You are on page 1of 6


Introduction Comparison of Approaches to Teamwork and Team-Working Comparison of Organizational Structure and Design Comparison of Cultures Conclusion Bibliography

Introduction The business organizations in today’s modern world are considered as significant and important sub-groups which are present in our society and they function with their own organizational structure differently, concerning business, healthcare, political, economic and social conditions. (Deal, 1990) They have some specific missions, problems, duties, market, and the services provided in a

it employs 59 people. supports of deals and investment expenses. the company possesses quite different approaches towards production. culture and design of the organizations. Biogenia exhibits Swedish model and the Toyotaism. As such the training programs are provided to the teams on development and to get new skills and technique which include discussion of the basic values for the company and as each person can assist these values. Comparison of Approaches to Teamwork and Team-Working For comparing of different style of approaches in team working. Lola ltd suffers from high entrance. Besides they are entrusted with responsibly for all processes of creating design of product before it is delivered to client. employs 15000 persons in 80 countries and both as democratic and works as the profitable organization. (Cox. The first example includes Biogenia which is world’s leading organization. Having Toyotaism. (Deal. and exhibits inefficient and inefficient teamwork. This company is managed by Pete Baker. do not identify itself with problems and duties towards the organization as a whole. in connection with community leadership formation and finance administration. In Biogenia teams have the powers for direct coordination with clients and suppliers and to find decisions of the problems. are measured consider itself in a competition among themselves and even try to threaten the activity of each other. “that total of parts is more than whole" is applied to any organization. it becomes necessary for effective teamwork work to increase and improve all organization. producing crops protection products. and other teams which are interdependent and which accomplish the tasks exist in wider social which influence other groups and individuals. It manages efficient control all over the world and approves that success and key for the expanded organizational activity is efficient control of people and granting it in an atmosphere of confidence. As such it becomes important for an assessment of collective work and organizational structure of the company or the business organization. results of two research cases is used as the link. that the group represents a set of persons which systems. The organizations are constituted with various teams allocated with specific functions to increase productivity in their organization. Thus. the company reduces barriers and restrictions among departments and calls up effective and effective communication. 2000) This article considers estimates and compares organizational structures and characteristics of two given companies. and distinction in their problems and duties makes their unique subgroups. such as the organizations which can be certain in it. overlapping and deadlocks for each member of the personnel or the public. (Golembiewski. it is possible to consider only as group. as the members in this case is considered. Thus. Speaking. which is engaged in dyeing and printing of textiles. 1979) Unlike teamwork were exposed on Biogenia. teams . and has hammered badly in comparison with other competitors.society. (Burrell. 1990) Lola ltd realizes bureaucracy. Lola Ltd is the second inline case study. having some hierarchies. It is due to partly because of a bad position at negotiations and absence of the collateral working system. aspiring to pass the way around. In connection with theories and concepts concerning teamwork. These two organizations exhibit opposite characteristics of a teamwork. It has been informed. controversial roles. concerning their production. thus teams create an atmosphere of uncertainty and significant mistrust. Communication lacks in Lola Ltd team. because if part of team or whole team is collapsed then whole organization suffers. In it not so well to what its parameters testify. 2000) Biogenia can be defined as a team with efficient teamwork while Lola Ltd. concerning theories and concepts of teams and their organizational management. Departments attitudes of working together is not cordial. This article will compare and estimate organizational structure.

