Management & Organizations in a Global Environment Report

This report explores the impact of structure, holacracy, contingency factors, and group dynamics on organizations in a global environment. It includes insights from scholars and experts, as well as analysis of real-world examples. The report covers topics such as the relationship between structure and strategy, the benefits and drawbacks of holacracy, and the role of group dynamics in decision-making.

Running Head: MANAGEMENT & ORGANIZATIONS IN GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT
Management & Organizations in a global environment
Report
Student Name
[Pick the date]

MANAGEMENT & ORGANIZATIONS IN GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT
1
Executive Summary
Due to innovation in technology the business corporates are in lot of confusion. As per study
conducted by many scholars, some are in the favor of the structure formation and some are not. It
covers all learning from system distribution of authority transformation of the organization and
their infliction of combination of stress along with decision making abilities.
Week 4
As per the study conducted by Yves Morieux, every organization which is working in this
business environment has some structure or follows some structure. The business market is full
of rivals and there must be something which will separate us from other companies because
somehow the products are of similar kind and in some case also serves the same features. But as
per study it has been found that structure of the organization is always dependent on the strategy
of the organization (Morieux, 2011). In short we can say that structure follows the strategy. It has
been seen that many of the companies do not serve a fixed plan for developing the structure until
they are not well aware of what strategy they are going to follow. But this kind of foundation is
not correct in every case because in our organization cases they does not have specifics strategy
and they mainly focus on the structure of the organization and so they concentrate on the power
distribution pattern and related levels which comes in their structure. Our organizations totally
believe that structure comes first as compared to strategy and sometimes their this believe
retaliate in the form of backfire when the eternal business environmental forces to change the
strategy.
Holacracy is basically a system which was developed by Brian Robertson for the business
management. It is totally focused on the new working pattern of administration in which the
power from a hierarchical structure is being taken and is distributed according to the authority
fixed. The study also focused on the pattern of practice articulated by individual for growth of
the organization and believes that it is not a fixed model or idea which cannot be alternated
(Robertson, 2008). The main difference between holacracy and bureaucracy is the devolution of
power in the first stage. While in team based structure there are unit of command, fixed rules
which all members have to follow as compared to Holacracy approach.
Contingency factors of organizations are related to size, year of experience, technology and
strategies. As Zappos is not a large size company, it is a midsize company so it will use
Holacracy to deal with the individual benefit of the employees of the organization as compared
to large companies which will focus on group in case of team-structure and not on individual.
While in it will focus on technology innovation which will provide them a cutting edge over their
competitors (Yadav et al, 2013).
It is not that an innovative organization is always agile but it is that agile organization is always
innovative and will be able to survive in both short as well as long run operations. An innovative

MANAGEMENT & ORGANIZATIONS IN GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT
2
culture forces the organization to have a clean direction of its objective which helps the
employees to set a proper structure to generate the proper support for the growth of the
organization (Ragin‐Skorecka, 2016).
Week 5
As per Milgram experiment a person can go to any extent if they thought that the action which
they are doing is morally right. The action of any person is totally dependent on the situations or
conditions at that time. Similarly for us, the action also depends related to the situation but we
must not totally agree with this experiment because this experiment is totally focused on the men
and also those too American men (Haslam, Reicher and Birney, 2014). Hence, as per us the
behavior of depends on the country environment. For us if the authority with is with us, we can
go only to the some level where we feel that we cannot pain the subject beyond that but if the
authority is with the high command we can go to any extent if it is legal as per the command of
the head authority.
My decision process is ok. In most of the cases my decision matches my objectives because
having the basic understanding of the topic. But now is the time where I need an improvement by
focusing on verities of options and try to figure out the risks related to the topic (Baddeley,
2010). The better we analyses, the better will be our decision making.
As per Solomon Asch human has to deliver many roles in his life which they learn from their
surroundings. The people often shift their role according to the situation present at that time
which sometimes becomes critical for him/her (Kundu and Cummins, 2013). The group has very
powerful impact on any individual personality role. We can also say that many time people face
conflict when one role challenges another. Hence joining a group itself indicates acceptation of
alteration.
When a person joins a group the person has to obey all the rules and regulations of the group. As
the group does not work for their personal interest, it works for the common interest of the
organization and hence it is important to align the group objective and organizations objective. If
the behavior of the personal is not in the favor of the group’s objective, in this case the
organization can put pressure on the person to align the situation (Michie et al, 2011). As groups
have ranking system so in this case if the person is not taking the ranking system seriously which
has been formed for the betterment of the group, the group can put pressure on the person to
become very concern about the ranking system of the group.

MANAGEMENT & ORGANIZATIONS IN GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT
3
Conclusion
As the world has changed its structure pattern and its culture related to the business transactions
have been getting shorter and innovative. The people are now not only working as individual but
they are also working in a group whose impact is vice versa but has interconnected it with the
process, technology to attain the common objective of the group that is organizations goal.

MANAGEMENT & ORGANIZATIONS IN GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT
4
References
Baddeley, M. (2010) Herding, social influence and economic decision-making: socio-
psychological and neuroscientific analyses. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of
London B: Biological Sciences, 365(1538), pp.281-290.
Haslam, S.A., Reicher, S.D. and Birney, M.E. (2014) Nothing by mere authority: Evidence that
in an experimental analogue of the Milgram paradigm participants are motivated not by orders
but by appeals to science. Journal of Social Issues, 70(3), pp.473-488.
Kundu, P. and Cummins, D.D. (2013) Morality and conformity: The Asch paradigm applied to
moral decisions. Social Influence, 8(4), pp.268-279.
Michie, S., Ashford, S., Sniehotta, F.F., Dombrowski, S.U., Bishop, A. and French, D.P. (2011)
A refined taxonomy of behaviour change techniques to help people change their physical activity
and healthy eating behaviours: the CALO-RE taxonomy. Psychology & health, 26(11), pp.1479-
1498.
Morieux, Y. (2011) Smart rules: Six ways to get people to solve problems without you. Harvard
Business Review, 89(9), pp.78-86.
Ragin‐Skorecka, K. (2016) Agile enterprise: a human factors perspective. Human Factors and
Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 26(1), pp.5-15.
Robertson, B.J. (2008) Organization at the leading edge: Introducing Holacracy™. Integral
Leadership Review, 7(3), pp.1-13.
Yadav, M.S., De Valck, K., Hennig-Thurau, T., Hoffman, D.L. and Spann, M. (2013) Social
commerce: a contingency framework for assessing marketing potential. Journal of Interactive
Marketing, 27(4), pp.311-323.

MANAGEMENT & ORGANIZATIONS IN GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT
5