Organizational Functioning Essay

This essay analyzes the organizational changes implemented at Meatpack, a food processing company, focusing on the impact of a flatter management structure and leadership development initiatives. The CEO, Bison, implemented several changes, including executive coaching, the Human Synergistic Circumflex, and a hands-on approach from line managers, aiming to transform the company into a billion-dollar enterprise by 2020. The essay evaluates the effectiveness of these changes, discussing the transition from a hierarchical to a flatter structure, the shift from a hands-on to a hands-off approach for Bison, and the overall impact on employee performance and company culture. The analysis considers various leadership qualities, including communication, accountability, organization, and compassion, and examines the challenges encountered, such as unclear accountability and coordination issues between shifts. The essay concludes that while the changes have yielded positive results, further work is needed in areas such as organization, coordination, and accountability to fully realize the potential of the new structure and culture. The essay also suggests strategies for fostering a more positive and trusting work environment to further enhance performance and embrace future changes.

Organizational functioning 1
ORGANIZATIONAL FUNCTIONING
Student’s name
Course
Professor’s name
University
City
Date

Organizational functioning 2
Organizational Functioning
Every organization has an individual system by which it operates in. For some
organization there is the top-bottom system; others use the bottom-up system while other
agencies use the flat system. Each kind of operating system has its structure. The structure of the
organization is the medium through which information flows. Organizational structure is crucial
to the functioning of any society. Different structure depicts different working conditions and
different results. Employee participation and accountability is another factor that influences the
operation of an organization. A sound management system cultivates close communication with
staff, and this translates to achieving the goals and objectives (Owusu 1999).
Meat pack is a food processing company that has recently changed its structure. All the
changes made were aimed at improving the performance of the business. Several changes
affected the management. Employee interaction with the directorate has been encouraged, and
the ascending management systems have been replaced by a flatter management system to
promote management accountability. Challenges have however accompanied these changes in
the leadership and cultural context. This article will evaluate the changes made at meat pack and
determine to what extent the changes have been effective. The report will involve some
subtopics that will help in the evaluation.
The approach Bison should take on the business: hands-off or hands-on
Bison is the CEO of Meatpack company. The company has a target to become a 1 billion
dollar company by the year 2020. The CEO Bison has the task of driving the company towards
the realization of this dream. To this effect, Bison has taken several steps regarding employee
performance. He started working with an executive coaching and senior leadership development
company to help develop his senior strategy team. The development program was a wise move

Organizational functioning 3
from him that will benefit the company. Leadership training helps the leader become an efficient
communicator which plays a crucial role in employee motivation ( Pamlife 2012). Bison has
also introduced the Human Synergistic Circumflex. The formula has helped him know the
organization’s culture about the behavior of the staff and management.
Bison has also introduced a coaching consultation for senior strategy team members. In
addition to this, he has encouraged the line managers to take on a more hands-on approach.
Hands-on results into the managers taking on a leadership role and working from the front and
collaborating with the employees to achieve the objectives of the company (Ray 2017).Bison has
thus implemented a flatter structure and eliminate the hierarchical structure. The new structure
has led to open communication between the managers and the employees. The hands-on
approach by the managers and the flatter organizational structure has enabled the employees to
be more accountable and the managers to lead from the front.
Bison is now safe to take a hands-off approach to the business. The hands-off approach
involves the management managing the organization through their team leaders and not
interacting with the employees and never crossing the line of authority of the team leaders
(Miller 2017). He has equipped his team leaders with the necessary knowledge through the
development programs. The style of communication has changed from the previous shouting to a
more derogative form where the managers and supervisors try and talk to their seniors and know
what is not working as it should. The employees fear Bison because he is one of the founders of
the company and thus may fear to question his decisions. The fact that there is some anxiety
created by him should also encourage him to take a hands-off approach. The concern stems from
the fact that the company has lost some senior employees and it had something to do with Bison.

