. Because of the fast shifts in market sales of the product groups tension among the members of the product groups emerged . Each product group wanted to have better performance in market than the rest which is not actually negative at all for the firm because it motivates everyone however the product groups became factions that are not helping in the coordination of all units in the company
With the intention to meet the need of increasing production , the company 's executives formed the new product development division . The function of this new division overlaps with that of the research division and marketing department because the extent of functions they perform was not closely discussed and limited by the top-level management
Implementation of separate division to handle product development has disrupted the previous cohesive interaction between prior existing divisions. New product development division has taken on a life of its own, opting to market its new developments instead of passing the new products to the other divisions to handle their usual responsibilities. I. The development division has taken over other division’s responsibilities without continuing to gather input and build a relationship with these divisions that already have the knowledge and specialized skills
The separation and newly divided responsibilities for divisions created the disruption which previously was not occurring between prior existing divisions

•

In spite of its independence of other teams with regard to product development and marketing, the new division still needs those other divisions for reports they generate. Customer service is being handled in a different manner than the established customers are accustomed to. This inconsistency and redundancy (having two sales people from the same company visiting the same customers) may be partially responsible for the reduction in sales percentages of the chemical and plastics markets.
• Inconsistency in calculating sales...

A. B. Macro

2. -.. Lack of willingness from departments to work with one another

C.
5.
6. D. T
7. 89. Some
. . * 4.

B. Micro
1. Lack of aid between departments.
2.
3.
4.
5. 6.
7.
8.
9. The company was having trouble generating a team concept within the division