The Political scenario of Lola Ltd is unstable. The company possesses a policy and scheme of profit sharing in which the fraction of profit for every year is shared among the workforce. It is connected with the unions and a labor in an establishment of wages every year. and represent trade unions. (Cox. with high educational level and qualifications. controversial roles. For comparison. The second name work of partners which operate business facilities in the company. The very first title work of the adviser that is equivalent heads of the top echelon. strengthening of a competition between employees. and. the senior heads which have responsibility for operative functions. (Deal. Pete Baker understand and adopt balancing of teams in team working which is established by Biogenia. which are used for carrying out the development of company’s organizational structure. Lola Ltd exhibits opposite features of Biogenia. and the decision on working models system in their teams decided by employees on Flexibility time operations. However. Third are coordinators. These features now exhibit employees of Lola Ltd which deletes their right to be a part of team. Management describes Biogenia as circular organization where workers have the rights to voice and exercise vote on all critical decisions taken by the company such as the factors of resettlements of plant operations and suggestions for improvements in operation. Lola Ltd lacks of strategic planning of the business-strategy for design of its organizational structure to play a crucial role. from highly coordinated workforce attitudes. From effective team work. associates. 1990) These combinations have allowed Biogenia to establish. and from management for the union participation in decision-making. The human resource management to improve better understanding and coordination among employees should be adopted by Pete Baker to be implemented in Lola ltd. from work on enrichment. a behemoth of several hierarchies. Constantly struggle and absence of unity in Lola chambers weaken its potential for decision-powers and the democratic control of . and occurrence of conflicts testifies. 2000) Unlike Lola Ltd. Dramatic effect with the different approaches towards teams is due to their managers who realize absolutely other approach towards team management and the worker. which is acting as a true leader and at the same time. as similar to other SME’s. It shows absence of efficient control that absence of flexibility and dynamism. the selected representatives. its departmental and the management structure has been defined as a bureaucratic nightmare. Economical manufacture or economical manufacture is defined as the system approach to revealing and elimination of waste by constant perfection. it often overlooks strategy requirements of organization structure. passing a product on attractions of clients in aspiration to perfection. which are other employees. such as alienation. accepting cultural responsibility of democracy and civil. Blind activity of the enterprises does organizational structure for development of strategy of progress. and is responsible for coordination of the general policies and strategies of the company. absence of progress of new technologies. the organization can assist success. encouragements and expansions of teamwork which is implemented by Biogenia to achieve its competitive advantage. with desire to keep social unity. Being family business. Besides the trade union offers training for employees how to interpret and understand financial both strategic data and employees are invited to participate. as objective. aspiring to pass the way around. finally. enough permanently moving on pattern of conflicts and coalitions and also desertion between work. The prime goal of the Biogenia is to have a transparency where there is information for employees when they require them. with a high level democracy for the worker and an autonomy. Comparison of Organizational Structure and Design Biogenia Company realizes a democracy which allows employees to choose effectively managers.have a high commitment for the company and economical manufacture. Besides Biogenia also accepts the Swedish model. independent and other various fractions. Libdem. overlapping and deadlocks for each members of the personnel or the public. The bureaucracy has been reduced due to reduction in twelve levels of management due to three. and it is supposed only four title names on the company. Conservative.

It can be made anonymously. audit of books and all issues concerning functioning management. According to motivation. From effective strategy of management. Members work in unacceptable. (Cameron. partitions and plants of demarcation of workplaces. 2000) Besides employees can freely accept and change the working space as they like. departments of study groups. Its structure of organization and design is not at all effective in such a manner that has led to the conflict and the further a dilemma in the organization. In effect. Before someone is promoted or hired for services. not giving it ample possibilities for participation in teamwork. each worker takes part in activity of its company. (Collins. inspections and grading are published on bulletin boards. it is compulsory. that effort depend on compensation for performance well. some factors influencing an overall performance are. with objective to receive new skills and the information on activities and manufacture. In difference. departments and work force work together for adjustment of contacts and achievement of a transparency. thus. This style of management breaks effective communication between its members. and attitudes of the accountability which can serve or supports or suppress capacity in the organization to achievement of its mission and objective. The company follows return assessment which is process at which employees can estimate work of the managers in each six months. inhuman conditions.activity. Each team in the company being creative and competent having understanding of coordination. Because of bureaucracy of the family assists standardization and objectivity. Besides everyone has the right for training. brings the contribution to success of work in Biogenia. 1998) With Biogenia. that each person on a regular basis visit their cultures of educational employment in which the company discusses their basic values and as everyone can assist these values. The design and structure does not approach for the workforce hence it is appreciable to make variations to administrations. Lola Ltd. and to not do anything under bureaucracy for intimidation and victimization of members. In this connection. Offices of the organization are not walls. The organizational structure and designing of the organization includes design and architecture the positions of work. devoid of flexibility and conditions of alienation. Influence of efforts on various performances would be informed as individual capacities and a role of perception. Besides the top management is . Reports shows. its staff. as well as. and dehumanizes incompetence. all workforces who will be working with them should estimate them. employees can expand at the most professional skills and bring the contribution to achieve success in the organization. 1999) Comparison of Cultures In connection with democracy. Besides effective performance changes each person and satisfaction in work will lead to satisfactory work and satisfactions conducts back to efforts. Besides it only shows that teams and workforce in Biogenia are well motivated. suppresses the creativity and initiative. (Golembiewski. it suppresses the employee contribution to the decision. Unlike culture Lola Ltd includes a rigid resistance in competition among employees and also threatens activity of individual member. limits personal growth. it was not possible to use and include effective and effective teamwork in their companies. employees Biogenia have the right to go on strikes. that appreciate also expectation of those awards of the subsequent activity. groups and employees in Biogenia well are carried out and well motivated from their workplaces and awards in the organization.

