Trw Systems Group

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 168
  • Published : October 11, 2011
Open Document
Text Preview
Central Michgan|
TRW Systems Group (A and B Condensed)|
History of TRW INC. and TRW Systems Group|
Rhonda Moore|

TRW Inc. was formed in 1957 by the merger of Thompson Products, Inc, and the Ramo-Wooldridge Corporation. Thompson Products, a Cleveland-based manufacturer of auto and aircraft parts, had provided $500,000 to help Simon Ramo and Dean Wooldridge get started in 1953.|

Different styles of matrix management can exist within an organization. The overall objective is to satisfy divisional or departmental functional requirements by pooling workers with similar skills. The major organizational matrix types consist of either weak, strong, or balanced matrix structures. When these departments were logical partitions of the company, any given groups of employees are too reported to the head of the department. After this point, companies began to restructure its employees into a matrix organization, mainly with the intent of developing project-managing units.

While reading the article of TRW we will find how they have set up the organizational matrix. Some of the questions that will be answered is this structure working properly? I will talk about how we take different approaches to motivation employees and how the relationship is within the project/functional manager. How the employees are dealing with the different sources of power? If at the end of this paper you should feel free in discussing about the history of TRW.

1. What kinds of organizational design choices has TRW made about the five design challenges discussed in Chapter 4; vertical differentiation, horizontal differentiation, integration mechanism, standardization vs mutual adjustment and informal vs formal organization.

Now when we look at the organizational design of TRW one of the challenges it faces is Vertical differentiation. It is a hierarchy with reporting relationships to link roles and sub-units: it defines who reports to whom and areas of responsibility. In the article it points out that TRW was in an effort to get a new team started. They would take a team and recreate it off of the team that was already dealing with the recurring task at hand. But when you look closely at the vertical differentiation in comparison with TRW you can see that the major proposal had representative that were consistent but when the technical staff was concerned they varied from proposal to proposal. The great things about this are that you always have new people to work with, different ideals and people not worried about where they fit in on the organization chart. This would create a positive working environment because people, were looked at as being equal. The disadvantages would be that you always had to bring the new team up to speed; you are working on a dead line, and also that you hope that you don’t have conflict between managers.

Now when we look at horizontal differentiation it’s the way an organization groups tasks into jobs/roles and jobs/roles into sub-units. It establishes the division of labor and level of specialization; defines personal tasks & responsibilities, highly specialized jobs have narrow range of tasks, and less specialized jobs have broad range of tasks. (Shape of the organization) When we do the breakdown of horizontal differentiation when dealing with TRW there is an understanding what each person responsibilities are and what they are accounted for in terms of a group. We can say that there is a very low degree of standardization and have to heavily leverage collaboration, influencing without power and relationships to work together to get various tasks done. With working in both horizontal and vertical differentiation it ties together with integration, as a consisting flow of cross functional: collaboration, coordination and, control. TRW has a very informal and organic type of structure where flexibility and adaptation to change is deemed as important, there...
tracking img