What pressures forced Ghosh to adopt a functional structure in 1989?
Ghosh had to adopt a functional structure in the year 1989 due to several factors. One of the
factors was the newness of the previous systems for the employees. The employees and the
organization had a hard time working in the organization because they were not aware of the
system's functions and how they were supposed to handle it. The new employees that were
hired in the company also had a hard time fitting into the work environment leading to more
problems in the organization. The employees were also not sure about the structure of the
company due to the lack of a hierarchy chart leading to more problems among the employees
in the workplace. The employees did not also perform as they were expected to because they
did not know the process that the company would use to evaluate their performance. The
most important factor that made Ghosh adopt the functional structure is that the previous one
had the potential of negatively affecting the reputation of the company because it promoted
the customers like their competitors (Bolen, 1998).
1b) What were the problems with the prior entrepreneurial structure?
The prior entrepreneurial structure made the process of managing and planning in the firm to
be difficult. The system made it hard for the company to continue with its tasks and come up
with appropriate plans that would help them in the achievement of their goals. The employees
also had a hard time when it comes to an understanding of the system and works better in the
organization. The fact that most employees did not understand the system affected the
efficiency of the employees in the workplace. The employees did not have an idea of whether
their performance was being evaluated, something that made them confused (Bolen, 1998).
2a) What problems resulted from the functional structure?
ESSAY QUESTIONS 3
The functional structure caused the separation of teams, making it hard for the employees to
engage in teamwork. Morale among the team players in the organization declined, making
the employees lose interest. The operators and the engineers also misconceived the structure
of the firm, which led to the company using more of its financial resources on the systems
and operations. The employees, therefore, interfered with the functions of the firms on an
individual basis rather than considering the policies that had been put in place by the
company. The work rate among the employees also declined because they did not value hard
work, which led to an unhealthy work environment (Bolen, 1998).
2b) What changes were made initially to deal with these problems?
Ghosh reorganized the staff and gave them tasks that matched their capabilities. Some of the
employees lost their jobs as a way of restoring sanity in the workplace. He also appointed
new staff and promoted their worth in the company.
2c) Were the changes effective? Why or why not?
The changes were effective because they created a considerable impact on the company. The
employees felt valued in the company, which increased their morale in the workplace. The
employees became aware of their role in the company, which made them perform better for
the benefit of all the stakeholders in the company. The previous staff that was integrated into
the new system suddenly found the work environment conducive and that they would
perform better in the company (Bolen, 1998).
3a) What benefits resulted from the company's transition to a divisional structure in
The divisional structure was developed in 1990, which was meant to better the firm. In the
new structure, Ghosh was able to divide the workplace into various sections, which made the
management of tasks in the company to be much easier. Each section in the company had a
ESSAY QUESTIONS 4
leader answerable to Ghosh. The fact that there were various leaders for various departments
made the process of managing the company to be much easier for Ghosh. The improvement
in the performance of the company became visible after the change in the management of the
company. The divisional structure led to the progressive development of the company. The
process of accountability was improved because the leader of each department reported to
Ghosh individually, which led to appropriate planning that enabled the company to achieve
its goals. The new organization in the workplace also improved the management of the
financial resources leading to an increase in profits (Bolen, 1998).
3b) What additional problems surfaced?
The firm still faced some challenges after the implementation of the new management
system in the company. Ghosh also faced challenges in the allocation of resources. The
divisions that were developed in the company were more interested in controlling the
resources rather than sharing with the other divisions. The leaders in various departments in
the company were not ready to support each other in the achievement of the company's goals.
The challenge is that the departments that had been created started operating as a separate
small company as opposed to a part of a large company (Bolen, 1998).
3c) What further structural changes would you recommend?
I recommend that the company should develop an environment that is conducive for all the
employees meaning that everyone should feel part of the company and its goals. The
company should also find ways of dealing with the divisions that come as a result of the
departments that have been formed in the company. The company should also share resources
equality with all the departments in the organization. The company should also regularly
change the management structure to ensure that it meets the trends in the market (Davoren,
ESSAY QUESTIONS 5
Bolen, I. B. (1998). Forcing Thermodynamically Unfolded Proteins to Fold. Journal of
Biological Chemistry, 4831-4834.
Davoren, J. (2016, August 12). Functional Structure Organization Strength & Weakness.
Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/functional-structure-organization-