Organizational Structure

Organizational Structure

Why do you think Apple’s functional structure has been so important for their products?

Apple’s functional structure has been operational since Steve Jobs returned to the organization in 1997 (Podolny & Hansen, 2020). The structure entails having all business sections in one unit and a single profit and loss for the entire organization. The functional structure has been instrumental to Apple’s success and its products for two reasons. First, Apple intends to create products that change and improve people’s lives daily. This calls for continuous innovation. Such innovation can only be achieved through its reliance on technical experts who are vastly experienced. The technology sector is subject to disruptions and rapid changes. Thus, the company must rely upon the intuition and judgment of experts who understand disruptive technologies (Colquitt et al., 2019). This means that it cannot wait for the client’s feedback and must act by producing products that are likely to entice the clients.

Second, Apple’s functional structure enables the company to avoid undercutting the quality of its products. Apple does not assess the performance of managers and other staff using short-term profits or cost targets. Bonuses that R&D heads receive are based on the company’s performance as opposed to the revenue of certain products. Thus, decisions concerning products are shielded from interruption that may occur due to short-term financial demands. The innovation decisions are determined through a cost-benefit analysis that R&D executives conduct (Podolny & Hansen, 2020). These two aspects ensure that Apple continually churns out quality products due to the functional structure.

What are the outside forces that might make Apple change their organizational structure in the future?

Various external forces may compel Apple to change its organizational structure. First, the need for constant software updates by clients who have already purchased their products may push the company towards such a direction. Apple’s functional structure seeks to anticipate and satisfy the client’s needs. However, it places less emphasis on market feedback due to its reliance on R&D experts. Its desktop users have reported frustration due to a lack of software updates (Colquitt et al., 2019). The long wait until Apple has a new product in the market could lead to client frustration, as they may not get value from their products.

Second, shareholders are likely to push the company to change its structure due to seemingly dormant services. According to shareholders, Apple does not monetize or make profits from apps such as iTunes (Colquitt, LePine, & Weson, 2019). This is due to the lack of accountability because the structure does not assess all aspects of the entire business. Instead, it assesses it as a whole. Such frustration and dissatisfaction among shareholders and clients could also result in the loss of significant market share and capital. Loss of capital can have a grave impact on the innovation decisions of the company, making it difficult to operate efficiently and profitably.

How might Apple change their structure in a way that allows them to have the best of both worlds?

Beneficial restructuring at Apple may entail the adoption of the matrix structure. Currently, the company already uses a functional structure, which seems to neglect the needs of clients and shareholders. Thus, the inclusion of R&D experts in various teams that make up the products. For instance, scheduling regular software updates for clients who have already bought Apple’s products is an after-sale service that continues to prove value for the customer’s money (Nivethika & Yoganathan, 2015). At the same time, experienced application developers should assess the economic value of apps that are included in the gadgets. This information should be relayed to internal stakeholders to avoid misplaced expectations. If iTunes is a complimentary app that is not expected to make money for the company, this information should be made clear. Otherwise, an experienced product team allows the company to serve the clients’ upcoming needs, promoting satisfaction. This implies that the company should improve its customer service, especially after sales. The reputation it enjoys in the market is a strength that still requires to be reinforced through proper customer service. Besides anticipating the market needs, it is also important to ensure that the actual feedback is put to use. Addressing the clients’ concerns and complaints complements Apple’s products’ quality in the market (Nivethika & Yoganathan, 2015). Failure to do this continually undermines its efforts to provide quality products.

Which of the organizational forms described in this chapter do you think leads to the highest levels of motivation among workers? Why?

The organic organizational structure, which is also known as amorphous, seems to motivate employees the most. A lack of guidelines and formalized charts characterizes this structure. Instead, it develops on its own as the organization grows. It can provide employees with an enabling work environment to achieve their goals. It is easier for an entity to respond to changes in the market rapidly if it has the right talent set. The encouragement to specialize beyond their roles provides employees with a learning environment and career growth opportunities (Colquitt et al., 2019). Employees are not restricted from thinking about others’ responsibilities, which encourages creativity. The ability to advise as opposed to order empowers employees to highlight their opinions. In comparison to other structures, this one offers employees the freedom to deliver on the company’s goals more efficiently (Pitts & Clawson, 2008). However, the structure requires extreme monitoring to ensure that it does not create apathy within the entity.

References

Colquitt, J., LePine, J. A., & Weson, M. J. (2019). Organizational Behavior: Improving Performance And Commitment In The Workplace. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.

Nivethika, V., & Yoganathan, D. (2015). The Impact of After Sales Services on Customer Satisfaction: Special References to LG Electronics Products, Sri Lanka. 12th International Conference on Business Management (ICBM) 2015.

Pitts, T., & Clawson, J. G. (2008). Organizational Structure.

Podolny, J. M., & Hansen, M. T. (2020). How Apple Is Organized for Innovation. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2020/11/how-apple-is-organized-for-innovation

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Assignment 3

Reference Source:

Textbook:-

• Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., & Wesson, M. J. (2019). Organizational behaviour: Improving performance and commitment in the workplace (6th ed). Burr Ridge, IL: McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Case Study:

Organizational Structure

Case: Apple

Please read the case “Apple” from Chapter 15 “Organizational Structure” Page: – 503 given in your textbook – Organizational behaviour: Improving performance and commitment in the workplace (6th ed).  by Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A., & Wesson, M. J. (2019) and Answer the following Questions:

Assignment Question(s):

1. Why do you think Apple’s functional structure has been so important for their products? (1.25 Marks ) (Min words 150-200)
2. What are the outside forces that might make Apple change their organizational structure in the future? (1.25 Marks ) (Min words 150-200)
3. How might Apple change their structure in a way that allows them to have the best of both worlds? (1.25 Marks ) (Min words 200)

Part:-2

Discussion question: Page: – Please read Chapter 15 “Organizational Structure” carefully and then give your answers on the basis of your understanding.

4. Which of the organizational forms described in this chapter do you think leads to the highest levels of motivation among workers? Why?(1.25 Marks ) (Min words 150-200)

Important Note: – Support your submission with course material concepts, principles, and theories from the textbook and at least two scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles.