1- 1. The functional structure is set up with the goal that each portion of the organization is assembled according to its motivation. In this kind of organization, for instance, there might be a marketing division, a business office, and a generation office. The functional structure works very well for private companies in which every office can depend on the ability and information on its workers and support itself. Be that as it may, one of the disadvantages to a functional structure is that the coordination and correspondence between offices can be confined by the organizational limits of having the different divisions working independently. The now-outdated Tecumseh Products Company was organized divisionally – with a little motor division, a compressor division, a sections division and divisions for each geographic zone to deal with explicit needs. The advantage of this structure is that necessities can be met more quickly and more explicitly, as every division can work freely for different divisions in the organization. Notwithstanding, a divisional game plan can likewise be awkward, as correspondence is repressed because representatives in various divisions are not working together. Divisional structure is exorbitant because of its size and degree. Private ventures can utilize a divisional structure on a littler scale, having various workplaces in various pieces of the city, for instance, or doling out various deals groups to deal with various geographic territories. The third primary sort of organizational structure, called the matrix structure, is a crossbreed of divisional and functional structure. Regularly utilized in enormous global organizations, the matrix structure considers the advantages of functional and divisional structures to exist in one organization. This can make control battles because most zones of the organization will have double management – a functional manager and an item or divisional manager working at a similar level and covering a portion of the equivalent managerial territory.

2. Virtual Structure: The substance of the virtual organization is that it is commonly a little, core organization that re-appropriates major business capacities. Additionally, alluded to as a particular or network organization. It is exceptionally unified, with practically no departmentalization. The pith of the virtual organization is that it is regularly a little, core organization that re-appropriates major business capacities. The virtual organization is additionally alluded to as a measured or network organization. It’s profoundly concentrated, with next to zero departmentalization. Virtual Structures tend to be flexible as people can be added and removed at will. Companies within this form of a structure are focused on doing what it is best at (Wagner & Hollenbeck, 2014). For example, if a company were good at marketing then in the world of a virtual structure this would be its core competency. According to Wagner & Hollenbeck, a virtual structure resembles that of a loose functional structure (2014).Team Structure: A team structure must be less various leveled, share the administration, and be more liquid than conventional structures, (for example, functional or divisional). Genuine teams don’t disband after an undertaking. Or maybe, they proceed to change and adjust to satisfy gathering and organizational goals more than quite a long while. Team structures can kill layers of management, which enables workers to settle on decisions without getting numerous endorsements. This streamlines procedures and brings down managerial expenses. Nonetheless, persuading people in a team-based organization can be more testing as team achievements are remunerated as opposed to singular accomplishments. Matrix Structure is a combination of a divisional and functional structure. This structure is geared towards being project driven, as the main activity for the company will be projected. According to Nagarajan, construction companies will use this form of the structure since the resources would be put to optimal and effective use (2004). For longer-term projects, a matrix structure will be able to maximize the resources.

Circular Structure: The freshest, and generally different, team structure is ordinarily known as a circular structure. A circular structure has little administration and highlights decentralized decision making. Managers coordinate and control relations both inward and outside to the firm. A social structure of communications is encouraged to fabricate and oversee formal and informal connections. The objective of this structure is to accomplish quick organizational development and adjustment to continually changing outer and inside situations.