II. Causes:• Implementation of separate division to handle product development has disrupted the previous cohesive interaction between prior existing divisions. New product development division has taken on a life of its own, opting to market its new developments instead of passing the new products to the other divisions to handle their usual responsibilities.• In spite of its independence of other teams with regard to product development and marketing, the new division still needs those other divisions for reports they generate. Customer service is being handled in a different manner than the established customers are accustomed to. This inconsistency and redundancy (having two sales people from the same company visiting the same customers) may be partially responsible for the reduction in sales percentages of the chemical and plastics markets.• Inconsistency in calculating sales estimates is causing misinformation to be produced since the norm within Exley is to use total market as opposed to their share of the market.• The self-proclaimed independence of this new division is causing rivalry among the other divisions that previously collaborated effectively.• The company realizes that there was a need to move a product development department closer to the production line but the modeling effect did not take place causing the conflicts to arise in command.• Too many levels of the organizational chart developed too many department heads and not enough communication/coordination efforts between departments (i.e. Marketing, Production and Consumer Research)• Deaf to Consumer thoughts/ideas. II. Causes
1. The product development division was given responsibility for market research, but the tasks of sales analysis and forecasting remained in the marketing division.
2. For each separate group of products, a project manager was appointed who was responsible for the coordination of all company activities for the product.
3. Estimates are usually based on the total product market rather than on Exley’s share, which often tends to inflate sales estimates.
4. Implementation of separate divisions to handle product development has disrupted the previous cohesive interaction between prior existing divisions. A new product development division has taken on a life of its own, opting to market its new developments instead of passing the... I. Causes
1. The creation of the product development division has been a main cause of the problems presented above. The goal of appointing product managers was to enhance the coordination of the product through the various stages of development in order to pursue the company’s goal of improving the sales. However, product managers’ efforts were considered to be self-serving to the product that that particular manager was handling. For example, the product manager did some marketing strategies which were seen by the marketing executives as acts that only benefited that particular product and did not benefit the integration of their markets.
2. Healthy competition arose between the departments which turn into negative outcomes. Each product group wanted the best for their product such as production process, performance process and overall sales. This created a sense of motivation and competition between the different product groups. This inadvertently leads to each group becoming factions and not helping in the coordination of all division within the business
3. Inconsistency and redundancy in terms of people within the company contacting and surveying customers could be causing for the reduction in sales
4. 5. II . Causes1 . Because of the fast shifts in market sales of the product groups tension among the members of the product groups emerged . Each product group wanted to have better performance in market than the rest which is not actually negative at all for the firm because it motivates everyone however the product groups became factions that are not helping in the coordination of all units in the company2 . With the intention to meet the need of increasing production , the company 's executives formed the new product development division . The function of this new division overlaps with that of the research division and marketing department because the extent of functions they perform was not closely discussed and limited by the top-level management3 . The purpose of appointing product managers is to enhance the coordination of the product 's contribution to the company and in the pursuit to improve the sales of each , product managers did some marketing strategies which was seen by the marketing executives as not contributing to the integration of their markets but rather as acts only for the good of product group the product manager is handlingII. Causes:
• Implementation of separate division to handle product development has disrupted the previous cohesive interaction between prior existing divisions. New product development division has taken on a life of its own, opting to market its new developments instead of passing the new products to the other divisions to handle their usual responsibilities.
• In spite of its independence of other teams with regard to product development and marketing, the new division still needs those other divisions for reports they generate. Customer service is being handled in a different manner than the established customers are accustomed to. This inconsistency and redundancy (having two sales people from the same company visiting the same customers) may be partially responsible for the reduction in sales percentages of the chemical and plastics markets.
• Inconsistency in calculating sales...Causes: 1. Increased competition from other companies required Exley Chemical Company to improve and increase their production. To do this the Company execytives created a new production development division, intened to improve the company in actuality it is the cause of many of the companys problems. a. The creation of the new division was poorly done lacking clarity of responsibilities and purpose seen in the overlaps with the research and development divisions b. No coordinitation or structure, such as a clear chain of command
III. Systems Affected• Structural: The unity of the groups is affected. The interdependence leads to consistent conflicts. If the leadership is not getting the job done then we need to know why and how to fix the problems. They need to work together to get the job done so some team building needs to be done.• Psychosocial: The presence of the product manager with the customer causes a psychosocial issue with marketing. In addition, the presence of marketing research by product manager causes strain. There is competition among the divisions for capital, labor, management, and so forth. The interdependence within this organization is causing problems but if it became boundaryless the departments would become more open, trusting, sharing of ideas (Brown et al, 2006).• Technical: There is lack of communication via the current networking system between the marketing and product development. Databases are not updated on progress of pending projects for the benefit of marketing. Emails are not answered in a timely manner. This is a fast growing ever changing company. Employees need to feel like they are in the loop and get regular feedback as to how they are doing and what new changes are being made that will affect them.• Managerial: A clear chain of command has not defined. Marketing should decide on the sales forecasts but the product department does that. The marketing department wants exclusive rights to interact with the customers. However, it is currently done by the product manager. Marketing should have information about all new product development. However, the development process is separate from the marketing. The division of work is unorganized. Managers have lost sight of its integration responsibilities.• Goals: Each individual department has the goal of maximizing the potential of their department. For example: research & development has the goal of doing the most R&D and production has the goal of maximizing production. Due to lack of leadership and cooperation amongst themselves, the goals are not being met. –III . Systems affected1 . Structural : Since there is an overlapping of functions when the product development division was formed , the bureaucracy of the whole company iIII . Systems affected
1. Goal and Values-due to lack of cohesion between the departments, the company’s goal of increasing profits and sales will result in more liabilities as departments work against each other instead as an overall team
2. Psychosocial-customers will experience the negative effects of the overlapping and inconsistencies within each departments processes and production distribution
