Organizational Design

Organizational Design
Name
Institutional Affiliation

Organizational Design
Despite operating in the same industry, businesses demonstrate their differences in a variety of ways. Notably, successful companies have learnt the importance of aligning their gods and services to their strategy and structure. The process has been instrumental in enabling the firms to form a grip on their clients and hence focus on providing them with their preferences irrespective of their location and, demographics. Great companies are known to develop amicable ways to enhance the performance of their organization and hence service delivery to their populace. Accordingly, Slocum and Hellriegel (2011) emphasize that having a unique selling proposition helps in the development of an effective business strategy that provides a tangible reason for clients to consider particular firms over their competitors. The attainment of unique selling propositions and organizational plans stems from the capacity to maintain an ideal organizational design that serves the interests of its stakeholders and that of the business.
Reason for Organization Differences
Companies represent the appropriate vehicles for the accomplishment of social purposes and offering meaningful livelihoods for those that work for them. The ideas generated from the companies tend to differ in in a variety of ways, considering that most firms have their unique goals and objectives. Different companies create value in varying measures and capacities.

The ability to create an enduring institution is dependent on its potential to extract economic value and develop frameworks that support both social and human values during decision-making processes. As a result, chances of having homogenous goods and products across companies tend to be minimal.
Companies’ strategies also have an impact on their abilities to deliver goods and services. An organizational strategy may foster to support differentiation strategies as mechanics of responding to the need of various demographic groups (Teece, 2010). As a result, the strategy will govern the abilities of firms to produce their goods and services.
Societal practices such as culture may have instrumental roles in shaping the type of goods and services that are produced. Notably, different cultures promote the use of particular materials over others. For instance, a fashion industry in India is more likely to showcase traditional Indian regalia, and the same applies for a similar venture in West Africa, thus, despite being in the same industry, both firms respond to the needs of their clients based on the importance of preserving their culture. As a result, the companies are more likely to focus on products that appeal to their target markets.
Different companies support different organizational structure and hence their policies. The structures have an impact on the skills and creativity of the company employees. Firms with structures that support horizontal communication and cooperation are more likely to foster innovation and thus lead to the development of unique products compared to those that have rigid ones (Wilson, 2009; Walker, Damanpour & Devece, 2010). As a result, employees in flexible firms are more likely to come up with possible ways of enhancing the quality and type of their products as opposed to those that are in businesses that follow complex bureaucracies.
External factors that have an impact on the operations of a firm may also create a massive difference in their categories. Political influences, community values of the surrounding people, market changes, and structures amongst other factors all have a significant impact on the company’s ability to conduct its business (Slocum & Hellriegel, 2011). As a result, the company structure and strategy will also have to adapt according to the surrounding factors that have an impact on its operations. Thus, a company is more likely to remain successful when it understands the dynamics that affect its existence. Besides, the nature of the company will also have to conform to the factors that have an impact on its ability to do business. Companies whose external elements favor their existence are more organized, successful and will always remain innovative in a bid to cater for the needs of their potential customers. The reverse is also true when the operating environment is harsh.
Fit in Present Work
The current working organization provides an ideal environment for the growth and support of all the stakeholders. I believe that every person has been provided with the same opportunity to realize his or her potential and capacities to spur creativity where necessary. The commitment and assurance of fitting in the organization stem from the fact the leaders have also created an ideal environment whereby individuals can nurture their talent and remain relevant in the respective industry. Training opportunities are offered to all members to ensure that they are competent to realize their potential (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2011). Besides, the leaders utilize a standard approach in the decision-making process as a strategy to incorporate the decisions of all stakeholders irrespective of their background. The methods have been effective in inculcating commitment and also enhancing job satisfaction for the current job post. It has also boosted personal confidence, whereby all employees are encouraged to improve on their skills and apply hands-on skills as ways of ensuring that each person perfects on their current work position.
Reactions to the Different Work Climates
The reactions for the different work climates are propelled by the ability to satisfy the needs and demands of all stakeholders. Employee satisfaction and hence the fit is dependent on a variety of factors. Jobs that give opportunities for advancement provide the ideal platform for individual growth and development. When the leaders identify the course of the path that an employee should follow to ensure that they accomplish their tasks, the impacts have a positive effect on the performance on the organization (Gutierrez, Candela & Carver, 2012). Work stress levels also affect the way employees relate to their work. When the workload supersedes the employee capacity to deliver, they are more likely to develop stress (Yücel, 2012). Poor planning and ineffective management also spur dissatisfaction amongst employees, thus affecting their outputs. I expect minor improvements to take place in the organization that I work for. Some of the changes that I anticipate include the ability to promote persons based on merits kill and credentials. There are instances when it is evident that individuals get promotion yet they lack the relevant skills to deliver on their tasks. Efficient employees should be evaluated according to their abilities and not necessarily paperwork that does not match their work output.
Evaluation
The evaluation of the scoring performance of my firm indicated that the company places social support context first. The leaders in the business foster on setting aggressive goals, which ensure that all employees set personal targets highly. The collective efforts of all employees translate to the performance of the company (Eccles, Ioannou & Serafeim, 2014). Accordingly, the performance management is what I expected. The organization sets precedence upon which all stakeholders interested inefficient management and success can emulate. The leaders have been instrumental in rewarding hard work through competitive incentives and remuneration.
The scoring on the social support was equally high. The company’s concern for the welfare of its employees plays instrumental roles in building their commitment and satisfaction to the company. Lack of relevant social support systems diminishes the prospects of a firm to enhance the performances of their employees (Jiménez-Jiménez & Sanz-Valle, 2011). As a result, I commend the company for the efforts undertaken to ensure that all employees have an ideal working environment that promotes innovation and creativity.
The activity has revealed that the working environment is a critical element of organizational design and structure. A firm’s design shapes how its employees respond to the demands of their work. Thus, a supportive working environment is a critical ingredient that promotes an organization’s performance.
Conclusion
Organizational design plays instrumental roles in shaping the performance of a firm. Companies ought to align their structures and strategies in ways that boost their efficiency and ensure that corporate governance translates to superior work outcomes. High-performance organizations can balance the needs of their employees with those of their values. Thus, the employees work towards the realization of organization success while at the same time fostering for personal development. As a result, it is imperative that company managers identify mechanics to sustain strategies that propel employee performance and replicate the best practices for the performance of the firm.

References
Eccles, R. G., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Management Science, 60(11), 2835-2857.
Evans, C., & Wright, W. (2009). How to make effective decisions. Manager, 32.
Jiménez-Jiménez, D., & Sanz-Valle, R. (2011). Innovation, organizational learning, and performance. Journal of business research, 64(4), 408-417.
Gutierrez, A. P., Candela, L. L., & Carver, L. (2012). The structural relationships between organizational commitment, global job satisfaction, developmental experiences, work values, organizational support, and person‐organization fit among nursing faculty. Journal of advanced nursing, 68(7), 1601-1614.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2011). Teacher job satisfaction and motivation to leave the teaching profession: Relations with school context, feeling of belonging, and emotional exhaustion. Teaching and teacher education, 27(6), 1029-1038.
Slocum, J., W. & Hellriegel, D. (2011). Principles of Organizational Behavior. South Western
Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long range planning, 43(2-3), 172-194.
Walker, R. M., Damanpour, F., & Devece, C. A. (2010). Management innovation and organizational performance: The mediating effect of performance management. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(2), 367-386.
Wilson, S. (March 2009). 5 ways to spur employee creativity. The Entrepreneur. p. 20
Yücel, İ. (2012). Examining the relationships among job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intention: An empirical study. International Journal of Business and Management, 7(20), 44.