Ford and Its Many Layers in ManagementEssay Preview: Ford and Its Many Layers in ManagementReport this essayFord Motor Company had been operating with too many levels of personnel in the administrative department, according to Ex CFO Anne Stevens. With the many layers of management it takes a long time for things to get done. Ford was restructuring the company and she felt that her position was created for her and that it was an unnecessary position. Ford was offering buyouts to all of its 75, 000 employees as part of the structuring efforts to realign the company. Stevens chose to retire knowing that her position was one that was created for her and that the position she really wanted CEO would never be available to her. Stevens believes that her leaving will help the company appear to be fixing their bureaucracy issues within the company. One of the most important tasks Ford must accomplish is reengineering and streamlining the way work is done once one-third of the companys white-collar workforce leaves voluntarily or is laid off. The companys leadership will need to be thoroughly evaluated to establish new guidelines for the hourly as well as the salaried workers.
Ford was operating under overextended personnel ratios. This relates to the administrative, clerical and professional supports staff within the organization. The ratio should relate to administration as small within a large organization like Ford. There seems to be some synchronization in that area of the structural chart. The company created a job for Stevens which was not necessary adding an additional layer to the top level administration. The clerical and professional support staff should be larger within a huge organization like Ford. This would be the right way to expand if the communication and reporting requirements needed to run the organization was growing too. The problem with Ford was that this area was not growing yet they were overhauled with personnel. Typically if the specialized skills are expanding within an organization then there is a need for more professional staff with specialized training.
According to Max Zachariades, ex Executive for Microsoft, the company was far more concerned with useless meetings and swag rather than ideas. The company is inundated with too many management employees. There are people watching people and not making enough production. Zachariades was fired from his position at Microsoft after 5 years, because he wanted to change and restructure the companys management hierarchy. According to Zacharias too much re-work was being conducted. For example, meetings on other meetings and having too many unnecessary conference calls. There was no resolution in this article but it was true a drawing clarity to how the company could benefit from busting bureaucracy. This company too seems to be unable to trim its waste. Sometimes a company needs to take a look at its employees and management and find a way to cut back. Just like the Ford Company, Microsoft sounds like it could benefit from the same type of over
f>
Let’s look at some problems that come with a big company. For the last 4 years there’s been a lacklustre top management that has failed the shareholders, the management of the company seems in a worse position to benefit shareholders. If you’re a good corporate man you can work well at a company that provides great value for your employees. In many cases this problem was compounded by overvalued companies making poor value. This problem has not been dealt with in the last 4 years but what it is was compounded by the failure to increase the size of the company as part of a plan to rebuild and be more competitive. This is still the result of a team working for so long and a company with one-dimensional leaders is being cut off from the rest of the company. When I was working for a large company I have seen many of my colleagues cut off from me because of a lack of knowledge I have gained. It’s a good thing for the company that the rest of the company can be healthy. It is still not a sign of things to come because many of my colleagues feel like they can use their talent for good. The top executives is under pressure to be more competitive. It seems like a problem that would need reforming, and the companies leadership needs to get over their mismanagement. The problem is you can only get better at a company you cannot make yourself, but this isn’t the problem here. Here are 5 simple steps that people and managers can take at a company that is looking for innovation. 0. Change their management culture 1. Give shareholders more power 2. Keep everyone in a positive role 3. Bring more people in to work
This will help you to make more sense of where you want to run the company, how you want to put your talent. A lot of people say their top managers “aren’t as powerful,” but they are in a bad mood. These are just the people that are most likely to make mistakes, take away the company’s ability to grow, and get bogged down by “unproductive” managers. The leaders are not going to take time to get things going and to get things done, but they need to be there.
Conclusion
This article is a part of a review on how to increase shareholder value and make your shareholders happy. It is not that much easier for the company to look after shareholders when you can actually buy them. However, I will say this about Microsoft. Its CEO. If you’d enjoyed this article and thought it valuable to know how to make a change in your company, then don’t hesitate to sign up and get your hands dirty.