Business Studies: Case Study

I would advise Shania that an LLC would be the best form of business to accomplish her goals. Shania wants to open a Christian coffeehouse and already has a name in mind. Colorado LLC laws allow LLCs to be formed with one or more members, taxes them at a lower rate like partnerships and sole proprietorships, and provides the members with lower liability that protects them from the company’s debt (Scrofano, n.d.). This form of business will give Shania the ability to name her company what she wants and run it how she wants. The limited liability is also desirable.

the downside possibilities. They worry that employees with seniority will become defensive, that morale will drop, that events will spin out of control, that short-term business results will be jeopardized, that the stock will sink, and that they will be blamed for creating a crisis. A paralyzed senior management often comes from having too many managers and not enough leaders. Management’s mandate is to minimize risk and to keep the current system operating. Change, by definition, requires creating a new system, which in turn always demands leadership. Phase one in a renewal process typically goes nowhere until enough real leaders are promoted or hired into senior-level jobs. Transformations often begin, and begin well, when an organization has a new head who is a good leader and who sees the need for a major change. If the renewal target is the entire company, the CEO is key. If change is needed in a division, the division general manager is key. When these individuals are not

All staff members do possess the membership of National Union of Robot Constructors i.e. NURC. The organization chart of JEEVES PLC is shown in Figure 1.

The current business is a family run farm. The farm has a capacity of 20 stalls; 10 of those stall are filled with boarders while the other 10 hold Megan’s horses, her father’s horses, or horses that belong to the barn. The barn is breaking even while using the money from boarders to cover the family owned horses.

Already title is caching our attention : “First, Let 's Fire All the Managers”. Intriguing start changes in the list of charges against the modern management system. The author is showing his critic for complicated system, where we have hundreds of managers in various level. He lists three main problems. As first is the costs of management which is very expensive. At second he shows that typical management hierarchy increases the risk of “calamitous” decisions with bad judgment. And as third multitiered management structure systematically disempowers lower-level employees. For all this three he is giving examples to make sure that readers will understand the problem. After that there is a lot of information about how this system is

The reason behind this point is that the managers have this position in the organization that they can motivate and inspire the general staff and they have many different mechanisms and they can also make their staff to accept the change and also to adapt is without any hassle and problems (Carr, 1996; Gouillart, 1995; Gareth, 2006).

Managers will not be super leaders in the beginning, but their overall performance will show in the long term.

The stayed employees were competent enough to accomplish their jobs; 2) The new system supported a better organizational structures. Downsizing the 17 layers of managers to 7 would not only significantly reduce the time of making decisions but also make mistake-correcting process less resistant; 3) Under the new system, employees were motivated to perform well without additional reinforcements provided by the organization. All the employees understood that they would lose their jobs if they don’t perform well. 4) The new system emphasized on people, which is a good choice since their responses will determine whether the system will succeed or not. In addition, concentration on personnel controls has relatively few harmful side effects and relatively low out-of-pocket costs.

Tall structures, like the one above, have many levels of hierarchy. An advantage of this structure is that the span of control is very narrow and long therefore there are many opportunities for promotion. However, a disadvantage of this organisational structure is that lines of communication are long, due to many levels in the chain of command and this may mean that messages get lost or tampered with on their way to the bottom and the firm is unresponsive to change. Another advantage of this structure is that each manager in each level of command has fewer staff or employees to watch over and control. This means that their job is easier as they only have to closely manage a few people and they can keep them on the task at hand. As a result of close management it means that the

Change in management can be a crucial factor to the corporation overall operating functions. When

Picking the right management structure guarantees an organisation proceeds with development, happy employees and gainful returns for the shareholders. Picking an unsuitable structure makes pressures in the middle of employees and supervisors, permits wasteful work practices to thrive and decreases organisation profits. In the most pessimistic scenario an inaccurate management structure can prompt organisation closure.

Non effective management has several impacts on the organization that could cause harm not only to the company, but to employees as well. The first reason I will cover for managers being non effective is that managers simply cannot deliver results. Results that need to be delivered are usually set forth by the business needs. Whether they are projects to

Hiring new untrained employees could be costly in the beginning, but they can also bring with them the motivation needed to take production to the next level. New employees look to find a place for themselves when introduced into a new work environment. New employees can also bring with them new and innovative ideas in how to perform work more efficiently. The purpose of eliminating layers of management hierarchy is because hierarchical management structures tend to adapt slowly to changing needs, and these structures tend to channel communication vertically, causing interdepartmental communication to suffer.3 This move allowed for better communication throughout, and eliminated some resistance to the

However, within this stage, a crisis called “need for revitalization” will appear. After the organization reaches maturity, it may enter periods of temporary decline. During this stage, a need for renewal may occur every ten to twenty years. For example, the organization may shift out of alignment with the environment or perhaps becomes slow moving and overbureaucratized and must go through a stage of streamlining and innovation. Within this stage, top managers are often replaced during this period (Daft, 2007).

Over the years, most organizations have been urged to consider changing their organizational structure so as to promote employee flexibility as well as empower them with the discretion of making decisions. As a result, organizations across the world have resorted to de-layering or flattening their organizational structures with the hopes of achieving employee flexibility and improving the operations of the organization as well. De-layering or flattening, in this case, refers to the elimination of certain layers in an organization’s hierarchy and the broadening of the span of control of managers. Research has indicated that pushing down the process of decision making to the lower organization levels not only makes employees responsible for their actions but also promotes accountability (Hirsch & De Soucey, 2006). It should, however,be noted that these changes in organizational structure have also left organizations in the midst of chaos. In fact, as organizations delayer their structure and downsize their labor force, employees, as well as managers, find themselves in working environments that have redefined their work as well as the corporate culture.