Author Note

[Type the company name]

[2016]

[2016]Organizational Changes

ContentsIntroduction:....................................................................................................................................2

Company Details:............................................................................................................................2

Business change Analysis:...............................................................................................................3

Related Roles in Changes:...............................................................................................................4

Changed Organizational model Analysis:.......................................................................................4

Conclusion:......................................................................................................................................6

References:......................................................................................................................................7

1

Introduction:The essay reflects the recent organizational changes in the new slogan ‘not snob but

cosmopolitan’ of the MNC ‘Runaway’. The major changes in the organizational structure focus

some fundamental weak points like flexibility, sourcing, store operations and marketing strategy.

According to business charter of ‘Runaway’ the company has gone through first order

incremental changes in late 80s. Therefore the recent organizational changes are of second order

which identifies the transforming and comprehensive changes in the firm’s internal and external

structure. The unique marketing strategy and proper outsourcing had listed the company in the

top list of retail Industry. But last year’s huge reduction in sales is the identifier of organizational

flaws. The consumer report blames outrageous prices, less promotional sales and Mall marketing

as well as direction strategy. Therefore the organization needs rejuvenating strategy for brand

value maintenance. This restoration in organizational changes associates with type two (2nd

order) changes.

Company Details:The firm ‘Runaway’ is a well-known name in the international retail industry. The US MNC has

its origin in early 80s and has gone through several industrial changes in the past. The firm’s

brand value is based on its unique and don’t’ care attitude in styling all kind of attires. The

organization perfectly reflects its popular slogan ‘revolution in color’ for a long time. Moreover

the company has expertise in all type of clothing and related accessories. The company has

unique and versatile range of color in all kind of clothing from men’s to women’s. ‘Runaway’

has started its journey in the 80s aiming a unique style and attitude to the working class.

However, with time the firm’s aim has changed. In the middle of 90s they started designing

clothes for children. According to the ‘Runaway’ archive the positive response from the

beginning has encouraged them to work in all kind and class of clothing. With changing style in

90s they started working on accessories like Totes, sunglasses, watches and umbrellas to

compliment suit or dresses. From the starting time their outsourcing and networking was

excellent. However, they are still facing problems in work group flexibility and market boundary

reduction.

2

Business change Analysis:The first order change in an organization searches its points of expansion in the fields like

management, directors, executives as well as related strategies. The type of organizational

changes increments and fills the void section in current strategy. ’Runaway’ no longer needs the

first order changes as the company is saturated with a well- defined management levels and

directorial structure. The networking strategy is robust considering a high level communication

among the headquarters in California and 1000 branches in USA. The recent outsourcing survey

shows an inclined graph to determine good strategy. But local survey report blames the rigidity

in internal teams and gap between local and global marketing strategy.

According to Palmer the rigidity can offer lack of disaggregation and empowerment. The void

space in different strategies also shows the lack of adjustment and tuning (Palmer, et al., 2013).

Therefore the blames according to the recent consumer reports needs a proactive planning to

bring organizational changes in the MNC. The proactive planning combines two strategies;

tuning all levels and restoring the current organizational structure. The modular structure of the

firm is good but the gap in communication level is the major problem area.

The consumer report also claims low level of directional strategy. The low level of labor like

Mall workers, short term staffs, sales persons and the middle level management like sales

manager and marketing executives cannot produce a precise report to the high level of

management. The high level management also reports irregularly to the directors (Zott & Amit,

2013). Therefore the management and directors are not fine-tuned. This point determines that

‘Runaway’ needs change in corporate culture/core processes.

As the gap is in the upper level of management and direction the firm needs a consulting strategy

to bridge gap. But according to the survey report the low and moderate level of management is in

chaos. So these two levels of management need a directive strategy to bring organizational

changes. The directive strategy determines strict goals and forced application of the goals.

Moreover Morgan’s metaphor defines ‘Runaway’ as an organization of culture and organisms

(Örtenblad, et al., 2016). So the firm must be careful about the business unit level changes it

trying to apply. The multi –level changes according to the type 2 of second order must follow the

precise focus of the restoration. The last annual report of ‘Runaway’ shows low performance

3

level in the last level of management. Therefore the firm needs ‘content’ business model for

changes.

Related Roles in Changes: ‘Runaway’ is facing problems from lower to higher order in working level of the organization.

Low level staffing: This level includes the staffs in all the branches, stores and malls. The staffs

majorly represent sales girls/boys, caretakers, marketing executives, store keeper etc. The

organization should break the large business unit in small group so that the performance

reporting is easier and regular.

