How do you think planning in today’s organizations compares to planning in an organization 25 years ago? Do you think planning becomes more important or less important in a world where everything quickly changes and crises are a regular part of organizational life? Why? Planning in an organization today is considerably different than 25 years ago, although each era certainly has its own challenges. In the past, planning was more stable and the flow of information did not include the internet and social media influence. This lack of readily available information was both a benefit and a liability, as trends and emerging competitors may have been more difficult to follow or quantify. Change, or more correctly stated, the speed of change for
…show more content…
“Since the firm usually has better control over its internal operations, it would do well to start by tackling internal challenges and then to move outwards toward external operations and suppliers” (Véronneau,Yan & Roy, 2013, p.212). This means that while a change of domain is an appropriate response to external threats; it should not be undertaken prior to optimization of internal structures and processes. One company that has been forced to change its domain is Barnes and Noble. The bookstore continues to suffer market erosion due to online bookseller Amazon but “its recent earning beat shows that brick and mortar bookstores are not things of the past and are making a resurgence” (Johnson, 2016, para 8). Barnes and Noble have sold off both Nook (Greenfield, 2014) and their college book divisions which is a drastic change that has forever changed their product domain. Their new strategy is to become a community meeting center, an ideal that is a sharp change in market, product and external environment (Berr, …show more content…
There is a culture of overall bossless openness, an atmosphere of continual evolution, change and empowerment that is prevalent at many levels of the company versus only the higher management levels in an efficient performing organization (Daft, 2016). A transnational organizational style shares many of the same attributes including but not limited to decentralization perhaps by geography for example, and an overall need for autonomy within different regions. Daft refers to a transnational organization as having a “philosophy of interdependence” (2016, p. 246) and an advanced and complex international organizational model. In summary, many of the goals are shared between the learning organization and the transnational organizational, however the scale of the transnational model requires interdependence and most importantly a shared and well communicated vision. The ability for this structure to enable knowledge sharing, global learning and shared values that allows the structure to be successfully applied in large global
“Since the firm usually has better control over its internal operations, it would do well to start by tackling internal challenges and then to move outwards toward external operations and suppliers” (Véronneau,Yan & Roy, 2013, p.212). This means that while a change of domain is an appropriate response to external threats; it should not be undertaken prior to optimization of internal structures and processes. One company that has been forced to change its domain is Barnes and Noble. The bookstore continues to suffer market erosion due to online bookseller Amazon but “its recent earning beat shows that brick and mortar bookstores are not things of the past and are making a resurgence” (Johnson, 2016, para 8). Barnes and Noble have sold off both Nook (Greenfield, 2014) and their college book divisions which is a drastic change that has forever changed their product domain. Their new strategy is to become a community meeting center, an ideal that is a sharp change in market, product and external environment (Berr, …show more content…
There is a culture of overall bossless openness, an atmosphere of continual evolution, change and empowerment that is prevalent at many levels of the company versus only the higher management levels in an efficient performing organization (Daft, 2016). A transnational organizational style shares many of the same attributes including but not limited to decentralization perhaps by geography for example, and an overall need for autonomy within different regions. Daft refers to a transnational organization as having a “philosophy of interdependence” (2016, p. 246) and an advanced and complex international organizational model. In summary, many of the goals are shared between the learning organization and the transnational organizational, however the scale of the transnational model requires interdependence and most importantly a shared and well communicated vision. The ability for this structure to enable knowledge sharing, global learning and shared values that allows the structure to be successfully applied in large global