Organizational functioning 4
He also describes himself as not a ‘big peoples’ person’ and recognizes that CEOs should be
good at interacting with the workers.
The above reasons and the contributions that Bison has made justifies that he should take
a hands-off approach to the business and see the results of his investments pay off. The plan will
give the employees the sense of responsibility, accountability, and fulfillment because they will
be aware that they have been trusted to manage their tasks. This approach will also give Bison
space to work on other big projects comfortably because he will be sure the employees will
dedicate a lot of effort to their jobs (Miller 2017). He should give the senior leadership space and
time to implement what they learned and to develop their qualities to be better leaders. The
hands-off approach will induce accountability to the managers who will ensure their juniors
work hard to reach the targets.
The extent to which senior leadership change has been effective
Senior leadership plays a significant role in any company. A company with strong senior
leaders is bound to thrive in the world of business. Leaders should keep on developing to keep up
with the changing times and be in a position to lead their teams efficiently. Great managers
should possess qualities communication, should show maturity and learn to control their
emotions because they are in the frontline of representing the company’s values, flexible to adapt
to both real and challenging situations, accountable to always aim at achieving the set objectives
(Cincotta 2014). The CEO of MeatPack company has considerably invested in the senior
leadership of the organization. He has introduced a leadership development session where the top
leaders get more insight on how to develop their skills.
A company-wide leadership development program was initiated in the company plus a
coaching consultation for members of the senior strategy team. The results of such investment

Organizational functioning 5
should have an impact on the enterprise. The top leaders should now change from the cultural
expectations in a manner that will inspire their juniors to follow (Quinn 2016). They should
change from the dominant set of values, behaviors, and norms to a set of rules that will
encourage professionalism. Development programs should enhance self and secondary
consideration structure (Tharenou 1990). The senior leaders, after the development training,
should show more transparency and regularly update the employees of the company’s vision and
goals and give the direction to which the company is headed (Dukelowhow 2017). Effective
senior leadership can change the culture of the company to be more inclusive. When decision-
making includes all employees, they will make a greater contribution to team collaboration and
will be more motivated to accomplish the organization’s mission and objectives (Tsai 2011).
Organization is another quality that strong senior leaders should have. Organization is a
prerequisite of prioritizing. Senior leaders should present both self and institutional organization.
The goal of this quality is to find things in the shortest time possible (Dinkle 2011). The
institutional organization will aid the company in achieving its aims and objectives within the
shortest time. Senior leaders should put an organized system in place which integrates the
departments of the company to enhance efficient functioning of the institution. The employees
should be free to interact with their seniors but at the same time respect them and ensure they get
their work done. Compassion is a trait that strong senior leaders should have. Compassion
increases employee loyalty (Seppala 2015). Managers should be compassionate but still firm
enough to have their orders followed.
Meatpack company senior leaders should have the qualities described above. Some
members of the senior strategy team said that they gained a lot of insight from the training.
Management organization in the company is not firm as it should be. There has been uncertainty

Organizational functioning 6
about the composition of the senior strategy team where some members attend the meeting but
are unsure if they belong to the team. Other members do not go to the meetings but are
considered to be part of the team. Senior managers have adopted the culture of talking to their
employees and talking about the problem. Managers will now understand the problems the
workers face and come up with permanent solutions. The Rockefeller habits have were put into
practice. Rockefeller habits involve the three pillars of priorities, data, and rhythm (Allison
2012). Managers can talk to their team members without offending them. Jobs are completed on
time because the employees don’t feel insulted by their seniors, but rather they feel like part of
the company. A major setback for the company is the question of accountability. Meatpack
Company has senior strategy team and a senior leadership team. Bison is also the CEO of the
enterprise. When an occurrence that could be harmful to the company happens, the individual to
take responsibility is not clear. The blame will have no one to fall on since the leadership
positions are too many.
Coordination and integration of the day and night shifts have not been cohesive. Priorities
of the two shifts are not aligned. Increasing productivity is the priority of the day shift while the
afternoon shift focuses on being ready for the sensitive lorry pick-ups. Senior leaders have the
duty of bringing to balance the two shifts. Lack of coordination results in unnecessary pressure
on one of the shifts. Employees coming from other companies have acknowledged that Meatpack
is more organized than other businesses. An organization is key to the functioning of the
enterprise, and the senior leaders seem to be on the right track. The number of managers who go
through the schedule for the following day is too high. The managers should organize themselves
to reduce that number or to take shifts.

