Jones and Shephard Accountants Inc The Need for Renewing

The case provided shows that Jones and Shephard Accountants, Inc. is experiencing some managerial problems. The company is experiencing a number of conflicts among the various individual making up the company. This is due to misunderstanding among the parties involved. Diagnosing the problem is the first step that should be taken if the normal state of the company is to be renewed. This paper is dedicated to exploring areas that needs to be straightened in order to restore the lost glory of the company. To amicably address the condition facing the company, the paper would consider the principle of the system thinking (Pugh, 1990). This principle is relevant to the case provided in that the kind of information given about the company shows that there is poor coordination among the different individuals making up the organizational structure of the company. Principally, the success of a company depends largely on how the organizational system is integrated. Various parts of the system should remain closely aligned and focused on achieving the goal of the organization. In such a system, the effort of one person should impact on the overall output (Mohr, 1982). However, when the system is not well integrated, the efforts applied by some individuals may not have any impact on the overall output. The organizational structure is very important tool through which system thinking can be fostered. An organizational structure that is well established from the top management to the subordinate level is bound to succeed more than the organizational structure that is not properly organized. Organization of the organizational structure should be based on the nature of the work required as well as the level of education of the person. Individuals dealing with technical jobs would feel recognized if they are placed in higher ranks than the individuals with lower ranks (Robbins amp. Judge, 2007). Consequently, such individual would have morale of working hard to show his or her prowess in the position he or she held in the organizational structure. However, the organizational structure of (Jamp.S) shows that those individuals who were supposed to be at the lower level in the structure are ranked next to the top management. Secretaries and supervisors, for example are placed too high in the organization (Gratton, 2004). Placing a person who has relatively lower levels of technical skills at top ranks would definitely result into the conflict. This is because of the fact that man naturally wants to live according to his status which, in most cases is determined by the level of education and the technical knowledge he or she has. The system presented is likely to breed conflict among the members making up the organizational structure. This is because the individuals such as project managers, who play a significant role in the organization, are ranked below the supervisors and the secretary pool. These managers would feel that they are not recognized and hence cannot give to their best level. Fundamentally, the organizational structure given implies that it lacks the principle of system thinking approach. Consequently, there is poor coordination and integration among various organs making up the structure (Grey amp. Garsten, 2001)RecommendationThe need for organized hierarchical system in the current bureaucratic organizations is invaluable requirement through which the goal of the organization can be achieved. However, according to the organizational structure given, it is clear that (Jamp.S), inc. follows the traditional organizational system which is characterized by poor coordination among different organs of the organization. The following organizational structure is an ideal structure that should be adopted by the company in order to facilitate its internal activities.ReferencesGratton, L. (2004). The Democratic Enterprise. Financial Times Prentice Hall.Grey C., Garsten C., (2001). Trust, Control and Post-Bureaucracy. Sage Publishing.Mohr, L. B. (1982). Explaining Organizational Behavior. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Pugh, D. S., (1990).Organization Theory: Selected Readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Robbins, S.F., Judge, T.A. (2007). Organizational Behavior. 12th edition. Pearson Education Inc., p. 551-557.

You Might Also Like