Organisation Management within High-Tech Companies - Essay Example

Organisation Management Compare and contrast the organisational culture and structure of two of the empirically-based case studies and critically discuss its impact on managers and groups. Introduction The organisational culture and structure of a company can go a long way towards making the company a success or a failure. Excellent in these two elements give the company agility, quick reactions to situations, a good marketing image and an overall boost which can not be gained otherwise (Entrialgo, 2002). In this regard, high tech industries and software companies particularly can have cultures which often go against the norms of normal corporate culture. While it may seem that traditional corporate culture would be more suitable for a highly scientific and method based process such as computer programming, these companies have often been successful simply due to their culture and organisation which is exemplified by companies such as Apple and GE. While these are large companies to say the least, they often behave like SMEs since they are able to quickly react to market changes (Geeraertes, 1984). The case studies A and B show that companies can have the ability to apply new ideas and quickly pick up on the latest tools for development if their organisation and company culture is up to the mark. A Comparison of Cases Company A was in the banking sector as a large multi-national bank. Since banks have a culture which comes from hundreds of years of service in the banking field, the XP development had to be influenced by that culture. The strictly hierarchical organisation of the bank reflected in how the XP team manager showed that a team of 12 individual was split into two teams each with one person acting as the sub-team manager. Fundamentally a team of 12 workers had three management hats which points towards over management in the XP development group. The formalisation of procedures, policies and guidelines for operations within the working of the bank clearly points towards a Theory X style of work in which Casual Fridays is considered to be a privilege for the workers (Lee, 1982). The dress code, which is reminiscent of a banker’s uniform, had to be taken seriously while the ideals held at the bank showed that it considered itself to be a typical corporation in which deviance would not be taken lightly. This certainly led to some problems for the eXtreme Programming team which had to deal with difficulties in communication and coordination. The company policies which discouraged information radiation were certainly a hindrance for the teams since they actually had to make a lot of changes to their work environment for it to be conducive to their task. An organisational culture which saw XP as an exotic tool could not fully understand why the environment had to be a certain way and why communication between individuals was necessary at all times (Levy and Powell, 1998). In essence, the system was supportive of XP in many ways since it wanted to benefit from the advantages of having expert programmers who could quickly and efficiently meet the deadlines given to them. At the same time the company was hesitant in giving them complete leeway since the organisational structure and the situation of the bank demanded that the programmers be able to show progress reports and discuss their projects only when time and the availability of free chairs allowed them to do so. On the other hand, company B is presented as a medium size company which produces security software. It is focused on producing software and the entire company moved to the process of creating products through XP which means that all individuals were aware of the development process which goes into eXtreme Programming. In fact, the company had completely abandoned the conventional plan based approach to producing software based on the recommendations made by the CTO. This means that the company would be appreciative of the environmental factors, the need for close communication and coordination and the collective effort which goes into eXtreme Programming. The organisational structure of the company certainly reflected that since the medium size and the collaborative culture meant that the company could be more agile than lumbering software giants (Young and Francis, 1993). The only person from senior management who worked with the XP team was the CTO and with a flat structure other managers had little to do with the operations of the team. Even the discussions with the CTO were not formalized in any real terms since the individuals could have ad hoc communication with the management to share their vision. The CTO himself focused on getting the strategy accepted by the developers so there could be no miscommunication or misunderstanding as to how the software was going to be developed and how it would perform the required functions. Clearly, this is closer to theory Y of human resource management in which individuals are given more of a leeway to perform work as they see best (Lee, 1982). In terms of team managers, one person managed the entire staff of twenty with a title of coach rather than manager. This meant that the team could work on a more personalised level with each other and communication would not need to be formal affair. There were informal organisations made by the team themselves but the coach managed all the sub teams which meant that the management structure was kept flatter than the one maintained by company A. Another difference between the approaches at the two companies is the environment in which the programmers operated. While a stark difference can be seen with the pictures that have been presented in the case, it must also be noted that cultural differences also exist between the organisations. For example, there was no real dress code at company B and jeans and T-shirts seem to be common enough as attire for the whole company including the top management who judiciously wore informal clothing when it suited their purpose. Interestingly, the culture of the company takes a lot from other IT and computer related firms who find that having an open space with lots of room for meetings and conferences is a much better idea than having closed spaces and different rooms for meetings between employees. It must be noted that although company B did not have to overtly emphasise loyalty to the company or obtain loyalty from the employees, they did manage to get loyal customers and have employees who saw the company as a good place to work at. This means that the company was able to provide an environment which was more conducive to the purposes of XP while remaining commercially aggressive with regard to the output they got from their employees. The seemingly uncontrolled and ungoverned environment was actually governed with the idea of profits and the commitment to the client which was shown by the employees as well as the management of the organisation. In fact, the cast study reports that the company might have gone too far in their desire to be a company which lived and breathed eXtreme Programming since despite the large open spaces and the areas reserved for meetings between programmers, most of the work was done near work stations and in tight coordination over a computer. The environment did help since there were always several free chairs for the programmers to work with but the greater effect for the positive tone struck by Company B was the culture and the structural organisation of the company which provided the real catalyst for XP. In fact, company B had programmers working with such intensity that they often did not fully utilise the kitchen facilities and other onsite amenities which were made available to them. Employees continued to work together at workstations to the extent that the need for taking breaks from work was noticed by the ‘coach’ who thought that some breaks in the middle of work would be beneficial for the company in the long run. Conclusion With regard to the culture, Theory X and Theory Y which deal with power structures within an organisation could lead to a better understanding of the methods of management used at the two companies (Lee, 1982). While the relaxed nature regarding the corporate structure and the work environment point towards a Theory Y management style in Case B, the image given to the bank suggests a Theory X management style. The same is reflected in how the companies can be compared in terms of structural organisation which is simply a comparison of flat as opposed to being hierarchical. Works Cited Entrialgo, M. 2002, ‘The impact of the alignment of strategy and managerial characteristics.’, Journal of Small Business Management, 49(3), pp. 260-270. Geeraertes, J. 1984, ‘The effect of Ownership on the Organization Structure in Small Firms’. Administrative Science Quarterly, 84(1), pp 232-237 Lee, J. 1982, The Gold and the Garbage in Management Theories and Prescriptions, Ohio University Press. Levy, M and Powell, P. 1998, ‘SME flexibility and the role of information systems’, Small Business Economics, 11(2), pp. 183-197. Young, C. and Francis, A. 1993, ‘Innovation, high-technology use, and flexibility in small manufacturing firms’, Growth & Change, 24(1), pp. 67-83. Read More