Allentown (Epd) Case Analysis
Executive summary
This report is to discuss the problems that Electronic Products Division (EPD) had incurred, and to present our finding along with the recommendation to address the issues.
At the organizational level, the new product development process is slow which adversely affects the division’s growth. In addition, the business is becoming fiercely competitive and customers become more price-sensitive which has resulted in sales declines and price erosion. The major problem at EPD is that the current functional organization structure is suboptimal to respond effectively to the dynamics of the industry it operates within. Another observation is that the leadership skills and styles are mismatched with the needs of individual functional department.
We conducted our analysis at the individual, division, and corporate levels. Evidence shows that a more organic and flexible organization structure is needed for EPD, which would improve team work and support the quick decision making capacity required to keep pace with the ever-changing market. After examining the leadership style and skills, we find that including Rogers, managers at EPD are lacking strategic leadership skills which lead to “throw it over the wall” attitude within the division. Coupled with the current ineffective performance evaluation system, the dysfunctional conflicts among the group members are inevitable. Peacemaker leadership style and limited teamwork among the different functional groups prevent them from reaching their full potential. EPD is actively participating in an organizational culture transition process to align its subculture to the corporate dominate culture – conflict avoidance and low risk taking. Unfortunately, these cultures do not support the strategic shift from military markets to commercial markets, and are impeding the division’s ability to grow.
Based on our analysis, we recommend the following:
Restructure the organization from a functional to a matrix
This report is to discuss the problems that Electronic Products Division (EPD) had incurred, and to present our finding along with the recommendation to address the issues.
At the organizational level, the new product development process is slow which adversely affects the division’s growth. In addition, the business is becoming fiercely competitive and customers become more price-sensitive which has resulted in sales declines and price erosion. The major problem at EPD is that the current functional organization structure is suboptimal to respond effectively to the dynamics of the industry it operates within. Another observation is that the leadership skills and styles are mismatched with the needs of individual functional department.
We conducted our analysis at the individual, division, and corporate levels. Evidence shows that a more organic and flexible organization structure is needed for EPD, which would improve team work and support the quick decision making capacity required to keep pace with the ever-changing market. After examining the leadership style and skills, we find that including Rogers, managers at EPD are lacking strategic leadership skills which lead to “throw it over the wall” attitude within the division. Coupled with the current ineffective performance evaluation system, the dysfunctional conflicts among the group members are inevitable. Peacemaker leadership style and limited teamwork among the different functional groups prevent them from reaching their full potential. EPD is actively participating in an organizational culture transition process to align its subculture to the corporate dominate culture – conflict avoidance and low risk taking. Unfortunately, these cultures do not support the strategic shift from military markets to commercial markets, and are impeding the division’s ability to grow.
Based on our analysis, we recommend the following:
Restructure the organization from a functional to a matrix
References: Steven L. McShane and Sandra L. Steen, Canadian Organizational Behaviour, Seventh Edition (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 2009) Hirunyawipada, T., Beyerlein, M., & Blankson, C Kaplan, R., & Norton, D. (2005). The Office of Strategy Management. Strategic Finance, 87(4), 8-60 Atkinson, P Watkins, M. D. (2012). How Managers Become Leaders. Harvard Business Review, 90(6), 64-72 Kudonoo, E., Schroeder, K., & Boysen-Rotelli, S Mahto, R. V., & Davis, P. S. (2012). Information Flow and Strategic Consensus in Organizations. International Journal Of Business & Management, 7(17), 1- 12. doi:10.5539/ijbm.v7n17p1 Kuprenas, J Abernethy, M. A., Horne, M., Lillis, A. M., Malina, M. A., & Selto, F. H. (2005). A multi-method approach to building causal performance maps from expert knowledge. Management Accounting Research, 16(2), 135-155. doi:10.1016/j.mar.2005.03.003 Watkins, M. D. (2012). How Managers Become Leaders. Harvard Business Review, 90(6), 64-72 The article “How Managers become leaders” written by Michael D Kudonoo, E., Schroeder, K., & Boysen-Rotelli, S. (2012). An Olympic Transformation: Creating an Organizational Culture that Promotes Healthy Conflict. Organization Development Journal, 30(2), 51-66.