Critically examine the architecture, routines, and culture (ARC) framework of organisational design as proposed by Saloner, Shepard and Podolny in Strategic Management.

The relationship between an organization’s strategy and structure are extremely important because it “directly impacts a firm’s performance” (Rothaermel, 2013, p. 309). Also, as an organization grows, it should reevaluate the current strategy and structure to ensure that it remains the optimal choice for the organization (Rothaermel, 2013). The four types of organizational structures, listed in order of least to most complex according to Rothaermel (2013), are: (1) simple, (2)

The design of an organization is a “formal, guided process for integrating the people, information, and technology of an organization” (Glickman et al., 2007). A good organizational design increases the likelihood that an organization will succeed; that its’ values will be realized and its mission will be attained. An organization begins with a strategy or a purpose, is followed by its philosophy or values, then identifies the mission and finally evaluates the environment and its’ strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to the organization (Kelly & Crawford, 2008).

An organization must align its strategy and structure to allow itself to achieve performance improvements over time. The four different structures, simple, functional, multidivisional, and matrix, are all suited to allow companies with different strategies to succeed but the company must decide which of these is correct for itself. A small start-up company will overburden itself with excessive cost if it seeks to implement a functional structure because it clearly will not have the talent on hand to create whole departments of HR employees or accountants. On the other hand, a company that grows to become a large multi-national

Structure is the basis through which an organization seeks to create control the direction of an organization. This is completed through clear definitions of the allocation of work, differentiation, and the coordination of having those responsibilities working together towards the efforts of the organization, integration (Bolman & Deal, 1993, pp). Through these methods, the organization is able to devise a division of labor that collaborates to bring about the missions and goals of an organization. The structure that comes about from this can be varied in their rigidness and flexibility it allows, and to an extent this is a great contribution to its success.

The strategic design lens assumes organizations are deliberate, goal-achieving entities (Ancona, Kochan, Scully, Van Maanen, & Westney, 2005: M-2, 10). In this view, managers can achieve organizational goals by understanding the fundamentals of design and fitting design to strategy, as well as to the larger organizational environment (Ancona et al., 2005: M-2, 12). In this paper, I discuss the five major elements of strategy – environmental fit, strategic intent, strategic grouping, strategic linking, and alignment – and identify two specific elements as causes of the problems Dynacorp is experiencing with its redesign. These elements are strategic linking and alignment.

(10 pts.) Discuss how organizational architecture and corporate culture are related. Use an example of a real-life firm and discuss how its corporate culture blends with its organizational architecture.

The Progressive Era was a period of social and political reform beginning in the post Gilded Age 19th century and lasting through WWI. Industrial and urban growth of early 19th century America while representative of opportunity and future advancement simultaneously posed many difficulties for working class citizens. Prior concerns over the conditions of working class citizens were multiplied and magnified by overpopulated and impoverished urban communities. During this era many new Progressive agendas were introduced with the goal of reforming dated and unregulated policies, the most prominent of these, the birth control movement. The documents from chapter six of Constructing the American Past show that at its core, the birth control

The structure and design of organizations have drastically changed over the last twenty-five years. Organizations develop new goals at the beginning of the year or after the completion of previous goals, and heavily depend on planning to help achieve these goals. Planning is an integral part of organizational success, as upper management receives substantial information on various needs such as risk uncertainty, available resources, employee development, and unforeseen changes in technology (Daft, 2013). Most importantly, successful planning allows management to make effective decisions when unforeseen events arise within the organization. Not participating in planning is equivalent to taking a road trip across the country without a

Organisation Design Ensures that the organisation is appropriately designed to deliver organisation objectives in the short term and long term and that structural change is effectively managed.

This structural form allows for an organization to be divided into various divisions where people with diverse skills are kept together in the form of groups that focus on particular customers or services. Each division has its own finance, health services, human resources and marketing staff. Each division has its own knowledge, abilities, expertise and resources required to function properly and handle tasks on its own. Changes in the environment do not affect the HCO. With a decentralized authority, departments under the divisional form are able to monitor themselves and adjust accordingly, and make faster

Alternative structures such as grouping by output/product or grouping by market are not options as they would result in “duplication of activities and resources, the erosion of deep technical expertise, missed opportunities for synergies and learning” (Ancona, Kochan, Scully, Van Maanen, & Westney, 2009, p. M2-19). The matrix structure provided a potential positive aspect in that it would provide a needed cross-functional linking mechanism by mixing the functional structure with grouping by output/product, but the complexity, cost, dual systems, and dual roles resulting from the matrix structure historically resulted in either the functional or the output/product system becoming more powerful than the other.

Deriving from this structure, with regard to separate businesses, each division demanded standardization and had an overall "Frankfurt is Orlando" mindset. However, it was recognized that each division was very different than the next and had varying distribution and selling methodologies. Hence, each division would have its own instance of the system to manage the customer fulfillment process, and a decentralized approach to implementation details (such as each division choosing its own partners). This minimized the risk of having the relative requirements of one organization driving the practices of another.

It is okay to allow an infant to keep crying depending on the circumstance, and age. Infants cry everyday for one to four hours. Under four months old, is it not okay to allow them to keep crying. Infants under four months old will not cry just to manipulate their parents. The infant is trying to communicate that he needs something, or just to be held. If the infant is hungry and the parent ignores that, it can become child negligence if repeated many times. At four to six months old, infants begin sleep training. Infants before that are used to sleeping fifteen and a half hours a day, so they have to adjust to sleeping eight to twelve hours through the night. At three months, infants sleep less during

According to Miles et al. (1978, p. 547), an organization is both its purpose and the mechanism constructed to achieve the purpose. It means that the concept of organization is embracing both goals and all the elements that represent unique combination. Miles et al. (1978, p. 553) draws the conclusion that structure and the processes taking place inside the organization are closely aligned; it is hard to speak about one without mentioning the other. It is important to understand the conclusion drawn by Miles et al. (1978). It illustrates how the

One the impact of such functional structure is that the effective communication and synchronization among division might be limited due to organizational restriction for having several divisions that will work individually (www.business2000, 2016).