Organizational and Theory - Research Paper Example

? OUTLINE Introduction 2 I. Nature of Organizations and Environment 3 II. Four Stages of Organizational Development 4 III. Impact of the Resources onthe Organizational Members 6 IV. Process of Competing for Resources with the Other Industry Player 6 V. Costs of Obtaining Resources 8 VI. Consequences of Obtaining Resource 9 VII. Differences in Resource Attainment 10 Conclusion 11 References 12 Organizational Research and Theory Introduction The business world of today is highly competitive. In order to survive and even thrive amidst this tight competition, different institutions and organisations employ a variety of resources to manage their operations. These resources may be human, natural, tangible or intangible. Human resources are the most important resources because they are in right place to coordinate other resources. Natural resources, as the name implies, indicates that they are the resources derived directly from nature. Tangible resources are those that can be physically perceived like the truck, the house, etc. On the other hand, intangible resources are those that cannot be seen like hope, belief, and best wishes. Organisations need a combination of some of these resources. If they do not need any other resource at all, human resources cannot be done without. In using various resources, they must be careful so that they use only resources that are of benefit to the organisation. They must also know when some resources are useful and when they are not. Of course, it must be noted that there may be situations in which one has to modify certain resources in ways that will suite one’s organisation. Above all, organisation must always remember that their goals, policies and programmes are important in the determination of how resources are structured. The success of whatever strategy an organisation adopts largely depends on the types of resources available, how profit is maximised and how losses and new resources are managed. As with many things in life, there are resources that are good for some organisation and there are those that are not so good for them. In determining what category resources belongs to, both the leadership and the management have important roles to play. They must also be able to recognise the impacts have or are likely to have in the advancement of the set goals of the organisation. If perhaps the resources are not performing as expected, they must be able to work out ways in which these resources can be optimally useful. This is because the organisation’s success in the competitive market place strongly depends on the performance of resources. Nature of Organizations and Environment In any organisation, there must be members who of course are human beings. This is exactly what the above quote indicates. The nature of organisations has a lot to do with the nature of human beings in them. The human resources as well as the natural resources found in any organisation have to be modelled into the form that favours the organisation. Humans, as we have been created, are unique. In a similar way, an organisation is unique. This certainly means that it would be almost impossible to come across two organisations that are exactly the same in all respects. In the same light, the environment is often unique, however, it may it may not be as unique as the organisation itself. Whatever the case may be, it must be underscored that the approach adopted by different organisations are largely different, even if the circumstances and environment are quite similar. It must be understood that in any organisation, there are variety of groups (just as there could be a variety of environments). The groups and the environments are of different kinds, while some are loose, others are unstructured and temporary. Yet they all have a purpose because that is the reason they were set up in the first place. One of the basic unchanging rules of organisational behaviour is that the structure (as well as the environment) determines how members of the organisation relate. Four Stages of Organizational Development There are four stages which are essential to organisational development. They are acquaintanceship, friendship, conflict and union. Most times, the indices for determining if anyone is a good leader in any organisation is that such a person must be able to effectively guide members of their organisation through these four stages over and again, either partially or fully. (Cottringer 2008 ) Acquaintanceship: For an organisation that is just hiring workers, this is the level to which the new employees are intimated about what the organisation stands for, job description, expectations from employees, performance standards, among many others. Communication at this level is always aimed at enlightening new employees on what the position they occupy entails and general details the organisation. At this level, what new employee does is to get himself or herself familiarised with how the organisation is run so that they are able to properly fit in. In some organisations, at this stage, the new employee is not allowed to really do any work, what the person basically does is to learn how things are operated. Friendship: After a new member of staff has been integrated, there is the need that they develop meaningful and sincere relationships with other members of staff. At this stage, communication shifts from the peripheral to the core. The new member of staff tends to know more about other people in the organisation, particularly because they have mixed up with them. By so doing they are able to effectively achieve team building. In some instances, they move from claiming they know their co-workers to actually knowing them. Conflict: In spite of the fact that many would not want this level to ever come to be, it is just inevitable. At this stage, there would be rift between various constituents of the organisation. The rift might be between the management and the members of staff. It