Greeley B Case

331 Words2 Pages
1. Relatively autonomous structure of new division which has own resources contributed to resolve some handicaps existing in previous structure. New structure enabled faster decision making, more risk taking, and a toleration of imperfection. The new compensation structure supplied some incentives to employees such as higher salaries and stock options, and cash bonuses. Thanks to these incentives and excitement of new business, new PCC Unit achieved to attract a lot of high-performing people. The new portables structure allowed break the deadlocks created by consensus decision making by establishing ownership of the various steps in the development process. Although consensus was still valued, it didn’t trump everything else. Low profile characteristic of new PCC Unit minimized higher visibility, and unwanted scrutiny and interference which are not desirable things in an organization. Finally general manager of the new PCC Unit was committed to new technology . 2. New PCC Unit met some conflicts with the flatbed division, and tried to make the conflicts as few and painless as possible. Hiring employees who were already working in flatbed division became a problem between PCC functional managers and flatbed managers. PCC managers never gave up, and hired the employees who they want. Also Faraci encouraged the flatbeds manager to let his star employee go to portables. Another issue was that HP compensation structure was not set up to reward managers and other employees the way the senior team would have liked to compensate them. So, incentives which was taken gotten limited. New organizational design made possible an autonomous unit to some degree, but it wasn’t perceived sufficient by general manager of the unit. Because Faraci would sometimes change schedules or adjust previously agreed-to funding didn’t feel that he had absolute freedom with the new unit. Beyond

More about Greeley B Case

Open Document