Pluto communication
Question: Final assignment on case study of Pluto Telecommunications
1. INTRODUCTION
Pluto started losing business because of there is no common strategic level business communications between directors and managing directors within organisation. The integrations of departments are causing further problems, because some employees are benefiting more than others are. Therefore, it is easy to envisage the conflict of interest from different individuals, which has created three sub-cultures within a single organisational culture. However, with the right measure of processes, management and leaderships, Pluto can bring both organisation and business on track.
2. STATEMENT OF PROBLEMS
Within the departments' communications and integrations dropped, because the strategic direction to tackle the rapid growth was either lacking or missing from top management. Moreover, the differences became highly evident at work motivation, time orientation and work culture within department levels.
3. ANALYSIS
Descriptions SOGI
(3.1) Managing director (Veronica) stayed away from regular operational matters because company was growing until recently when she realised that Pluto started losing new orders and received number of complaints from customers. Organisational
(3.2) External consultant (Andrew) assessed that Pluto communications is lacking with communication and integration within departments. Group
(3.3) Four executives have four different types of personalities and interests, which created conflicts. Individual Table-1: SOGI Analysis with brief descriptions Work Motivation Time Orientation Work Culture
Sales Department Yes Yes No
Customer Service Department No Yes No
Marketing Department Yes No Yes Table-2: A matrix dimensions of problems associated with specific departments
3.1 Organisation
Pluto is a telecommunications company, which means company's core business idea is to make communication possible for others; however, there is a disconnection in
1. INTRODUCTION
Pluto started losing business because of there is no common strategic level business communications between directors and managing directors within organisation. The integrations of departments are causing further problems, because some employees are benefiting more than others are. Therefore, it is easy to envisage the conflict of interest from different individuals, which has created three sub-cultures within a single organisational culture. However, with the right measure of processes, management and leaderships, Pluto can bring both organisation and business on track.
2. STATEMENT OF PROBLEMS
Within the departments' communications and integrations dropped, because the strategic direction to tackle the rapid growth was either lacking or missing from top management. Moreover, the differences became highly evident at work motivation, time orientation and work culture within department levels.
3. ANALYSIS
Descriptions SOGI
(3.1) Managing director (Veronica) stayed away from regular operational matters because company was growing until recently when she realised that Pluto started losing new orders and received number of complaints from customers. Organisational
(3.2) External consultant (Andrew) assessed that Pluto communications is lacking with communication and integration within departments. Group
(3.3) Four executives have four different types of personalities and interests, which created conflicts. Individual Table-1: SOGI Analysis with brief descriptions Work Motivation Time Orientation Work Culture
Sales Department Yes Yes No
Customer Service Department No Yes No
Marketing Department Yes No Yes Table-2: A matrix dimensions of problems associated with specific departments
3.1 Organisation
Pluto is a telecommunications company, which means company's core business idea is to make communication possible for others; however, there is a disconnection in
References: 1. Corbett M. (2012), Attributes of individuals, Organisational Behaviour (IB8020), Warwick Business School, Warwick, p-5. 2. Corbett M. (2012), Motivation and Psychological Contact, Organizational Behaviour (IB8020), Warwick Business School, Warwick, p. 6, 8, 15 3. Corbett M. (2012), Group Decision Making, Organizational Behaviour (IB8020), Warwick Business School, Warwick, pp. 3-7 4. Corbett M. (2012), Leadership, Organizational Behaviour (IB8020), Warwick Business School, Warwick, pp. 3-8 5. Corbett M. (2012), Attributes of Organisation, Organizational Behaviour (IB8020), Warwick Business School, Warwick, pp. 10-18 6. Corbett M. (2012), Strategy, Structure and Environment, Organizational Behaviour (IB8020), Warwick Business School, Warwick, pp. 4-9 7. Corbett M. (2012), Power and the Political Context of Organisations, Structure and Environment, Organizational Behaviour (IB8020), Warwick Business School, Warwick, pp. 3-9 Bibliography 8. Buchanan D. A., and Huczynski A. A., 2010, Organizational Behaviour, Pearson Education ltd., Harlow, Essex, (7th edn), p. 140, 289, 423 9. Handy, C. (1999), Understanding Organisations, Penguin Books ltd., London, England, (4t edn) p. 159