Organizational functioning 7
Overall the senior leadership of Meatpack is valid to a certain extent. Work on
organization, coordination, and accountability still needs to be done. Industrious relations are
good, and the managers take the leadership role. Employees feel appreciated and are more
involved in decision-making. Yields have increased in the past year due to the collaboration
among the seniors and their juniors. The impact of the change of the senior leadership is evident.
What senior leadership can do to influence more change positively in the future
Culture exists in every institution. Every organization has its unique set of culture norms
(FAIRLEIGH DICKSON UNIVERSITY n.d.). The managers at Meatpack should set a more
positive culture. Employee participation should increase. The rewarding of the employee is a
good initiative towards developing a positive culture. The employees could be allowed to choose
the rewards they would like. Choice of the present is expected to increase employee performance
(Caza 2015). Recognition of employees helps in motivating them to work hard. A culture that
involves recognition of workers will raise the performance of Meatpack Company. Employees
will work hard with the aim of being the best, and consequently, it will result in better
performance of the company.
Trust is a valuable input in an organization. The level of trust workers put on their seniors
determines how they will perform. The extent to which employees will trust their manager to be
fair and honest influence the level to which the worker will engage in productive behavior
( Brown2015). Meatpack’s senior leaders should get to know their juniors well. Biases should
not be involved in decision-making or punishment. Employees’ trust in the management will
create loyalty. Companies with loyal employees perform well because the laborers always
engage fully in their tasks. Change often face resistance in the workplace. Often, the effort to

Organizational functioning 8
bring change leads to diminishing job performance (Zenger 2015). Employee trust results to the
workers accepting change since they know that their managers have their best interests in mind.
Management enthusiasm also helps boost employee morale. Employees tend to reflect
their superiors. The workers get to understand the mindset of their manager and can work
towards achieving the company’s objectives since they have a clear picture of what the manager
expects of them. As staff becomes acquainted with the management’s vision, they will be more
willing to promote a culture of change and embrace the new ideas (is4profit 2011). A dull
management impacts a flat attitude in the workers. Employees end up performing poorly or
averagely and not to their potential. Meatpack’s managers are young and energetic. Engaging the
workers should be frequent with the intention of sharing their enthusiasm.
Meatpack Company senior leadership has to show energy and determination with the
aim of motivating the employees. Positive change is necessary for the company. Change requires
a different culture. People at the workplace hold on to the institution’s working culture,
therefore, the management needs to strategize on how to implement change positively without
rupturing employee relations.
The extent to which Meatpack’s flatter structure has helped create a cultural and
performance change
The culture of an organization grows over time. Cultural change is only accepted if
significant events occur (Heathfield 2016). A change in the management style is significant to
cause a cultural shift at Meatpack Company. Before the introduction of the flatter structure,
communication to workers was through shouting. Managers would shout at the employees
whenever there was a problem. Communication was top-bottom. Managers sat back and watched
the employees work. Meatpack Company had the culture of employees not interacting with

Organizational functioning 9
managers and the senior leadership not engaging the workers in decision-making or problem-
solving discussions.
Bison introduced a horizontal structure in the company. The structure has resulted into
interactions among the managers and their juniors. Managers now engage the employees in
discussions in finding solutions to common problems. Shouting no longer applies in
communication. Senior leaders have taken leadership positions. Managers now lead in the
everyday business activities. Employees now speak freely to the high-ranking officials of the
company. The flatter structure has influenced positive change that the workers are embracing.
The new structure has allowed promotion to supervisors. Employees with the talent and work
ethics now have the opportunity to nature their talents and rise to senior positions.
Performance of employees at Meatpack Company has changed due to the flatter
structure. Workers engage with their superiors and give their perspective on company issue.
Involvement of the employees has motivated them to work harder. Managers’ performance has
also changed to better. The managers are now at the front steering the company forward.
Engagement of employees and the senior leadership has resulted into working solutions for the
problems encountered. The overall performance of the company has increased. Integration of
company superiors and their workers takes credit for the improved performance. The increment
in yields and lack of loss injury time in the past year marks the company’s performance
improvement.
Change, especially in an organization is not readily embraced by everyone. Barriers to
change always require a smart strategy to maneuver around them. Often employees are resistant
to change because they feel that the modification is going to make their life worse. Failure of the
management to examine the current state also causes resistance (Mar 2013). Some cultural shift