may as well be between different units amongst the members of staff. Some markers of conflict include: lack of productivity, difference in values and lack of growth. Nonetheless, it should be pointed out that conflicts, in this instance, are a test of how strong the second level is. This stage eventually leads to the last. The ability of the organisation to transit to this level is largely dependent on the ability of the leader of the organisation to mend the bridge. Union: This is the definitive sign that an organisation is progressing. At this stage, many, if not all, of the indices of measuring the growth and development of the organisation is in the affirmative. The workforce is pleased to work, productivity is at its peak and the organisational goals are achieved. There is no discordant tune. Everybody is working towards the progress of the organisation. For example, the management and the membership are on the same page as far as matters concerning remuneration are concerned. However, the fact that there is bliss at this level does not mean that it will remain so forever. It also possible that the efforts made to resolve the conflict experienced at the previous stage has been impaired. If that be the case, the leadership may have to partially or fully restart the process. However, when the leadership has to confront the same challenges over again, it would do lots of good if they do not pretend that they are overtly familiar with the issues that led to the conflicts the last time. If they act as though they are already familiar with the circumstance, it would mean that they do not really desire the best for the organisation. Impact of the Resources on the Organizational Members Even without mentioning the impacts of resources, especially the developed resource, on the organisation, they are apparent. One of the most obvious impacts is that it would inevitably lead to the growth of the development of the organisation itself. This is bearing in mind the fact that there is really no organisation without organs. In this case, organs refer to the different arms and units that there are in the organisation. It is important to know that the comfort of members of any unit translates to the productivity of the unit. If a unit is productive, it would automatically rub off on the entire organisation. Among contemporaries, the organisation would be highly rated because they effectively maximise the productivity of the resources. Since the kind of relationship that is supposed to be existence is mutual, not only the management would derive benefits, the staffers would also. Foremost, the workers would be satisfied doing what they do. They would also be glad because the value they are given is deserved. Process of Competing for Resources with the Other Industry Player Before any organisation can boldly say that it is competing with other players in their industry, the organisation must, first of all, know itself and know what exactly it stands for. At the acquaintanceship stage of organisational development, every member of the organisation must be put through what the organisation stands for. It is also important that during the orientation of new employees, they are made know that their industry is competitive and the role they have to play. The new employee must be aware of the exact level of competition, so that they would brace up. However, it is not in all cases that competition is keen. Even in such cases, they must be told that the status quo is likely not to remain so for too long a time. A competing firm, in order to beat its competitors, could introduce into the market a resource that has the ability of annulling the success achieved by competitor (Barney, 1986). For instance, if two organisations are involved in rental services, one of them can make their rental charges less than that of the other organisation. Similarly, as a way of outwitting competition in the industry, they might make sure that they render top-notch services like no other player in the industry does. This high quality services must be offered unrelentingly. The moment the standards in quality service falls, the loophole which other key players will take advantage of has been opened. All that has been said above can be linked to one’s knowledge about the industry in which one is a player. However, before organisation begins to take steps aimed out winning more customers, they may need to carry out a survey on what obtains in their industry and what exactly they can do to be the best in that industry. This is so that they do not take steps that would not result in their intended heart desires. Every organisation involved in any competition must also remember that their competitors would not sit down and watch them take total control of the market. The other players would not give in so easily. This is where the ability to sustain it comes in. It is not merely about being able to compete within the industry. An organisation can be said to have a sustainable competitive advantage when efforts made by competitors to render their competitive advantage redundant stopped (Rumelt 2002). According to Heyl (2010), other processes of competing for resources with other players in the industry include “on-time delivery – meeting delivery-time promises”, “customisation – satisfying the unique need of each customer by changing services and product design”, “variety – handling a wide assortment of service and products effectively” and “volume flexibility – accelerating or decelerating the rate of production of services or products quickly to handle large fluctuations in demand” Costs of Obtaining Resources Resources are inputs available to an organisation for the betterment of their lot (Amit 1993). If resources are left to exist in isolation, they would definitely have no contribution toward productivity. The costs of obtaining resources can reflect in business culture, administrative wherewithal, and property rights (Greenley; Hooley; Broderick & Rudd 2004). No organisation