3. Operation –lower productivity within the company due to inconsistencies and overlapping processes
4. Managerial- management has lost focus of how all departments create the whole operation and this will result in numerous performance gaps
5. Structural- overlapping of divisions has caused deterioration in the system, weakening of the hierarchical chain, and chain of command. The holistic approach of product development and production processes has also been diminished and will be greatly modified
6. Technical: procedural changes will occur due to methodological discrepancies of manufacturings deteriorated . The specialization of work done by the lower level departments is now...IV. Alternatives• Keep the organizational structure as status quo. Not an effective action as the company’s sales is decreasing on a yearly basis and there is a major lack of communication and productivity within the departments. This action could be detrimental to the motivation levels of the employees and overall success of the organization.• Dissolve the Product Development Division ramp up on additional staff in research, engineering and marketing to collectively coordinate projects; make them interdepartmental liaisons. Possibly not an effective decision due to the amount of money spent to build this department. The competition and conflict could remain if the employees from the dissolved group were integrated into the existing departments.• Re-examine the organization’s hierarchy and redevelop departments. This action will allow for the reduction of competitiveness while motivating the employees to work in an open and trusting environment sharing the goals and objectives of the company (Brown & Harvey, 2006). The company is constantly changing products and their methods of use, yet the functions of the departments have not changed. In effort to motivate the employees and encourage the departments to work together but not to be totally interdependent upon each other, reorganizing the departments and redefining functions and work teams should alleviate the current conflicts. This action should also assist in improving the culture of the company through teambuilding exercises and instilling a sense of cooperation and coordination reducing suboptimization and intergroup competition.• Improve interdepartmental interfaces and address intergroup operating problems. This can be accomplished by bringing the underlying problems to the surface and allowing the groups involved to initiate open communications between the departments and applying problem solving techniques in a jointly concentrated effort (Brown & Harvey, 2006). An important dimension in organization development is the interface between groups within the company know that people in these groups can often fail to cooperate with others and that there can in fact be conflict between the groups (Brown & Harvey, 2006).IV. Alternatives
1. Increase the role of top management within the company to regulate and ensure consistency between the development production division and other departments to ensure product consistency. Top management would need to establish rules and regulations and monitor internal operations for this to be effective.
2. Increase the communication between project managers and departments. Regulate what information needs to be gathered by the project managers in all departments so communicating with department heads becomes more standard instead of by-passing department heads.
3. Create teams to assist the project managers. Team members should be pulled from each pertinent department to build a team that has expertise in each department. This can help in creating better judgment when it comes to the production process of products such as realistic input on market conditions and estimated sales.IV. Recommendations• New guidelines need to be developed. Since the different divisions have forgotten how to work together, there needs to be some standard actions that each division should follow. These guidelines should state how to deal with each division since there needs to be communication between them (Brown & Harvey, 2006). These guidelines, or operational elements, need to also explain each division’s responsibilities to the next (Blanchard & Thacker, 2004). These elements will help coordinate communication activities between the management and the employees.• There needs to be some sort of team building (Brown & Harvey, 2006). This particular situation is called a “problem situation”. This is where work is designed to be done as a team (Brown & Harvey, 2006). In this case, there are conflicts between the different divisions as to who is responsible for what and when (Brown & Harvey, 2006). Whether it is between the product division and the marketing division, or the sales department and the marketing division, each of them has a job to do and must be able to overcome these problems (Brown & Harvey, 2006). One way to help overcome these problems is to bring in a consultant to change the structure. Structure is so important for the employees. The structure helps to show the flow of information up and down the chain of command, including those in the chain of command itself (Brown & Harvey, 2006).• The Exley Company needs to implement an incentives program in order to keep employees motivated towards maintaining teams (Brown & Harvey, 2006). No one division can do everything by themselves (Blanchard & Thacker, 2004). This will also keep the companies goals in mind and everyone working in the same direction (Brown & Harvey, 2006). Along with incentives, there needs to be clear expectations of the employees and managers. There are two sides to everything. In this situation, the managers need to be held accountable, not only to the upper chain but also to the lower chain, the employees (Brown & Harvey, 2006). These managers are responsible for making decisions that make or break certain products, or divisions. Accountability, responsibility, and availability, are all keys to success. When the managers act accordingly, the company will be successful (Blanchard & Thacker, 2004).• Employees need to be a part of the goal-setting, planning, and decision-making activities (Brown & Harvey, 2006). In order for employees to follow along with and agree to the goals, they need to be a part of the making of those goals. When employees are a part of the process, they are more likely to buy into them and actually participate in setting and maintaining those goals (Brown & Harvey, 2006).• Once the goals have been set, planning has been done, and things have been reorganized, it is important to maintain the process by holding regular meetings about the status of the changes (Blanchard & Thacker, 2004). Managers need to be aware of how their workers are going to react to the training and developments (Brown & Harvey, 2006). In this situation, every manager needs to have dialogue with the marketing department. This action, alone, will set into motion changes that would be expected to aid the sales and revenue of their respective products (Blanchard & Thacker, 2004).V. Recommendations
The restructuring and growth of Exley Company in terms of fixing the internal structure and sales aspects starts with the formation of a chain of command in conjunction with top manager roles. This chain of command will assist in creating consistency between the departments and in establishing a clear chain of authority. Top managers should establish and regulate the processes and procedures product managers must follow when collecting product input for marketing. With departments working towards the same goal, product production, the company’s overall goal of increase in sales can be accomplished. Through communication and collaboration the company will increase its chances at long term success. Lastly, another area of success in terms of increased sales lies in the company’s ability to tap into competitor’s concepts and take advantage of how to exploit Exley’s competitive edge. This will generate the possibilities of more collaborative work and increase in revenue.ReferencesBrown, D. & Harvey, D. (2006). An experiential approach to organization development. (seventh edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.McNamara, C. (1999). Business planning. Retrieved on 26 October 2006 from www.NonProfitOffice.comDagmar & Oliver Recklies. (2006). Themanager.org. Retrieved on 26 October 2006,from http://www.themanager.org/Strategy/Change_Phases.htmBlanchard, P.N. & Thacker, J.W. (2004). Effective training: systems strategies andpractices. (2nd Edition). Upper Saddle River NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. |