SRV 332 wk4 dis2
Organizational Structure Read the case study, “The Organization of Outback Steakhouse” at the end of Chapter 16 and answer the following questions in your post:
a. From an organizational perspective, can Outback continue to grow with so little organizational structure?
Despite the lack or organizational structure, Outback seems to have become quite a success. There are little things that this company does that are targeted to pleasing guests. For instance, the kitchens are bigger and the dining areas smaller than other similar establishments (Walker, 2010). This may not seem to be the right way to go, however, by doing this, the restaurants are better able to handle larger crowds on the weekends; when the kitchens are less stressed, guests get their food on time and made correctly, which makes guests happy. This simple strategy keeps guests coming back, which can more than make up for the revenue missed out on by having a smaller dining area. Also, using a smaller dining area helps the servers, since they only take three tables at a time (Walker, 2010). This, coupled with the higher quality of food that Outback spends a pretty penny for will keep its doors open. Another big profit maker is having no middle management (Walker, 2010). Since the franchisees report directly to the president, there is a significant savings in labor. Outback may have a bit of a strange structure, but if it continues to offer outstanding service and high quality products, it will remain at the top and make a lot of money.
b. What kind of organizational structure would you suggest for Outback Steakhouse?
Because Outback is so successful with the lack of an organizational structure, if it was necessary for them to change, I would recommend the company become a boundaryless organization. In essence, this is really quite close to how Outback is currently operating, but I believe that adding a more formal structure to a company that is so used to having “no rules” would be detrimental
a. From an organizational perspective, can Outback continue to grow with so little organizational structure?
Despite the lack or organizational structure, Outback seems to have become quite a success. There are little things that this company does that are targeted to pleasing guests. For instance, the kitchens are bigger and the dining areas smaller than other similar establishments (Walker, 2010). This may not seem to be the right way to go, however, by doing this, the restaurants are better able to handle larger crowds on the weekends; when the kitchens are less stressed, guests get their food on time and made correctly, which makes guests happy. This simple strategy keeps guests coming back, which can more than make up for the revenue missed out on by having a smaller dining area. Also, using a smaller dining area helps the servers, since they only take three tables at a time (Walker, 2010). This, coupled with the higher quality of food that Outback spends a pretty penny for will keep its doors open. Another big profit maker is having no middle management (Walker, 2010). Since the franchisees report directly to the president, there is a significant savings in labor. Outback may have a bit of a strange structure, but if it continues to offer outstanding service and high quality products, it will remain at the top and make a lot of money.
b. What kind of organizational structure would you suggest for Outback Steakhouse?
Because Outback is so successful with the lack of an organizational structure, if it was necessary for them to change, I would recommend the company become a boundaryless organization. In essence, this is really quite close to how Outback is currently operating, but I believe that adding a more formal structure to a company that is so used to having “no rules” would be detrimental