Charity Organizations Taylorist Strategies †MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about the Charity Organizations Taylorist Strategies. Answer: Introduction Taylorism is mainly focused on maximizing the organizational profit by controlling the labor force. The Taylorist practice treats money as the primary concern and everything else as secondary (Nyland, Bruce and Burns 2014). That is the primary reason that it has been losing its relevance todays world. Most organizations in the developed world have abandoned the practice of Taylorism in their business. The workers in contemporary Australia, America or Europe do not engage with original Taylorist practice. This means Taylorism is not rejected totally by all the organizations, it still exists but in a different form. Most companies implement the Taylorist strategies in combination with other effective business strategies (Waring 2006). However the original method of money centric method is not applicable in many cases. The charity organizations do not engage in Taylorist practice. However sometimes Australian or American companies apply Taylorism in their work force. If in the previous year the organization performed poorly or the current labor force are not producing as per the requirement then this method can be useful. The Call Centre business is an area where the Taylorism is stile applied successfully. The idea of Taylorism is based upon constant monitoring and controlling the labor force in order to increase the productivity. In this method the labors are almost mechanized and creativity or freedom is not much appreciated by the employers. In the Indian Call Centre business the use of Taylorism can be a good example (Sinha and Gabriel 2016). There the leadership controls the employees through constant monitoring and decides what exactly they will be doing. In countries like Dubai, India or China the leadership of the organization has to manage large number of labors. The time and motion management of the Taylorist scientific management is applied in few organizations there. Like McDonalds operate under the Taylorist method in such countries where large number of customers are served in a very short time (Babajana and Webber 2015) Many organizations ignore to treat the organizational structure as important as the organizational strategies. The structure of the organization is not only the infrastructure or the hierarchical structure it includes the employees as well. Yves Morieux explains that in an effective organization the strategies and the structure follow each other (Morieux and Tollman 2014). Strategies and structure both are equally important for improved organizational performance. However dealing with the strategies often proves to be challenging for the management. If the management fails to manage the structure well the implemented strategies will fail as well. Morieux suggests that there should not be many layers between the top management and the operation level; otherwise the management will fail to understand the competitive opportunities (YouTube 2017). The employee advantages can create great opportunities for organizational advantage (Goetsch and Davis 2014). The managements responsibility i s not just the designing of the plan but implementing them effectively is more important. It should be implemented in such a way that it neither compromises with quality nor with the employee wellbeing. Therefore, just as Morieux concluded, in any productive organizational strategies and structure work collaboratively. Halocracy is a process of managing a responsible company where every people associated with the company are empowered (Holacracy.org 2017). In this practice the roles are not based on the people rather the work defines the roles. The whole structure works in small self sufficient groups. All the employees are bound by the same set of rules and it does not exclude the CEO of the company as well. In a traditional bureaucratic system each role is defined for a specific person and he is entitled for a particular job, but here one people serves several role and vice versa. In the other system the leaders or the top managements makes all the important decisions, but here locally all the decisions are made. The authoritative power is distributed and not at all concentrated on a single person unlike the traditional one. In a traditional team based organizations the roles are defined for the teams but here the work is defined by the self sufficient group or individual. There are few contingency factors that can affect the organizational structure of Zappo. The CEO of Zappo Tony Hseieh has relinquished the power and encouraged the employees to form decentralized self sufficient teams (Vox 2014). The management believed that the centralization of power within the organizational culture was resisting the innovation and improvement. Zappo is almost 17 years old (Zappos.com 2017). Company works in a smooth environment where future market expansion in shoe, cloth or hand bag is there. The company has been using markets latest technologies. A lot of other companies look up to Zappo as an ideal organizational model. The company has always been adaptive as it adapted digital technologies very early. Zappo operates with 1500 employees so it can categorize as a medium size company (Pontefract 2015). The company needs assistance from another firm for managing the smaller teams as it is not possible for the CEO to handle them individually. Also for the employee s the new strategies related to Halocracy may appear to be challenging for the employees. The innovation and experimentation may cause risk and uncertainty but if its effective then it may prove to be hugely profitable for the company. The management would hire new talented employees who have enough knowledge in modern technologies. The existing employees must go through the training of new technologies. The employees must be rewarded through increased wages or incentives. Such practices within the organizational culture will enhance the productivity. Reference Babajana, Z. and Webber, A., 2015. Organisational Behaviour. Nyland, C., Bruce, K. and Burns, P., 2014. Taylorism, the international labour organization, and the genesis and diffusion of codetermination.Organization Studies,35(8), pp.1149-1169. Sinha, S. and Gabriel, Y., 2016. 5 Call Centre Work: Taylorism with a Facelift.Re-Tayloring Management: Scientific Management a Century On, p.87. Waring, S.P., 2016.Taylorism transformed: Scientific management theory since 1945. UNC Press Books. Goetsch, D.L. and Davis, S.B., 2014.Quality management for organizational excellence. Upper Saddle River, NJ: pearson. Morieux, Y. and Tollman, P., 2014.Six simple rules: how to manage complexity without getting complicated. Harvard Business Review Press. YouTube. (2017).Organization Design: BCG's Yves Morieux on organization and competitive advantage. [online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jm7d1dzOKmw [Accessed 25 Aug. 2017]. Holacracy. (2017).How It Works. [online] Available at: https://www.holacracy.org/how-it-works/ [Accessed 24 Aug. 2017]. Pontefract, D. (2015).Forbes Welcome. [online] Forbes.com. Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/danpontefract/2015/05/11/what-is-happening-at-zappos/#4afc31a74ed8 [Accessed 24 Aug. 2017]. Vox. (2014).Zappos just abolished bosses. Here's why.. [online] Available at: https://www.vox.com/2014/7/11/5876235/silicon-valleys-latest-management-craze-holacracy-explained [Accessed 24 Aug. 2017]. Zappos.com. (2017).About Zappos | Zappos.com. [online] Available at: https://www.zappos.com/c/about-zappos [Accessed 24 Aug. 2017].