Organizational functioning 10
occurs as the company grows while some changes are planned (Lee 2016). Change, however,
cannot take place overnight. Workers cannot change their culture immediately. Various aspects
of the business area and the complexity of the interrelated parts affect the workers
Fortunately for Meatpack Company, there has not been any barriers to the culture change.
Development programs that the senior leaders took inspired them to become better leaders.
Managers willingly interacted with the employees. Reception by the employees of the culture
change was positive. The CFO, CEO, COO all embraced the cultural shift. Culture change at the
company is active because the existing norms were not favorable to the workers. Shouting at the
employees was not the best way to communicate. Employees yearned for managerial
understanding on the problems they encounter at the company. The new culture allowed
discussions and consultations between workers and the managers. Inclusivity of the laborers in
decision-making was a change for the better. Senior executives, through the development
training, realized that engaging their juniors was a better style of leadership than shouting at
them. The training programs for the senior leadership of the company were a smart move to
initiate the change.

Organizational functioning 11
List References
Allison, S 2012. Mastering The Rockefeller Habits-How to scale a Hyper-growth Business.
[Online]
Available at: www.forbes.com
[Accessed 31 September 2017].
Caza, A. McCarter M.W. Gregory. B. Northcraft 2015. Performance Benefits of reward choice: a
procedural perspective. Human Resource Management Journal, 25(2), pp. 184-199.
Cincotta, C 2014. 7 Traits to Turn Good Managers into Great Managers. [Online]
Available at: www.entrepreneur.com/article/238129.
[Accessed 29 September 2017].
Dinkle, A M 2011. Time Management: Organization and Prioritizing. [Online]
Available at: www.alnmag.com/article/2011/04/time-management-organization-and-prioritizing
[Accessed 29 September 2017].
Dukelowhow, J 2017. how senior leadership can improve employee communication. [Online]
Available at: www.tembosocial.com/blog/how-senior-leadership-can-improve-employee-
communication
[Accessed 5September 2017].
FAIRLEIGH DICKSON UNIVERSITY, n.d. Enhance Your Business by Creating A POSITIVE
culture. [Online]
Available at: view2.fdu/academics/silberman-college/centers-and-institutes/rothan-institute-of-
entrepreneurship/outreach-programs/family-business-forum/family-ink-articles/7-enhance-your -
business/
[Accessed 29 September 2017].

Organizational functioning 12
Heathfield, S. M 2016. How To Change Your Company Culture. [Online]
Available at: www.the balance.com/how-to-chnge-your-culture-1918810
[Accessed 29 September 2017].
Zenger, J.& Folkman J 2015. 7 things Leaders Doto Help People Change. [Online]
Available at: hbr.org/2015/07/7-things-leaders-do-to-help-people-change
[Accessed 29 September 2017].
Miller, K 2017. Hands-on managersvs. Hands-off Mangers. [Online]
Available at: www.workzone.com/blog/hands-on-mangers-vs-hands-off-managers/
[Accessed 28 September 20117].
Owusu, Y A 1999. Importance of employee involvement inworld-classagile management
systems. InternationalJournalof agile, 1(2), pp. 107-115.
Tharenou,P. & lydon J.T 1990. The effect of a supervisory development program on leadership
style. Journal of business and psychology, 4(3), pp. 365-373.
Ray, l 2017. azcntral. [Online]
Available at: yourbusiness.azcentral.com/handson-leadership-7838.html
[Accessed 28 September 2017].
Pamlife, R, Pectu A.J.,& Draghic M. 2012. The Importance of Leadership in driving a strategic
lean six sigma management. [Online]
Available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s1877042812044540
[Accessed 28 September 2017].
Quinn, R. & Quinin R.E. 2016. Change management and leadership have to mesh. [Online]
Available at: hbr.org/2016/01/change-management-and-leadership-development-have-to-mesh
[Accessed 29 September 2017].

Organizational functioning 13
Brown, S, & Taylor K 2015. Employee trust and workplace performance. Journal of Economic
Behavior and Organization, Volume 116, pp. 361-378.
Seppala, E 2015. why compassion is a better managerial aspect than toughness. [Online]
Available at: hbr.org/2015/05/why-compassion-is-a-better-managerial-tactic-than-toughness
[Accessed 29 September 2017].
The is4profit team, 2011. How to bring positive change to your business. [Online]
Available at: is4profit.com/how- to bring-positive-change-in-your-business/
[Accessed 29 September 2017].
Tsai, Y 2011. Relationship between Organizational Culture,LeadershipBehavior, and Job
satisfaction. [Online]
Available at: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article/PMC3123547/
[Accessed 29 September 2017].