Effective Organizational Structure in Strategy Execution Process Essay Example

are not achieved or met. In business, many problems may arise in the process of strategy execution. Fostering the organizations capability to execute strategy requires the managers’ to practice their responsibility, as well as the employee participation.

This requires an effective organizational structure. In my opinion, the most effective organizational structure when it comes to strategy execution is the integration of both the strategic engineering and strategic anarchy organizational structures. These two types of structures compliment each other when they are combined, as compared to when used independently. By so doing, the positive aspects of the two organizational structures are put together .

The negative effects of using each structure on its own are minimized or completely eliminated.The ever-changing business environment in the modern business world requires an organization to minimize the risks that emanate from an unstable business environment. An ineffective organizational structure as explained by Ellis (Ellis, J 1998) undermines the good performance of an organization. To begin with, strategic engineering is beneficial to an organization in relation to strategy execution in several ways. Through this strategy, the managers are able to clearly articulate the organization’s goals, objectives, and plans.The management top officials can then mobilize the employees to work towards achieving the set objectives, and also promote the good flow of the strategic process.

The performance of the organization becomes an important aspect of executing the strategy plans. Strategic engineering is very instrumental in performance measurement. According to Kaplan et al (Kaplan, R. , and Norton, D. 2000), the tools that will enable an organization to monitor the compliance of employees to the strategic plans area put into place.

Since employee performance creates concern in the

organization, organizational structure assists in the development of effective means through which employees can work to achieve the objectives of the strategies. The monitoring of the employee performance then creates room for implementation process improvement through the strengthening of existing effective operations, and the correction of any errors. However, this structure has one major setback . This is, that the employee views are not considered by the management.Instead, the employees are used by the management as strategic plans execution machines. In order to correct this, integrating the management practices of the strategic anarchy is important.

For instance, the employee participation through their views and opinion in strategic execution process is promoted. This is encouraged by the structure’s disregard for “command and control” method of leadership. Through this structure, the employees are always aware of what is expected from them and what to do in order to meet those expectations.The employees’ needs and opinion are always considered as important, and hence the employees’ participation in strategic execution process is promoted in the organization. By putting together the positive aspects of the two structures, the management and the employees become fully involved in the strategic execution process.

The organization’s managers can use their authority to ensure that the process succeeds through proper articulation of objectives and goals.The strategic anarchy aspect of involving the employees in the process will allow the employees to give their opinion about the goals, objectives, and the best means through which the strategic goals can be achieved. The innovation and entrepreneurial opinion of the employees is utilized . The strategic anarchy creates a set back in the execution process by lacking a consistent and a

well planned direction of successful implementation.

Through the articulation of objectives and plans, this problem will be solved.Hrebiniak (Hrebiniak, L. 005) supports the organizational structure that adopts the management practices of the two structures in strategic execution process the top management officials can use their authoritative responsibility, while the employees can fully participate in the process. The employees become aware of the strategy objectives and ways of adapting to the business environment that keeps changing. In addition, they are given freedom to execute strategies with the organization’s central authority interferes when necessary. There is clear communication in relation to the organization goals when an effective organizational structure exists.

Conclusion Any organization that seeks to become successful must be able to adapt to the changing business environment. This means that it needs to develop strategies that will allow it to perform well. After strategy development, the strategy execution process follows. This process requires an effective organizational structure that maximizes the success of the process.

It is the organization’s responsibility to make sure that the organizational structure that exists serves this purpose. Failure to do so spells doom for the organization.