3. At the point when an independent venture has a bigger number of workers than it requires, managers may choose to downsize the association. This can be the consequence of expanded productivity or decrease sought after. While downsizing influences everybody in the association, it has the most noteworthy impact on representatives who are expelled and need to leave the organization. Representatives who lose their positions due to downsizing might be qualified to get severance pay. Workers are qualified to get severance pay if their agreement of business accommodates it or their boss has a strategy or practice of paying severance pay. Organizations that utilize more than 100 individuals must give their representatives 60 days composed notice of a mass cutback or pay. Getting a single amount installment toward the finish of their business can be a positive for representatives as they can clear obligations or develop their reserve funds. It might be upsetting for a representative to hear that he will lose his present place of employment. In any case, it additionally opens different open doors he may not generally have considered. Numerous organizations offer withdrawing representatives help to secure another position, known as outplacement support. A worker may get a new line of work that offers preferable terms and conditions over his past job. Some leaving workers take advantage of the lucky break to set up in business for themselves, utilizing their severance pay to support their new pursuit. At the point when a representative is informed that he is losing his employment as a major aspect of a downsizing procedure, he may get dejected. He may contrast himself horribly with associates who will stay with the organization and lose trust in his aptitudes and capacities. On the other hand, a worker may lose control of the organization for settling on the choice to expel him. After some time, that outrage can go to sharpness. To manage the mental impacts of downsizing on withdrawing workers, numerous organizations offer directing help.

An organization’s structure can effectively affect its individuals. Not every person leans towards the opportunity and adaptability of natural structures. A few people are generally gainful and fulfilled when work assignments are institutionalized, and uncertainty limited. Work specialization adds to higher representative profitability. No proof backings a connection between the length of control and worker fulfillment or execution. Genuinely solid proof connections centralization and employment fulfillment, implying that less centralization is related to higher fulfillment.

References

Sheaffer, Z., Carmeli, A., Steiner?Revivo, M., & Zionit, S. (2009). Downsizing strategies and organizational performance: a longitudinal study. Management Decision.

Schnetler, R., Steyn, H., & van Staden, ,P.J. (2015). CHARACTERISTICS OF MATRIX STRUCTURES, AND THEIR EFFECTS ON PROJECT SUCCESS. South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, 26(1), 11-26. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1690372265?acc…

2-Organizational structure is ultimate determining factor of organization’s success. According to Point Park University, an organizational structure can be described as a structure that defines organizational hierarchy (Point Park University, 2018). This system is designed to determine how a business must operate to achieve its goals and objectives. The three main types of organizational structure include functional, divisional, and matrix. Each system comes with unique advantages and fallbacks and can only be applicable for companies in specific situations or at certain stages of their life. The functional structure is based on a complex organization being separated into smaller departments with specific set of roles and responsibilities (Ahmadi at al., 2016). Commonly this system is used to satisfy the need for separation into smaller groups. For example, a company could have some teams working in information technology department, some in marketing and the last once in finance management. Each department had a head manager who answers directly to an executive leadership that overseas several departments. The functional structure is based on shared goals and common duties and is aimed on maximization of specialization scale.

The second structure is called divisional or multidivisional and is used as a tool to reduce the decision-making responsibility from the top management and allows for much more autonomy among groups within organization (Ahmadi at al., 2016). This system represents a set of individual functional departments that report to a central office. Essentially, each group operates as its own company, managing its own resources and finances. Thus, this type of structure offers better flexibility to a large company with many subdivisions, allowing the central office to solely focus on large projects. Finally, the last system is matrix structure which is aimed towards combining functional and divisional characteristics. The focus of matrix solution is to merge the efficiency of functional structure with elasticity and support of divisional system. In this structure, specialized personnel are involved in one or few project teams where all the activities are negotiated between functional and project managers with the large influence by team members. This system is considered as the most challenging because at times it might be exceedingly difficult to report to several managers and keep clear communication. Therefore, it is extremely important for everyone to have a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities.

In recent years, several organizations have been working on developing new structural options with less layers of hierarchy and more emphasis on opening the boundaries of the company. According to Robbins and Judge, the three main innovative designs are virtual, circular and team network (Robbins & Judge, 2013, p. 490). In the core of virtual organization is a small, fundamental group that outsources major business functions. This system is highly centralized and has few or zero separate departments. Commonly, the managers in virtual structure spend majority of their time directing and controlling outside relations, typically through computer-network tools. One of the major advantages of this system is its elasticity. Head managers can control every business operational process from any location around the globe. The primary downfall is decrease of managerial oversight over the key business functions. Additionally, cultural alliances and shared aspirations can be lost due to a low degree of personal interface. It is common for team members who are geographically separated and lack frequent communication to experience difficulties with sharing information and knowledge, which causes reduced originality and slower response time.

