The following paper is on organizational effectiveness in which to propose a model of organizational culture, structure, processes, and controls to foster discipline, bottom-line-focused organization to ensure innovation and discovery. The proposed module should outline and defended why it is to be effective balance between discipline and innovation. The Strategic Management of Technology and Innovation book by Burgelman, et al outlined a study.
This study took two decades to collect data from 250 executives, inclusive of over 30 CEO's, from an extensive sample of advanced corporations, which includes biotechnology, semiconductors, computers, pharmaceuticals, and aerospace industries. The study was guided by fundamental question, "What strategies, policies, practices, and decisions result in successful management of high-technology enterprises? " In summary, there were six themes of success that was found with the conclusion of the study.
The six themes of success were business focus, adaptability, organizational cohesion, entrepreneurial culture, sense of integrity, and hands-on top management. The study also found that no one firm demonstrates an excellence in all six themes. The study also found that less successful firms are not lacking in the six themes. However, the outstanding high-technological firms tended to score higher in the six themes, while the less successful ones scored lower. Business Focus A business focus should be considered over a long term for high technology firms. This allows a firm to concentrate on what it does well.
By concentrating on what it does well a firm can develop an internal knowledge of its markets, competitors, technology, employees and future needs of the customers. High technology firms are more successful when they maintain a business focus that stress the strength product /product line of the company. Even with company growth, the business focus should be maintained and if a secondary product/product line is created, it should be closely related to the first. Dominate companies like IBM, Boeing; Intel and Genentech confine them to the strength product of their firm.
For smaller successful, high technology companies the concentration of the business focus is even more specialized. Companies like Tandon concentrate on hard disk drives, while Tandem only on high reliability computers. This high concentration and dedication to the business focus allows a company to keep a thumb the growth and future direction of the strength product and customer needs. ITT and RCA two companies that were both leaders in technology made the mistake of diversifying their product line away form their original strength. The result was a lost of the market share they once had and for RCA 2.
9 billion dollars in debt. In many cases by narrowing the business, focus and returning to the company's strength product a firm can once again become the technological leader that it once was. In their article some name (Fonseca & Musich address the need for CA (Computer Associates) to narrow its business focus in an effort to return CA to a place of prominence in the software industry. (Fonseca, 2006) Adaptability Corporations, organizations, and employees are rapidly changing to adapt to a shorter period while playing an important role integrating the change into responsibilities.
Management, organizational, and corporation need to assist in the facilitating the employee's capacity to adapt to change and business focus, in today's fast-paced world. (Bareil, 2005) Driven by the business focus the need to adapt should work in conjunction with each other. Bareil article "Facilitating the Individual Capacity to Change" outlines a three-step approach to manage employee's reactions to high turbulence and intense episodes of adoption. The three stages create multiple windows of opportunities at different strategic times during implementation, and leaders can leverage their employee's capacity to change.
Based off the model of seven Phases of Preoccupations (PoP) during change, see figure 2 for the phases, to see additional details to PoP see Bareil article outlined within the references. The three stages are Ask, Diagnose, and Act. Fostering and adapting to change, and acting upon the change of business focus will strive to continual provide innovative thought and new discoveries into the workforce environment. One thing that has showed us the inability to adapt or change causes companies to be stagnant and lose market value and share.
Examples include Kodak, General Radio, and Planet Rock Tee's; the list can continue further, there are only primary examples to the inability to change and their loss of innovative and business opportunities. Organizational Cohesion Defined by Wiktionary Cohesion is the state of cohering or of sticking together or more specific to cohere is the said of the substance, mass, or body whose parts so stick together (Wiktionary. org, 2006). With that said, organizational cohesion is where the diverse organizations structure work together with the common business focus, sticking together.
Effective communication from the executive leadership and management needs to foster this cohesion between the organizations via communication driving a common business focus. Without cohesion, the organization will cause a division between the organizations or employees, which distract the attention from the business focus. Other than communication it is also best to foster cohesion between management and the employees by not utilizing pretentious job titles, separate dining rooms and/or restrooms for executives, larger and more luxurious offices, or privileged parking just to name a few.
(Burgelman, 2004) This cohesion provides innovative, communication between the organizations will foster innovative thought and new discovery. Entrepreneurial Culture To create a highly effective and bottom-line-focused organization, many established companies look to create an entrepreneurial culture within their existing framework. This presents a serious challenge for companies who have long established core customers and core practices. Neuborne (2003) compared creating an entrepreneurial culture to starting an exercise program (Neuborne, 2003).
"Everyone agrees it's a great idea but few are able to follow through and make it happen. A study last year by management and technology consulting firm Accenture noted that 70 percent of executives surveyed listed entrepreneurship as "very important" to their organizations' overall success. " So why do not more organizations do this effectively? It does not happen because too many companies are mired in the status quo. The CEO must foster the environment that allows for creative and innovative thoughts and actions that may "run the stop signs" and create new opportunities for the company.
If there is too much resistance to change then the company will fail miserably. One serious thought to consider, if you do not foster an entrepreneurial spirit, your competition is sure to do so. This can be fatal for any company that has blinders on. Baumol defines entrepreneurs as the creators or promoters of change (Baumol, 2004). The Institute for Enterprise Education defined the six constituents of an entrepreneurial culture: 1. The most effective way to change an existing organizational culture is by creating individual entrepreneurial units on the edge of organizational structures. 2.
In order to transform existing cultures, we must first begin with the mindset of its people. By identifying their individual meanings, beliefs, and values and combining these with their interests, strengths and talents, we can begin to align the person's individual purpose with the leader's compelling vision. 3. The entrepreneurial vision must be powerful enough to not only sustain this transformation, but must also inspire confidence and trust by allowing each of these units enough freedom and flexibility in order to develop, grow and compete in today's complex, chaotic and rapidly changing global environment.
4. As individual profit centers, each unit provides opportunities for more effective resource allocation and a stronger customer focus. 5. Employees think and act as entrepreneurs, leading to a greater degree of involvement and freedom to create individualized networks. 6. As the number of these entrepreneurial units' increases, more leaders are needed to drive these enterprises. A strong entrepreneurial culture creates leaders from within.