To What Degree Does Diversification Reduce Risk? What Arguments Can Be Formed Against Diversification? Use Examples from Your Own Company or One You Know Well.
Diversification: Designed for Effort
Reorganisation for an intentional emphasis
Child (2005) Suggests a bureaucratic structured organisation is not transparent for novelty and tractability. However, hierarchal structure has been working for decades and some employers like to work this way. Many employees prefer this type of structure as this will help them advance their careers when they perform. Organisational ‘Blueprint’ gives employees their boundaries of operations; in addition, this gives managers the knowledge of their employees and ultimate control. Even though this might be a good formal structure, in today’s market this would not help the organisation to have any competitive edge.
Management needs to lead with diversity, pre-empt to their environment and be adaptable if they wish to be respected managers in their business. Development is lost when a bureaucracy does not allow change by their employees, within this type of organisation, any change is slow, and this is due to management approval of their `time line. Organisations need to restructure in flexibility and innovation to maintain the strategic focus of its employees. Organisations must start to work to a lateral structure to allow all employees to be responsible towards the strategic objectives of the organisation; and to ensure these objectives remain encountered. This type of organisation allows empowerment to the employee of their performance, which enhances ideas and communications, thus increases innovation and flexibility that is desirable to meet those objectives.
Firms concurrently pursue their development across both the geographic and product diversification areas. Hashai and Delios (2011) states that:
To achieve balance, businesses commonly adopt a strategy of expanding an under-diversified direction at the expense of an over-diversified one. Accordingly, we depict geographic diversification and product diversification as being an endogenous relationship, from which we
Reorganisation for an intentional emphasis
Child (2005) Suggests a bureaucratic structured organisation is not transparent for novelty and tractability. However, hierarchal structure has been working for decades and some employers like to work this way. Many employees prefer this type of structure as this will help them advance their careers when they perform. Organisational ‘Blueprint’ gives employees their boundaries of operations; in addition, this gives managers the knowledge of their employees and ultimate control. Even though this might be a good formal structure, in today’s market this would not help the organisation to have any competitive edge.
Management needs to lead with diversity, pre-empt to their environment and be adaptable if they wish to be respected managers in their business. Development is lost when a bureaucracy does not allow change by their employees, within this type of organisation, any change is slow, and this is due to management approval of their `time line. Organisations need to restructure in flexibility and innovation to maintain the strategic focus of its employees. Organisations must start to work to a lateral structure to allow all employees to be responsible towards the strategic objectives of the organisation; and to ensure these objectives remain encountered. This type of organisation allows empowerment to the employee of their performance, which enhances ideas and communications, thus increases innovation and flexibility that is desirable to meet those objectives.
Firms concurrently pursue their development across both the geographic and product diversification areas. Hashai and Delios (2011) states that:
To achieve balance, businesses commonly adopt a strategy of expanding an under-diversified direction at the expense of an over-diversified one. Accordingly, we depict geographic diversification and product diversification as being an endogenous relationship, from which we