Middle/High level of staffing: The above mentioned level reports directly to the middle level

teams. The level represents store/marketing managers, sales managers, security managers etc.

Middle level directly reports to high level which consists of marketing/finance/sales managers,

creative consultants, Audit/ appointing committee etc (Bair, 2015). These management levels

must be highly communicative to produce daily/annual precise reports.

BOD: The organization needs change in long term strategy /local marketing. Directors should

take consulting approach for an immediate change in sales report.

CFO/CEO: They must consider the innovation and consistency in planning.

Changed Organizational model Analysis:The weakness in the organizational structure of ‘Runaway’ is shown in the SWOT analysis of

the recent report. The SWOT is given below:

Strength:

Modular organizational structure

High level of networking

Unique creative strategy

High brand value

Functional approach in work culture

Weakness:

Weak matrix organization

Gap in low and high level of

management

Confusion in team building

Complexity of ‘organism’ metaphor

4

Adequate resources and expertise in

products

Low trust level in hierarchy

Lack of open communication

Opportunity:

Robustness of modular structure

Tend to innovation

Importance to value /ethics in work

culture

Expertise in risk management

Application of new strategies

Quick adaption

Threats:

Inflexibility with rapid changes

Lack of optimization

Confliction of management and

directors

Low rank co-operation

Confliction in production and creativity

The modular approach of ‘Runaway’ is difficult to break. But they should check the low level of

co-operation in different ranks. The last years’ annual report is the proof here. The creative

strategy is unreal in the recent marketing scenario. So the consumers are blaming high prices for

the products. Moreover the firm has a reputation for innovation and creativity (Anderson, 2016).

They started their journey differently. But with time the rank confliction has increased. The

creative directors are not reflecting their strategy properly in the management level.

There is a communication gap/lack of team spirits. Therefore delayering is not efficient now.

Furthermore the efficient networking among 1000 branches and the headquarters is not helping

in the low level of co-operation. The functional structure lacks its high level of performance and

low level management lacks restrictions of daily reporting etc.

But the firm has taken quick actions after observing last year’s final report. The consulting

approach in the BOD is the proof in this case. According to the recent risk management report

the directive approach in low and moderate level of management has shown positive changes to

bridge the gap (Carayannis , et al., 2015). The directors must change the creative and marketing

strategy to get the high level of optimization.

The performance report must include the recent local and global changes in the similar brands.

According to the SWOT ‘Runaway’ is not flexible with quick changes (Goetsch & Davis, 2014).

Therefore the company needs to increase the team spirit in all staffing levels. The low level of

5

open communication must be reduced using flexible management strategies. The directive

approach in the business unit level must continue until the efficient reporting comes back.

The last thing in which the ‘Runaway’ needs care is the trust level of hierarchy. To increase faith

the work culture must be more flexible as the same can change communication level positively.

Conclusion: The essay focuses on the organizational changes of a leading firm in retail industry. The

‘Runaway’ is famous for its innovative and creative marketing strategies. But according to the

last year’s annual charter the sales report is declined majorly. Considering this point the essay

discusses what kind of organizational changes is required for the brand. The essay discusses the

annual and recent performance report of the company and focuses the major gaps in the internal

structure of the company. According to the business model analysis the essay also identifies the

related roles and their effect in the organizational structure. The gap of communication and rank

wise confliction need multi-level organizational changes of second order. Furthermore the essay

has discussed the strength, weakness, opportunity and threats according to the standard SWOT

analysis. The weak points/threats of the firm can be removed using high creative/adaptive level

of strategies according to this analysis.

6

References:Anderson, P., 2016. Nicolai J. Foss and Tina Saebi, eds.: Business Model Innovation: The

Organizational Dimension.. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(2), pp. NP17-NP19.

Bair, J., 2015. Putting Organizational Transformation and Workplace Dynamics in Global

Context. Journal of World-Systems Research, 21(2), p. 532.

Carayannis , E., Sindakis, S. & Walter, C., 2015. Business model innovation as lever of

organizational sustainability. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(1), pp. 85-104.

Goetsch , D. & Davis, S., 2014. Quality management for organizational excellence. s.l.:pearson.

Örtenblad, A., Putnam, L. & Trehan, K., 2016. Beyond Morgan’s eight metaphors: Adding to

and developing organization theory. Human Relations, 69(4), pp. 875-889.

Palmer, I. et al., 2013. “Flexibility” as the rationale for organizational change: a discourse

perspective. ournal of Organizational Change Management, 26(1), pp. 83-97.

Zott, C. & Amit, R., 2013. The business model: A theoretically anchored robust construct for

strategic analysis. Strategic Organization, 11(4), pp. 403-411.

7