1) if you were on the Dynacorp task force, what would be your first choice for an alternative design? what would be your second choice? 2) Which of the problems of the current design would your chosen design address? what problems (if any) would it not address? Are there any new problems to which it might lead? 3) What linking and alignment mechanisms would you propose to make the “grouping” of your first choice design more effective?
Organizational Behavior - Culture Lens
Problems inside Dynacorp: When Dynacorp has changed its structure, there are problems of linkage and alignment in the light of Strategic Design Lens. According to the new structure, Research and Advanced Development Group and Business Units (BUs) are in the back and Customer Operations are in the front to communicate with markets and customers. Being in the back, the Research and Advanced Development Group and BUs have almost no relation with customers. As a result, the fragmentation of technical expertise would be deepened, the integration between market needs and technology development would be very poor and the technical support services are slow. Therefore, enhancing the integration and cooperation between the front and the back will become a big challenge. On the other hand, the new structure does not totally solve the alignment problem of improving performance measurement system because some branch managers and product managers of BUs are still spending most of their time worrying about the new performance measurement system that is based on performance against revenue and margin goals. In short, the new structure still has weaknesses in linkage between the back and the front and in alignment. Problems in the view of Political Lens: In light of Political Lens, the new structure is facing the problems of interest conflicts between BUs and the weak power of executives. As M. Pauley said, different product team leaders are trying to sell different types of products...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document