The team structure is designed to eliminate the chain of command by replacing it with empowered teams and departments (p. 493). This system allows the company to remove vertical and horizontal boundaries and flatten, flatten hierarchy as well as minimize rank and status structure. When fully operational, the team structure can even break geographical barriers. This structure in based on cross-hierarchical teams which consist of top executives, middle managers, supervisors, and operative employees, participative decision-making practices, and the use of 360-degree performance appraisal (performance evaluated by peers and others). In recent days, many large companies like Coca-Cola and McDonald’s have adopted the team structure principals to expend their business to international level. the circular organization places executives at the heart of the company, radiating outward in circles grouped by specific functions such as managers, specialists, and then workers. This system is especially appealing to creative entrepreneurs and some small innovative companies. However, some employees might find this structure somewhat unclear regarding who to report and who oversees the project.

At some point of its lifetime, an organization may be forced to implement a downsizing strategy to reach an appropriate size, restructure, adjust to growing technological advancements, become more proficient in its core business, become more flexible, lower production costs, or remain competitive on the market. As stated by Akdogan and Cingoz, sometimes downsizing can create some severe issues stopping the company from meeting its objectives (Akdogan & Cingoz, 2009). The policy changes and layoff practices imposed during downsizing process could make employees incredibly angry with leadership. Additionally, the remaining workers (survivors) may respond to downscaling in assertive way. If the process is perceived as unfair practices, the survivor’s commitment and loyalty will decrease drastically. Therefore, the negative perception of downsizing by remaining employees can become a large problem and force an organization to fail. One of the biggest reasons for unfavorable attitude towards downscaling by subordinates is the fact that members have concerns about their own future and expect increase in their workload. Since achieving the target of implementing downsizing strategy directly depends on employee’s attitude, organizations must ensure their workers share organizational commitment – overall strength of personal identification with and close involvement in an organization.

References

Ahmady, G. A., Mehrpour, M., & Nikooravesh, A. (2016). Organizational Structure. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences , 230, 455–462. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2…

Akdogan, A. A., & Cingoz, A. (2009, February). The Effects of Organizational Downsizing and Layoffs on Organizational Commitment: A Field Research. researchgate.net. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/200823989_The_Effects_of_Organizational_Downsizing_and_Layoffs_on_Organizational_Commitment_A_Field_Research.

Business. (2019, May 2). 4 Types of Organizational Structures: Point Park Online. Point Park University Online. https://online.pointpark.edu/business/types-of-organizational-structures/.

Robbins, S. (2013). Foundations of Organizational Structure. In T. A. Judge (Ed.), Organizational Behavior (15th ed., pp. 480–502). essay, Pearsons.

——————————————————————————————————

3- First and foremost BRICS is an association of the five major emerging economies of the world. The member nations of BRICS are Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. It was formed in 2006 and it is headquartered in Shanghai, China. The motive behind forming this group of nations was to encourage commercial, political and cultural cooperation between the member nations. BRICS help the members’ nations to enhance trade amongst them and provides growth and stability to the region. BRICS in the recent time has emerged as a powerful regional group and it has considerable significance on the world politics and trade. The formation of BRICS was an effort of Russia and after the success of this association many other countries such as Afghanistan, Argentina, Indonesia, Mexico, Pakistan and Turkey have expressed interest in joining it. Since BRICS involves few of the most powerful economies and emerging superpowers this association is considered to be powerful and influential (Joy, Justin; Panda, Prasant Kumar, 2019).

