ORGANIZATIONAL-BEHAVIOR

Abstract

In this paper, we will refer to the case study of Bremerton, Inc. (BI) to discuss some common pitfalls in organization structure caused by power mismanagement and inefficient organization hierarchy. Firstly, the issues in the case study project will be correlated with organizational behaviors that caused them. Then several alternative organizational behaviors and structures that could have prevented these issues will be discussed and support for the argument will be derived from classic Organizational Behavioral Theory. Our team has identified power abrogation, overly-redundant organizational hierarchical structure, incorrect delegation of authority and power, and failure to use empirical data to identify the issue as key organizational behavioral issues in this case study.

Analysis of Organizational Behavior Issues in IT Implementation Project at Bremerton, Inc.

BREMERTON INC. (BI) is a worldwide integrated financial services company utilizing over 1000 individuals. It works in a profoundly competetive showcase condition where piece of the overall industry relies on name acknowledgment and comfort and flexibility of administrations and items. Following the traditional methods of practice and maintain the structure seems to be a big problem withing the organization. Accountability and transparency is important in any and every line of work.

Introduction

Current Situation (OB Issues)

The major problem with the organization is the lack of visibility that causses distrust and this is the vital thing that needs to be dealt with in addition to the below hierarchical issues, recorded beneath, likewise were uncertain:

1. Defining the marketable strategy to bolster and legitimize Threshold: As we have talked about finally somewhere else, there was contention and likely legitimate difference about the reasons for Threshold from a business perspective.

2. Deciding the way of thinking and general bearing of the upgraded IT framework abilities: Key executives secretly discussed whether exchange handling ought to be done halfway, or locally. The choice had significant financial and execution results. Issues of unwavering quality, cost, and client inclinations made a vague image of how best to move toward framework design. Without strong information, it was workable for every official to bolster either elective.

3. Responsibility for business items and administrations: Since the business course for both Bremerton and Threshold were not yet characterized, the variety of new items and administrations was additionally indeterminable.

4. Conceivable disposal of current business items, administrations, and procedures: Many may get out of date. Who ought to choose which, assuming any, of these may be changed or suspended, and who might control the ones that remained involved some concern and specubtion.

5. Everyday administration and structure of Threshold: The COO, EVP-Operations, also, SVP-Development all had a stake in how, and who, might really execute Threshold. Choices had to be made on who might run Threshold gatherings, who might visit, how the outstanding burden would be dispersed, and who would control which parts of ihc advancement exertion. We found a serious level of political moving and indccisivcness inside the Bremerton official gathering on these issues.

Methodology

Every official had their possess need list for items and administrations that required growing, however who should control or choose these was dependent upon much hypothesis and secretive quibbling. An essential contradiction rose among showcasing and activities over control and close down of new items. The CEO can allocate the corresponding legitimate power and then let everyone execute it through the corresponding cocerive or reward power.

Problem Identification and Strategic Analysis

Problem Definition

The main issue in the case study can be understood according to social cognitive framework of the organization behavior studies. There should be a reciprocal interaction between social, behavioral and environmental aspects at an organization, but in this case, the middle management desired a goal, and behaved with the expectation to achieve that goal but neglected the effect of that behavior on environment of the organization. This created an environment which in turned distorted the cognition of more managers in the hierarchy causing an organizational behavioral issue.

Further, the issues of Bremerton, Inc. continue to exacerbate due to the resulting single-loop learning (defined by Argyris), as the decision makers within the company did not attempt to identify the underlying issue but continued to treat the symptomatic behavior by ignoring the cause that resulted in the power vacuum.

A complete SWOT analysis of the organizational culture should have been done, identifying the problematic goals, policies, frameworks and strategies that caused the issue and determining the correct course of action to rectify them.

SWOT Analysis

Organizational culture refers to the unspoken cognitive rules established within a company due to actions of all or majority of its employees and managers. SWOT Analysis can not only be used to analyze the measurable factors such as skill, funds, resources available for the organization but also used to analyze the srtrengths and weaknesses of the organizational culture which is not easily quantifiable.

In this case, SWOT analysis for the internal environment of the organization is as follows:

· Strengths: The organization has necessary resources- skilled workers and infrastructure needed to achieve the objective.

· Weaknesses: The organizational cultural is not aligned with the goals of the company. The policy by CEO does not divide the responsibilities to the relevant departments or clearly communicate the steps to achieve the goals set by him. This results in ambiguity of who is responsible for what and how should a objective be achieved. A clear feedback loop on the progress of the project and decisions by management is absent. This absence of defined monitoring policy resulted in redundant work, lisuse of financial and skilled resources.

Lesson Learnt – Relevant Concepts/Tools

Position power can be used to describe such a scene, because CEO's decision caused his power to be taken away. If legitimate powers are not correctly assigned, it might cause lack of management, inconsistent information, and lack of cooperation among different departmetns, which will lead to chaos in the company.

Conflict arises when contract is broken. Everyone has the need for power, but too much power will cause inequality of rights across departments. Each department needs to perform its own duties, and then report to CEO to ensure that CEO has finial decision-making authority on all major issues.

Recommendation

Proposed Solutions

The political issues happened in Threshold project mostly caused by leadership vacuum of the CEO which creates assumption and competition between the COO, EVPs, and SVPs. The project ended up with an absence of clearness who held power, no one had authority to hire, fire, promote, compensate or allocate resources.

The current organization chart of Bremerton clearly showing the chaos already, such as: Finance and HR department reports to COO, and VP-IT reports to SVP Development. We were discussed on how the structure should look like based on best practices from other organization. In our opinion, COO shouldn’t oversee IT, Human Resources, and Finance function. Those functions should be independent and report directly to CEO. In addition, SVP Development should be part of EVP Marketing team because the function is related with commercial aspect.

During kick-off meeting, CEO as the project sponsor should communicate clearly on the project charter which includes: goals/objectives, timeline, resources, team member responsibilities, and performance evaluation/metrics to determine whether they are succesfull or not. HR team should be involved in the team as well, so they can support on resources allocation, hire more people if needed, and be the neutral person who can help resolve conflicts between team member.

Implementation Plan

The steps to composing implementation plan usually are straightforward, however the real process isn’t simple or quick. There are several important components need to be included:

· Major Tasks: describe specific major tasks and objectives in implementation.

· Timeline/Schedule: roughly put the deadline for each tasks.

· Resources List: supporting tools, facilities, software/hardware, manpower, etc.

· Documentation: supporting documents need to be stored where everyone can access and review.

· Success Criteria: define the criteria which can indicate the project completion.

· Sign-off: indicate whether they need senior leadership approval before moving forward to execution.

This plan need to be shared with everyone, so they can keep up the transparency with different groups and the executives.

Monitoring Plan

There are two types of monitoring plan:

· During Implementation: after defining the major tasks, they can breakdown the tasks into smaller actionable tasks. Evaluate the milestone for each task and report the issue in regular basis, so everyone will aware how healthy the project is.

· Post-implementation: define the goals to measure the success of change. Compile report of issues/findings, so company can use this as future improvement references.