Organization Effectiveness and Success Paper

Organization Effectiveness and Success Paper

Thomas Buckley

Grand Canyon University:  ORG 812

October 4th, 2016

Organization Effectiveness and Success Paper

        Organizational Effectiveness in the focus of technology with today’s ever changing landscape, is highly important in the design and efficiency of the organization.  With the internet explosion, and the integration of wireless networking the view of e-commerce has changed (Mohapatra, 2013).  With the thought that organizational effectiveness being defined as the efficiency with which the organization can meet the objectives set, the success of the organization is known.  Within this paper we will address how technology has had a great impact on organizational structure for Google Inc., a top employer and highly successful organization.  Having a heavily dependent organization on the e-commerce and technology, Google Inc., is a great example to discuss and analyze.  Through this paper we will discuss the effect of technology on Google Inc.’s efficiency, design and effectiveness.  We will also address a best organizational structural response toward environmental uncertainty and recommend changes to improve efficiency and effectiveness.  

Google Inc.

        Organizational effectiveness is the efficiency in which an organization is able to meet the established objectives (Cameron, 2010).  This can differ between organizations based on differing goals, structure, and even opportunities for resource attainment.  When dealing with top of the market technology leaders, Google Inc. rises to the top. Organizational structure at Google Inc. has a function-based and product-based definition with flatness, which groups employees based on function (Google, 2014,2015).  Teams are designed based on function as well as product’s.  Examples would be, Sales Operations team, Product Management team, and groups based on devices such as Nexus (Google 2014, 2015).  The organization also created a flatness, where each team, employee or group can bypass any level and go directly to the CEO (Google, 2014, 2015).  The success of Google Inc. links to the correlation of strong organizational culture, as mentioned by Claver-Cortes, Pertus-Ortega and Molina-Azorin (2012), toward the organizational structure.  Through Google’s synergistic benefit of this style of structure, marketplace dominance is evident in expansion and prosperity (Google Inc., 2014,2105).  With regards to effectiveness it is evident in the market domination that Google Inc. has shown to be highly efficient in operations.  This is done through measurement of comparison to the achieved targets of set standards.  

        This structure allows for a flexible culture that builds the capabilities of the organization.  This is done through five areas, open, innovative, smart with emphasis on excellence, hands-on, and supports small-company-family rapport (Google, 2014,2015).  As Google Inc. creates a culture based on these foundational pieces that as Alvesson (2012) suggests drives efficiency and effectiveness organizational wide.  This has translated to Google Inc., being a company that has built a reputation with the customers influenced by the organization (Smith, 2013).  This culture correlates to the overall organizational effectiveness and efficiency.  

        Organizational efficiency is improved with the use of technology due to the relation of the available resources of the organization.  With Google Inc. the adaptation of technology integrates the organizational differences and builds on allocating resources as needed to the groups that have priority.  Technology allows for best practices as Becker and Gerhart (1996) suggested that “best practice” can help organizations become more efficient and effective.  This would show that Google Inc.’s culture and correlation would be in line with Becker and Gerhart.  Who also suggested that managing the flow of communication between differing departments can increase efficiency through the sharing of resources. This creates a technological bridge that connects and associates the differing departments and groups.  

This role of technology increases effectiveness through the composition of departments and differing groups.          Prasad, Green and Heales (2012) found that technology can indeed, combine and align functional and product departments within the organization with differing structure and design.  As all operations become associated through the technology, effectiveness is enhanced with the flow of communication aligning.  Where complication and overwhelming size, once dictated, technology has created ease and correlation.  Since technology can communicate with a broad amount of users at one time with a single message, efficiency grows and creates effectiveness.  This is highly important within the organization of Google Inc.  

Google’s life cycle is influenced by the well-designed structure that delegates to the differing roles, groups, departments and products creating achievement of established goals and objectives.  This cycle goes through progression of the four stages Daft (2015) establishes in the text.  From entrepreneurial to elaboration all organizations follow a path through these stages for survival.  Beginning with the establishment of needs and objectives the organization requires the hands of the visionaries.  Then the organization moves to defining clear and attainable goals and creates the design and expectations for the stakeholders.  As the organization moves to the third of the four stages, formalization begins to take shape and process and procedures take hold.  This stage shapes effectiveness as goals and objectives are realized which propels toward the elaboration stage.  As Daft (2015) in the text suggests, movement through this cycle creates effectiveness and a guide to the organization for success.