It is clear that the BRICs have experienced strong economic growth over the past decade, and have gained upon the traditionally influential Western countries in terms of economic strength. This development, in addition to the recent financial crisis, has given the BRICs increased confidence to act on the international scene, and thus their political clout has grown and will probably grow more in the years to come. The future structure and effectiveness of global, International and regional governance through institutions or bilateral agreements depends, to a large degree, on the way that the BRICs will be included in policymaking. In order to agree on useful global agreements and conventions it is absolutely essential to include developing countries and, in particular, the BRICs. With increased political and economic powers, it is likely that the BRICs will be looking to assert and also want their economy better to bring prosperity and progress (Wise, Nicholas, 2019).

On the other hand the NAFTA on the other hand is an agreement between three nations i.e. Canada, Mexico, and the United States to create a trilateral trade bloc in North America. The major focus of this treaty was to create and promote a free trade area to conduct business without trade restrictions. Whereas NAFTA only looks for a free trade area the BRICS believe in increasing all types of cooperation such as economic political and cultural as well as their main agendas of NAFTA is to eliminate duties on goods crossing north America, to provide a platform to international investors in North America and most importantly to obtain a broad spectrum of growth including business and agricultural development (Sharma, Shweta; Anand, Anand, 2018).

References

Joy, Justin; Panda, Prasant Kumar.Journal of Financial Economic Policy; Bingley Vol. 12, Iss. 3, (2019): 345-363.

Sharma, Shweta; Anand, Anand.International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management; Bradford Vol. 67, Iss. 9, (2018): 1625-1639.

Wise, Nicholas.Journal of Place Management and Development; Bingley Vol. 12, Iss. 1, (2019): 89-100.

4-BRICS is an acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. These five nations ranked among the world’s quickest developing business sector economies for quite a long time, on account of low work costs, good socioeconomics and bountiful normal assets all at once of a worldwide items blast. It’s critical to take note of that the Goldman Sachs proposition wasn’t that these nations would turn into a political partnership (like the EU) or even a conventional exchanging affiliation (Thompson & de Wet, 2017). Rather, Goldman said they can possibly frame a ground-breaking financial alliance, in any event, recognizing that its figures were idealistic and subject to critical approach suppositions. All things considered, the suggestion was that financial force would bring political force from BRICS nations consistently went to highest points together and regularly acted working together with every others’ advantages.

It is a lot of like the European Union and NAFTA, which plan to diminish or totally dispose of import and fare levies, so as to advance the free progression of products across outskirt nations. The fundamental driver between the making of economic deals is the financial model for similar favorable position, which expresses: the capacity of an individual or gathering to complete a specific monetary movement (Chrzanowski, 2011). A few nations can create a more noteworthy measure of products for less expensive than different nations and subsequently, advantage from economic deals through diminished levies on sends out, which permit them to send out more prominent amounts just as dispense with exchange deficits. BRICS plans to achieve more noteworthy success by empowering business, political, and social collaboration between the five taking an interest countries. Up until now, it would appear that they are well headed to achieving this.

Plainly BRICS nations are attempting to set up monetary maintainability outside of western overwhelmed markets, and all things considered. From 2000 to 2008, the BRIC nations’ consolidated portion of complete world financial yield rose from 16 to 22 percent. Together, the BRIC nations represented 30% of the expansion in worldwide yield during the period (Hou, 2013). By putting resources into their own business sectors first, they will see considerable homegrown development; something that is essential to BRICS countries, particularly China. China has supported monetary development for quite a long time and is currently in a situation to radically improve their own personal satisfaction, instead of have every other person advantage off of their modest items.

Reference:

Chrzanowski, I. (2011). NAFTA and the EU are the two on a collision course? Folia Oeconomica Stetinensia, 10(1), 131. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/v10031-011-0006-1

Hou, Z. (2013). The BRICS and global governance reform: Can the BRICS provide leadership? Development, 56(3), 356-362. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/dev.2014.5

Thompson, L., & de Wet, P. T. (2017). BRICS development strategies: Exploring the meaning of BRICS ‘Community’ and ‘Collective action’ in the context of BRICS state led cooperation in south africa. Chinese Political Science Review, 2(1), 101-113. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41111-017-0056-0