Formal Organizations

A century ago, organizations involved a pyramid shaped of rankings in which few controlled the many. With this system, it distanced those in higher power with those at the bottom of the barrel within a company. There was no democracy within the company and those who were at the bottom of the pyramid of power had to do whatever job and task a person of higher power instructed.

Throughout the years things started to change and evolve. In the early 1900s, organizations and businesses were not really efficient in their work and job performances. In this top-down format, managers did a few things. They took a look at each workers job by figuring out what operations were involved and the allotted time it needed for the task to be completed. Then they tried to figure out how they can maximize their efficiency. Finally, incentives were given to those workers who did their job well. This was known as scientific management.

By the mid-century, organizations continued to be inefficient but mostly through their hiring processes. Women and minorities were never those in power or even in the management position. They mostly were of white men. These "closed" organizations created unproductive workers because there were no hopes of advancement within their workplace. Men tended to be more worried in their reputations while women cared for the creative side of the businesses. When organizations became more open, the results were clear; they became more profitable.

Today, organizations are more flexible and open. Rather than a top-down model, it works on the basis of teams with senior managers overseeing the projects at hand. Those in power in these types of organizations, ask for creativity and ideas from their employees rather than barking out orders. Today's organizations encourage their employees to be more creative and give them huge responsibilities. They are supervised less and given goals but want their employees to use their talents to achieve them. Teamwork is another difference than that of a century ago. This new openness creates a smaller number of levels within the change in command. Because of the ever-changing world we all live in, adaptation and creativity are essential for today's business organizations.

In order for Micah's organization to evolve and become more flexible, there are many characteristics that need to change. The first is the company's activities. The top-down model of hierarchy in the company needs to change. By making small groups of teams all working towards a common goal, it would increase production and efficiency. The second is hierarchy. Having a smaller level of chain of command would make for a less resentful staff. The third is norms. A company should have its rules and regulations, but it is the responsibility of each employee to uphold to its policies. The fourth characteristic is membership criteria. Those in power need to encourage its employees and not just give out tasks and orders. It would make for a better workplace if the organization gets its employees involved in possible out-of-the-company activities such as an annual BBQ or holiday party. This would bring the entire company together in one place; give a chance to mingle with the boss, etc. This leads into the fifth characteristic which is relationships. As a company, Micah's coworkers need to relate more with one another. This includes those in power with their employees. The sixth characteristic is communication. Typically in a more formal beaureaucratic organization, memos and notes came from the top very formally and unthoughtful. In order to make it better, more face to face communication is necessary. The last characteristic is focus. A company is always to be task oriented, however, if they became more person-oriented and cared more about its employees, than Micah's organization will result in more efficiency among its workers which will increase production and profitability!

One example of a formal organization trying to change was that of Delphi, America's largest automotive parts maker. Rather than trying to take a step forward, they took a step backward! They tried to get out from under its labor contracts by cutting corners and decreasing the wages of its employees. This trend went nowhere! The average Delphi employee was making $27 an hour and was reduced to $10 an hour. They believed that they were being too generous to its workers when in fact it created a negative effect. This trend will most likely not take place in the future. Bankruptcy courts have been working with the employees to retrieve their hard worked salaries. America's future cannot be a bright one if the best ideas our industries have for bringing us into global competitiveness is to drive their middle-class workforce into penury (Blumner, 2005).

Another trend is the matching a CEO's pay to