Among all reading materials, the topic impressed me most is Appex Corporation. Several years ago, I tried to start my own business and design the organization structure. When I read Appex case, I was stunned because my design was quite the same as Appex. Never do I want to see what happened in Appex happen in my future company. Therefore, I desire to learn from the case and all the other aspects mention in our readings to design my new organization structure and separate it into three stages, including “Starting”, “Leadership”, “Accountability”. (Exhibit 1)
In “Starting” stage, the purpose is the most critical feature of the organization, and so does information flow. During this period, people with the same idea or purpose gather together, …show more content…
In this case, powers show. Unlike legitimate power set by rules, the power which shows in this stage is earned by people themselves. Their powers are not likely to change, even if the organization design changes. For example, in the case of “Rondell Data Company”, Doc Reeve still held his power even if Frank Forbus had a higher-level position. In addition, employees are willing to be led by these people with natural powers because they can actually be benefited, like Lois Weisberg’s case. These two features of the power at this stage is exactly a crucial factor that allows the organization to cooperate in good coordination although the size of the organization is getting bigger.
Either purpose or power can lead the companies to grow, although they may grow in the two different ways. On the one hand, like companies in the first situation, they grow accompanied with stronger purpose, spirit or belief, and simultaneously have simpler cooperation among employees, just like Apple did. On the other hand, like companies in the second branch, they usually growth with two features, which are authority and appearance of sub-teams, which goes to the next …show more content…
When I was thinking through all these revolutionary processes of an organization, so many concepts came out from my mind. Not only purpose, communication, power, value, accountability, and hierarchy I mentioned in this essay, but also those not mentioned such as cross function structure, competency trap, culture, and bureaucracy, especially. I still remember that professor said that "From decades to decades, voice, which states bureaucracy should be get rid of, is everywhere; however, it still exists" during the discussion of bureaucracy must die. I think that the appearance or hierarchy in the development of my organization design somehow shows the answer. Either hierarchy or bureaucracy, it exists for a reason.
In this three stages of organization design, I have put as much suggestion as I concerned to avoid mistakes happened in Appex. But still, no perfect organization design is there, and designing organization is nothing like a regression analysis that allows predicting how an organization will change when it grows. Just like professor said, “It depends”, right? And it is exactly the reason that I think "organization", the subject, is
In “Starting” stage, the purpose is the most critical feature of the organization, and so does information flow. During this period, people with the same idea or purpose gather together, …show more content…
In this case, powers show. Unlike legitimate power set by rules, the power which shows in this stage is earned by people themselves. Their powers are not likely to change, even if the organization design changes. For example, in the case of “Rondell Data Company”, Doc Reeve still held his power even if Frank Forbus had a higher-level position. In addition, employees are willing to be led by these people with natural powers because they can actually be benefited, like Lois Weisberg’s case. These two features of the power at this stage is exactly a crucial factor that allows the organization to cooperate in good coordination although the size of the organization is getting bigger.
Either purpose or power can lead the companies to grow, although they may grow in the two different ways. On the one hand, like companies in the first situation, they grow accompanied with stronger purpose, spirit or belief, and simultaneously have simpler cooperation among employees, just like Apple did. On the other hand, like companies in the second branch, they usually growth with two features, which are authority and appearance of sub-teams, which goes to the next …show more content…
When I was thinking through all these revolutionary processes of an organization, so many concepts came out from my mind. Not only purpose, communication, power, value, accountability, and hierarchy I mentioned in this essay, but also those not mentioned such as cross function structure, competency trap, culture, and bureaucracy, especially. I still remember that professor said that "From decades to decades, voice, which states bureaucracy should be get rid of, is everywhere; however, it still exists" during the discussion of bureaucracy must die. I think that the appearance or hierarchy in the development of my organization design somehow shows the answer. Either hierarchy or bureaucracy, it exists for a reason.
In this three stages of organization design, I have put as much suggestion as I concerned to avoid mistakes happened in Appex. But still, no perfect organization design is there, and designing organization is nothing like a regression analysis that allows predicting how an organization will change when it grows. Just like professor said, “It depends”, right? And it is exactly the reason that I think "organization", the subject, is