Examples of Organizations Operating on Mechanistic vs. New Science Assumptions
Mechanistic organizations are appropriate for environments that are stable and also for routine technologies and tasks (Czarniawska, 2013). They have clear, centralized, well-defined, vertical hierarchies of control, authority and demand. Predictability and efficiency are emphasized through formalization, standardization, and specialization. This results in processes, technologies, and defined jobs’ rigidity. Mechanistic organizations increase efficiencies when there is relative stability of technologies and tasks (Jin &Drozdenko, 2010). One example of a mechanistic organization is Toyota Ltd, which uses the Just-in-time (JIT) production system. JIT offers a continuous, optimized, and smooth flow of work with carefully measured and planned work-cycle times as well as the movement of goods on demand only (Monden,2011). This, in turn, reduces the cost of capacity, materials, and wasted time. With this system, Toyota’s staff can concentrate on their work tasks with zero interruption which results in timely delivery, better quality, and customer satisfaction.
Another example of a mechanistic organization is the fast food franchise McDonalds Ltd. The company uses JIT inventory while serving its customers (Nandini, 2014). The food restaurant has burger patties, cheese, toppings, and fittings at hand, but the assembly and cooking do not take place until a customer places an order. In addition, McDonald’s has a list of approved suppliers responsible for supplying all the franchise outlets. The suppliers offer products and services in a timely manner, which eliminates poor quality. The e-procurement system ensures purchase of products is done on time.
New Science Organizations
Organizations operating under the New Science philosophy are those that seek to form relationships founded on feedback loops, evaluation techniques, networking, and progressive business models (Wheatley, 2011). These organizations merge models, processes, and relationships to work together so as to create a competitive edge in their respective industries. By so doing, a company is able to ensure that the stakeholders involved in steering the company to profitability are part of a team whose only goal is to excel. Thus said, these organizations focus a lot on the well-being of their employees as well as the absolute satisfaction of their customers. These organizations realize that discontented employees will impact the loyalty of the customers, and thus, such organizations ensure that employees are satisfied with their jobs. Hence, organizations remain relevant to the industry, excel in efficiency, and attain long-term viability in a dynamic business world (Wheatley, 2011).
One such example of a New Science organization is Starbucks Ltd. The company’s mission is to nurture and inspire the human spirit (Michelli, 2013). That said, everything the company does is grounded on the connection with people and the belief that the company can influence positive action toward contributing new things on a daily basis. The company has a strong culture that is value-oriented and has a sense of purpose: acting with compassion while being driven by performance. One way that Starbucks achieves this is that it does not refer to its staff as employees but rather as partners because the company believes in shared success. Being a partner implies that staff are given an opportunity to be partakers of something that is beyond being mere employees (Michelli, 2013).
Another example of a new science organization is Google Inc. Google, on the other hand, has eight rules that it believes make for a good manager (Bryant, 2011; Draft, 2014). These rules include being a good coach, empowering the team and avoiding micromanaging, expressing interest in the success of team members as well as their personal well-being, being result oriented and productive, being a good communicator and listener, helping employees with the development of their careers, having a strategy and vision for the team that is clear, and utilizing technical skills for advising the team.
References
Bryant, A. (2011). Google’s quest to build a better boss. New York Times, 12.
Czarniawska, B. (2013). Organizations as obstacles to organizing. In Organization and Organizing (pp. 27-46). Routledge.
Daft, R. L. (2014). The leadership experience. Cengage Learning.
Jin, K. G., & Drozdenko, R. G. (2010). Relationships among perceived organizational core values, corporate social responsibility, ethics, and organizational performance outcomes: An empirical study of information technology professionals. Journal of Business Ethics, 92(3), 341-359.
Michelli, J. (2013). Leading the Starbucks way: 5 principles for connecting with your customers, your products, and your people. McGraw Hill Professional.
Monden, Y. (2011). Toyota production system: an integrated approach to just-in-time. Productivity Press.
Nandini, A. S. (2014). McDonald’s Success Story in India. Journal of Contemporary Research in Management, 9(3).
Wheatley, M. (2011). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world. ReadHowYouWant. com.
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
We’ll write everything from scratch
Question 
Using the Internet, newspapers, magazines, or television, point out two examples of organizations operating on mechanistic assumptions and two examples of organizations where leaders operate on new science assumptions.
Examples of Organizations Operating on Mechanistic vs. New Science Assumptions