, competition had not been very strong, change of technology was gradually and information source of information was scarce. Therefore, development efficiency is the only person they need and mechanistic model satisfied their needs. Greenberg and Baron(2000) observe the mechanistic company is an inner organisational structure in which people specialized careers, rigid rules are impose, and power is vested in a few high-class official. Based on this is of it, most of us probably think of the united states tax office, the post office, banks or simply university registrar's office buildings as types of mechanistic company.
Two representative ideas in mechanistic company are Weber's ideal bureaucracy and Taylor's Ideas of technological management. Morgan (1943) described that Taylorism experienced greatly increase development efficiency; promoted the change of capitalist world and consequently achieved maximum profit. Some organisations experienced spectacular success using the Taylor's methodical management. Panasonic Company(2006), it is the first company that used divisional structure and can better make a specific distinction between responsibilities and government bodies of departments, in the meantime bring employees' eagerness and creativeness into full play and further specialization. But due to divisional composition is better to free from mind office's control, Panasonic acquired concentrated main four functions to balance the impacts of decentralization (Mclnerney, 2007). First of all, set up thorough financing system and accounting system. Next, creating company's own banks and controlled subsidiary company must acquire capital from company. Finally, carrying out amount policy of workers administrative, and finally taking intensive training program. As a result, Panasonic possessed efficiently a mixture of decentralization and centralization composition and swiftly become one of the 500 lot of money companies on the globe. However, in my opinion, mechanistic organisation's success is due to the precondition, that your external environment is secure and unchanging.
In fact, the environmental conditions are likely to be changing on a regular basis. For example, I believe everyone experienced trains, buses and airplanes cannot run on time. But why the general public transport (mechanistic company) cannot departure or appearance punctually? It really is clear that changes in exterior environment effects them, such as weather, traffic jam and unstable situations.
Actually, Drummond (2000) word Taylor didn't invent time management and just focus on efficiency, thus he disregarded the value of exterior environment. Furthermore, Gerloff (1985) said that when a company was too heavily centered on labor productivity, it might be bring opposite impact and limited company's development. Faxconn Company is the better proof of this.
Foxconn is the world's greatest contract electronics produce. By the end of 2009 it possessed US$59. 3 billion in earnings. However in the management style of company, it offers greatly imperfection, the management procedure is too bureaucracy and armed service (Jenny and Ngai, 2010). Predicated on Jason (2007)Terry Gou, the CEO of Faxconn, feels democracy is the most inefficient management procedure of company, this means decision-making should be choose a responsible individual leader, rather than waste time and energy on democratic debate.
For go after the labor productivity and maximum income, works and managers are limited in the time of eating and times of visiting toilet. It could be turned out by Terry Gou, he likens his workforce to animals in one of general public interviews. There can be an extreme example:
"Foxconn employees who made emergency calls to the police through in-factory telephones were automatically transferred to Foxconn's own private security office!"(Jenny and Ngai, 2010).
Consequently, subsidiary company of Foxconn happened suicide incident of employees (BBC Media, 2010).
From my perspective, the failure of Foxconnn is up to martial command style and neglected the wishes of employees. I say that that Foxconn might be an exceptionally example of disadvantages of mechanistic company, but it could offer a reference point for companies, which implemented mechanistic management as the principal approach to management. I think mechanistic point of view is no more suitable for the introduction of modern businesses. Now think about high-tech market sectors, such as those focused on pcs, aerospace products, and biotechnology. Their environmental conditions will tend to be changing on a regular basis. Therefore, company needs a new organisation framework to conform a strong world, such as learning point of view.
In my opinion, a major challenge of modern business isn't just to supplement mechanistic principles with fresh ideas and strategy, but also to transform management thinking. Furthermore, I believe mechanistic principles belong to the classic management style and cannot ideal for the development of society. Morgan (1943) said one of the major issues facing many modern organisations are to displace this kind pondering with fresh ideas and solutions, not and then supplement this. Inside the light of this scenario, Senge (1990) launched learning company, which is the most successful company of the 1990s called by Lot of money Magazine. Learning company emphasize system considering technology should replace traditional mechanistic thinking and static thinking, and taking good thing about fifth discipline to cope with complex active situation. Based on my research, IBM Company is a quite successful company for change based on learning company.
Perscott and Miller(2001) take note during the period of 1991-1993, IBM Company got exhibited deficits for three years running and the quantity of reduction up to $8 billion; Furthermore, the process of decision-making in company is too complex and professionals pay too much focus on the internal procedure, to neglect changes of the market. Furthermore, they obdurately withstand transformation (Perscott and Miller, 2001). However, Gerstner (the CEO of IBM) saves in deadly danger of IBM by using learning company mode.