should ever expect getting the best from its resources without investing something in them or it (as the case might be). An organisation has to invest in its resources not because they expect immediate boom but because they recognise that they will reap the fruits in the nearest future. This is also still connected to the fact that the quality of resources would, in the short and long run, have impacts on the organisation. Another cost of obtaining resources is that the organization is continually put on the edge particularly as it touches on improvement of their product/service. The thinking faculty of every member of the organisation must always be alive to create new and creative ways of moving the brand forward. Another cost acquiring resources is that after investing so much on the resources, believing that it would be for the eventual good of the organisation, the trained personnel might end up with some other organisation. It would even be worse if the person goes to work for a rival. It might be implied that that person may use the knowledge acquired for work against one’s organisation. This would then throw up another challenge to the think-tank, particularly the media and marketing aim, of the organisation. Consequences of Obtaining Resource It is highly improbable that any business owner would intentionally engage in any activity that will be to the detriment of the organisation. The consequence (whether good or bad) of obtaining resources should be generally for the benefit of the organisation. One of them is that productivity will be optimised. Given the right environment, resources are bound to give results. However, above all kind of results, management must give premium to human resources. This is because humans will be the ones to strengthen the other resources. Once the human resources are taken care of, the other resources would have no issues to contend with. Closely related to the point stated above is that the brand an organisation represents would belong to class that other key players would not only to beat but would want to emulate. In the same light, the labor market would also be enthusiastic about becoming members of staff because they are well aware of the care members of staff are given. In the long run, these would have cumulative effects on the product or service rendered. It would also give way to expansion. When resources are obtained, the organisation has to take the resource with not only its good part, but also its bad part. That is another reason organisations have to select the best resources into their service. Yet, even after the best have been chosen, they have to be refined or trained so that the bad parts are either removed or deemphasised, and so that the good they have to offer will be maximised. Differences in Resource Attainment It is almost natural for one to expect differences in the attainment of resources by different organisations at varying times. The goals of the organisation would determine what they would achieve with their resources. Also, organisations get varying resources based on the environment in which they work and where they have gone to get resources. For instance, if an organisation that needs the service of young graduates goes to a marketplace to announce their intention, such an organisation will most definitely not get the kind of people they would have gotten (if they get any) had they gone to a university campus. Similarly, looking beyond the scope of human resources to financial resource, there are differences in resource attainment. It is undeniable that no organisation can survive without strong finances. Beside the capital, organisations get financial resources thorough the products and services they render. If an organisation is not aware of how it can optimise profit through what they offer, it would certainly occupy the lowest rung of the ladder in the league of contemporaries. In the same sense, if an origination does not also know the target audience whom what they have to offer is meant for and seriously address them, such an organisation cannot but remain be irrelevant in the scheme of things. The best role they can play is be second fiddle to others. So, for any organisation to progress and effectively achieve the attainment of resources, they must have useful information on the sector where they operate and how they best attain resources. Conclusion The attainment of success by any organisation does not happen overnight. The management and staff of the organisation must consciously work towards its attainment. They must be informed enough to know what to do and when to do it. They must know the importance of resources on the organisation. They must know the nature of the organisation in tandem with the nature of the environment. Also, they must not fail to be aware of the important role everybody has to play in the furtherance of what the organisation stands for. Finally, they must be informed. References Amit, R.; Schoemaker, P.J.H. (1993) “Strategic assets and organizational rent.” Strategic Management Journal; 14, (1). pp. 33–46. Barney, J.B. (1986) Organizational Culture: “Can It be a Source of Sustained Competitive. Advantage?” Academy of Management Review 11. Cottringer, William. (22 April 2008) “The Four Stages of Organisational Development.”. Web 31 March, 2011. www.selfgrowth.com Encyclopedia of Business. (2000). (2nd ed). Ed. Jane A. Malonis. 2 vols. Detroit, Michigan: Gale Group. Greenley, G.E., Hooley, G.J., Broderick, A.J. and Rudd, J.M. (2004), “Strategic Planning Differences Among Different Multiple Stakeholder Orientation Profiles.” Journal of Strategic Marketing. Heyl, Jeff. Competing with Opeartions. (2010). (PowerPoint Presentation). New Jersey: Pearson Education. Rumelt, D.P. “Towards a Strategic Theory of the Firm.” (2002). Alternative theories of the firm; (2) pp. 286–300, Elgar Reference Collection. International Library of Critical Writings in Economics, vol. 154. Cheltenham, U.K. & Northampton, Mass.: Elgar. Read More