It is crucial to agree that organizations should adjust to the changing business environment to remain competitive. Concurrently, competition is widespread in any industry and economic conditions also change regularly. In this context, organizations that can hardly adopt the mentioned business dynamics are disadvantaged. It is important to create credible competitive advantages and viable brand names to remain relevant in the global market. This provision demands efficient management systems. The pressure to attain a breakthrough and the need for performance improvement are reasons behind the implementation of efficient management systems (Amelsberg, 2002). Others include proficiency in the industry and efficiency in operations. These reasons usually make companies implement new organizational structures to achieve management efficiency. Kahawa International (KI) operates in the financial sector and has to implement organizational change to be adaptable to the business environment.
The company wishes to implement a system that improves performance and reduces operational costs. The system would ensure that there is a free flow of information in the organization. It would also help in measuring the performance of the company. Concurrently, it will be possible to focus on the mission, planning, and developmental issues. The system selected by Kahawa International is based on the balanced scorecard. The framework of the strategy depends on the structure of the organization, levels of management, and integration (Hill & Jones, 2010). This paper presents Kahawa International’s proposed strategy and organizational change method that will enable success. This is a critical provision when considered decisively concerning management efficiency. It is important to adopt efficient management systems to enhance competitiveness.
Kahawa International Management Model to be adopted
Kahawa International (KI) has adopted a trivial management trend. The recently hired consultant (on management) advised the company to adopt a lean system. This would enhance efficiency and cost-effectiveness. The management has to recognize that a lean system would enable KI to be competitive since it would enhance its competitive advantages. In addition, it would enable integration thus enabling management and workers to connect freely (Tanachart & Islam, 2010). The current strategy that KI use leaves the management to make decisions on its own and this interferes with the implementation of the policies it makes. However, the management has to ensure that the whole company understands the proposed system. The system has to be holistic thus KI has to formulate general and specific objectives for the company and each department respectively.
New KI Objectives and System Realignment
The current management system that KI uses does not specify the objectives of the management. The new system proposed during organizational restructuring identifies the goals of the management. These include understanding goals, communication, and an interactive decision-making process. In addition, the management has to provide agenda that can be acted on and integration is to be achieved. The communication channel is to be lean, and documentation is to be transparent. The management intends to provide a meta-model business focusing on the financial industry, both locally and internationally. The model would enable KI to fit in the industry hence enhancing its effectiveness. It is also implementable and thus appropriate for KI.
The structure of the system to be adopted requires realignment of all core levels of operations. The core levels have to perform efficiently and be cost-efficient. The effective operations of these levels will ensure sustainable development in the performance of the whole organization (Kallio, Saarinen & Tinnila, 2002). The realignment in KI is to be both horizontal and vertical. Vertical realignment would enable KI to balance stakeholder requirements with the interior and exterior business environment. It will enable KI to put focus on the company’s vision and main values. This will force the management to emphasize exceptional customer relationships, the superior quality of products and services, and favorable publicity. The customers’ expectations have to be met and surpassed, and training and development of staff have to be done. These are not currently done by the management.
Conversely, horizontal alignment will ensure that the adopted strategies will bring balance in productivity and cost. The costs incurred while executing the business and measuring performance will be identified by the management. This means that the management will emphasize workers’ performance and cost-efficiency but not on activities (Amelsberg, 2002). Thus, the company has to adopt a balanced scorecard and sales stimulation program system. All these have to be adopted so that the management system focuses on vision, core values, and mission. These will aim at answering the questions; “What does KI want? What are the beliefs of KI? And why does KI exist?”
The new strategy map for KI will help in managing the performance and productivity of the entire company. The performance will be measured at every level by use of a balanced scorecard (Csaszar, 2009). This is not done in the current strategy used by the company. The use of the balanced scorecard ensures that KI stays focused on the strategy that it adopts. It gives KI the strategic agenda to pursue. The strategies to be used by all the departments also have to be interrelated and have to contribute to the general strategy. The strategic goals of KI will define the objectives of the company, the measurement tools, and the initiatives to be taken.
The features of the strategy (balanced scorecard) that will be used in defining goals include financial aspects, customer focus, stakeholder affairs, and developmental perspectives. The company (KI) will define the objectives of each of the perspectives. For example, customer focus will discern quality provisions regarding customer care service. Customers’ expectations should be surpassed. The measurements include measurements of the outcomes and measurements of performance drivers. The management has to group them by use of leading and lagging indicators.
Actualization of the strategy by the company will be through the alignment of strategic objectives with corresponding operational objectives.
The company has to capture and document all business processes. Currently, this is hardly done by the management. The organization (KI) has to consider all business processes core, supportive, and executive. The core processes consist of those that enhance the value chain of KI. These add value to KI’s commodities and satisfy customers’ needs. The competence that KI has in managing the core processes will ensure success. The support processes do not add value to the products and services but are internal systems that ensure smooth operations in the company. An example of a support process is project management or quality management (Saaty & Vargas, 2006). The process network can be complex and can involve supply chains, relations with other organizations, and government regulations. The relationship between the processes and work instructions has to be known, and all processes have to be documented. Technological improvements have to be included in management processes to increase efficiency and reduce costs. Information in the company also has to be managed properly (Stanev & Krappe, 2008).
This involves how the adopted strategies will work through the structure of KI’s management. The current strategy (used by the company) does not align with the strategy and structure of the company. The organizational deployment will allow the management to eliminate some of the unnecessary offices. Some offices have duplicated work thus causing inefficiency. The new structure of management will be viable with only seven individuals on the board. The vertical alignment that the company makes will ensure that all employees know their roles thus competent (Csaszar, 2009). The structure will allow each level of administration’s performance and cost to be measured. The structure will enable the measurement of benefits made by KI and the costs incurred to achieve such gains. At the same time, KI has different operational and strategic achievement indicators.
The proposed management system suits KI since it enhances efficiency, productivity, and relevancy in the realms of business. It will ensure a reduction in operation costs. In this context, KI will enhance its competitive advantages in operations. However, the commitment of the management (of KI) will help in augmenting success, both in the implementation of business strategies and in attaining positive results. The proposed method combines proven approaches concerning management. The system ensures that strategy, communication, integration, and performance of departments/workers lead to efficiency in the business.
Amelsberg, J. (2002). Systemic performance and cost management: A management framework for organizational excellence. Quality Congress.ASQ’s…Annual Quality Congress Proceedings, I (1) 487-500.
Csaszar, F. (2009). Organizational structure as a determinant of performance. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania
Hill, C. & Jones, G. (2010). Strategic management theory: An integrated approach. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Kallio, J., Saarinen, T. & Tinnila, M. (2002). Efficient change strategies. Business Process Management Journal, 8(1), 80-92.
Saaty, T. & Vargas, L. (2006). Decision making with the analytic network process: Economic, political, social, and technological applications with benefits, opportunities, costs and risks. New York, NY: Springer.
Stanev, S. & Krappe, H. (2008). Efficient change management for the flexible production of the future. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 19(6), 712-726.
Tanachart, R. & Islam, S. (2010). Designing an Efficient Management System. New York, NY.: Physica-Verlag HD.