Firstly, Gerstner (2002) organized a fresh team: immediate response team through modifying organisation structure and company form. This team effectively overcomes several problems: bureaucracy, slowly and gradually in development circle, unresponsive to market and expensive operating cost.
Secondly, he finally followed shock therapy management via system thinking, which reduced the management levels from 7 to 4. He succeeded in persuading the table to restructuring and completely ruined traditional bureaucratic management method and immensely cuts the price of management. Furthermore, for creating a shared vision, he breaks a tight hierarchy system and immediately communicated along with his employees via e-mail; Furthermore, for changing mental types of labor force, wherever he goes, he always established an hour for getting together with all employees and listening carefully their speech and ensures every employee has an opportunity to point out their own ideas.
Finally, he also applied a combined procedure of stock option and money incentive to improve professionals' personal mastery. After some turnaround, IBM mounted up from $8. 1 billion in 1993 to a $7. 7 billion revenue in 2001.
Therefore, as much as i am concerned, Gerstner calls for full good thing about fifth self-discipline of learning organisation to transform from a producer to technology integrators within e-commerce and services market sectors.
In addition, Senge(1990) also details that system thinking is quite important to a learning organisation. If the company has thorough system thinking, it will more lucrative than other companies.
Novo Nordisk (NN) can be an insulin producing company of Danish. Before 1985, many of diabetics need to inject insulin many times each day by hauling syringes and vials everywhere you go, it was too inconvenient for patients. For handling this issue, many insulin creation businesses pay their attention to doctors, just contrary, NN centered on patients through system thinking of learning organisation. Soon later Novo Nordisk Company launched the NovoPen, which is a new injection approach to providing more convenience for the users. Since NovoPen was launched, NN occupied approximately 60% of insulin market in Europe (Henrik, 2001).
From this case I could know system thinking of learning organisation will definitely make a difference in the development of a firm.
Up till the present moment, I have already known in the introduction of modern enterprises, possessing learning perspective is vital to a corporation. But how they will keep this perspective and also have in a position to learn within an ongoing way?
Here, I have to introduce a fresh learning approach: Double-loop learning (DLL), which is coined by Chris(1977). DLL means that an individual or organisation has able to achieve an objective on different situations, to change the goal on the basis of their own experience or probably refuse the target. As for single-loop learning, is merely repeat the same problem without changing the technique they used and ever querying the goal.
Morgan (1943) remember that many organisations have become effective in single-loop learning, developing an capacity to scan the environment, set targets, and monitor the general performance of the system in relation to these objectives. However, in double-loop learning, virtually all companies havent achieved proficiency as bureaucratization system is available and hierarchical and horizontal divisions have hindered the learning process.
But Basic Electric (GE) Company been successful in doing double-loop learning and how do they do that? In my opinion, the primary reason for GE's success is the innovation of Jack Welch, the CEO of GE in 1981.
Tichy and Sherman (1995) mentioned that Welch launched two kinds of new management strategies: Workout and Boundaryless. Workout is a fresh change program for teaching the abilities. The workout strategy aspires to help all GE's professionals have knowledge and knowledge about the change process itself and creating an capacity of thinking and solve problem. For instance, how to initiate change, why must change, and the way to accelerate it?
Boundaryless meant precisely what the words implied: eliminating most of barriers among each team, such as anatomist, making and marketing. In this way, each department can communicate and learn each other. Welch emphasized when occurs problems or new goals in the corporation, we must do isn't only to take care of problems or finish new goals, but also to believe why the challenge happened and if the new goal is right? (Michael, 2002). In a word, all this revolution Welch does is just for making a continuing learning atmosphere and permeates every mind in this company.
Therefore, in my opinion, so, a business will maintain circumstances of carrying on learning and will be increasingly lively.
Overall, for me, a mechanistic function of organisation is highly effective indeed, especially in a stable environment. Because of a hierarchical approach is successful for routine businesses, such as Weber's bureaucracy and Taylor's clinical management. Nonetheless it is not always effective, especially in a dynamic environment. Therefore, a significant obstacle for modern organisations aren't and then provide some fresh ideas and approach based on mechanistic principles, but more important to keep up with the development of society within a fresh function, such as learning function. It enables the present day organisations to keep learning, surmounting and progressing. But I must say that that mechanistic method still has great directive value to the modern organisations.
Consequently, to summarize the multiple point of view frameworks has helped me tremendously and it trained me how to use different perspectives to analyse an individual or organisation. For me, when organisations choose their framework, it cannot imitate or duplicate blindly the framework of successful business and it still must clearly analysis on the basis of internal and exterior situations. Similar to the contingency theory, it originated with the work of Woodward (1958) and was development by Fiedler (1987). They feel that there is no best and perfect setting to organisational design or lead an organization, but the most suitable for modern organisations with existing external conditions.