with bureaucratic way of management. Without the team. 1999) Now the problem consists in managing the company as it is not enough competent. the important differences between cultures of two organizations lay on its different styles of management. 1999. from bureaucracy to democratic company. & Berg. has not executed standards of the clients and its employees. & Morgan. effective and capable than other as it is able to realize and use democracies and transparency in the company. 1999) Conclusion Teams are prominent aspects of the company as being responsible for performance of various operations of the company. every employee is considered as equal. & Quinn. with equality in rights and to avail all privileges. R..S. K. . Besides fairy tales of the message are not passed also credits. Bibliography Alvesson. The company could not use effectively and productively communications as the tool for achievement of success which initiates each worker to participate in affairs of the company. In the given work. From a transparency to democracy. Corporate Culture and Organizational Symbolism. It is clear.O. Cameron. In difference. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.considered as distant and aloof as all of them are not having hearings about a possibility of firing because of financial problems. It creates an atmosphere of uncertainty and mistrust and consequently employees worry about the workplaces. P. team work. Thus the company was successful in assisting effectively communication which it used for maintenance of cooperation and teamwork among employees. two examples of the different company have been estimated from the point of view of teams. (Cameron. culture and design. London: Heinemann. strike root for work of others. (Dewey. many problems and duties of the company would not be designated effectively among it members. Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis. to show attention to demands of the subordinates which is its incompetency in participation on demand of the employees. and in Lola Ltd. 1979. Diagnosing and Changing Organisational Culture: Based on the Competing Values Framework. 1999) However. organizational structure. In Biogenia transparency allows each worker to estimate their value and value. 1992. Burrell.. M. Thus it is very important first to assess how companies are managed before its realization. that many such organizations and more even separate groups possess separate cultures and subcultures. G. This functioning of management value the effective communications and equality between its members has allowed the company on assistance. One company is found to be more competent. If a management is transformed and changed. sights and recommendations and views of employees has no value. (Cameron.E. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley. culture of employees and teams will also be changed. If Lola Ltd succeeds in changing its personnel management. G.. it can also achieve effective and effective teamwork and interoperability within the limits of the company. Lola Ltd.

Roben T. Golembiewski. London: Routledge.. A. 189. New York: John Wiley... S.J. & Cheyne. D. 2000. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.. and K . A. Cooper. R. J. Denison. 1998. Vol. Cox. T. Dewey. Finnish translation. & Kennedy. Cox.201." ln M. No.T Golembicwski. Helsinki: Gaudeamus. "Organizational Innovation and Science of Craft of Management. Corporate Cultures. A Study of the Relation of Knowledge and Action.R. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.. eds. Rahim.Collins.T. 1998. Safety Science 34. Safety Culture: Philosopher.J. Corporate Culture and Organizational Effectiveness.129. Organizational Change: Sociological Perspectives. D. 2000. . 1999. The Quest for Certainty.. D. 1982. Deal. & Flin. Improving Safety Culture.s Stone or Man of Straw? Work and Stress. Current Topics in Management. (1990). 12. A Practical Guide. 1998.A. 3. S.. and Eran Vigoda. 111. Assessing Safety Culture in Offshore Environments. D. Mackenzie.