人力报告.doc

1. Introduction.2. Findings(1) The structure and hybrids changing of Barbour Brown after merger.(2) The applicable structure of the structure.(3) The main situational about them and how the technology and size helped determine the new structure .(4) The different line, staff, functional and lateral relationships within proposed new structure.(5) The Authority, responsibility and delegation should be exercised within the new structure.3. Conclusions.1. Introduction.This report has been analysis the situation after Barbour Brown merger with John Colbert Civil Engineering Contractors. After merger, the most structure of them need to re-structure. And on authority, contingency theory side need to rebuild. In this report, I will analysis the situation about them.2. Findings.(1) The structure and hybrids changing of Barbour Brown after merger.There are two main organizational structure: tall(narrow spans) and flat(wide spans). The tall organizational structure had many levels of supervision. This kind structure were easy to close supervision and fast communication between subordinates and superiors. But it cost too much in those levels, supervisors may get too involved in the work of subordinates and undue delay may be cause because information has to be carried through several levels, upwards and downwards. In flat structure, supervisors have to delegate and ensure clear policies are laid down. But it also had some disadvantage, such as it maybe lost control by the supervisor and the need for high-quality managers as their workload tends to be so high that bottlenecks may occur. The flat structure is the more science structure of organization. The Barbour Brown company were useing flat structure after merger.And also, Barbour Brown after merger also useing the hybrid structure. A hybrid structure will include elements of both matrix and functional organizations. The advantages of this structure is that it may be adaptable to changing business circumstances. Disadvantages are that it may led to staff being confused about what they relational are. For example, David would like to use the centralised line structure. And Neil would like to choice the way of the centralised team. Centralised functions is a structure where the specialist functions are held in a main central position, serving all other depertments or locations. Usually some activity is centralised as it may be uneconomical, They are unaffected by local needs, or headquarters wants to maintain a common approach.In the attached case, we could found the dissection of work by product or service. For example, in the first paragraph, John believe creating a business would cater fully for development of civil and structural engineering projects. And in the last Paragraph, John thought savings could be made by reducing he administration costs currently incurred by having two administration sections.(2) The applicable structure of the structure.In departmentation by product, a production unit is set up for each good/service.This approach is mainly adopted by large organisations, but can work effectively in smaller ones. Top management can delegate wide authority to a division or plant that manufactures and sells a product or family of products (or services). The advantages of dissection of work by product or service included: Aids specialisation of staff and equipment; Coordination is facilitated and customers may get better service; Responsibility for profit can be introduced by setting a standard for a product department with the manager responsible for most of the functions involved; Managers are given a wider responsibility. But the disadvantages is difficulty of maintaining coordination among product areas and duplication of some activities in each product group.However, Form the case, Barbour Brown after merger were suit on use the line project. Where authority comes down from the boss to their staff directly a line relationship is said to exist,for example the authority of the manager flows down the line of command. The manager is said to be the line manager for the particular group of staff.(3) The main situational about them and how the technology and size helped determine the new structure .Contingency theory is a class of behavioural theory that claims that there is not best way to organize a corporation, to lead a company or to make decisions. Instead the optimal course of action is contingency upon the internal and external situation.From the case study, They were about to star work on two major developments: the new eisure complex and the office block for the Scottish Executive, the latter of which was only secured as a result of the close working arrangement of the two firms. we could find that they range of goods and service will be increased after merger. And from the case: the design engineer was in charge of a given project on site. We could know that the design engineers power were addition. On the side of administration, the two administration will be one after merger, certainly the administration cost will be saving after merger. Finally, the merger would made the company grow. The two company merger could be beneficial in a number of ways, in the case the merger would help clarify this relationship, John had a large office and easy access to the engineer, and they design communication tended to be done though phone calls and e-mail etc. Through those way we could found the firm size were tend to formal and after merger they sharing their resources made the competitiveness to be more strong. Certainly, their own power were increased.(4) The different line, staff, functional and lateral relationships within proposed new structure.Where authority comes down from the boss to their staff directly a line relationship is said to exist. We know, John employed two teams, each team comprised a team leader, digger driver and three qualified builders, when working on large developments they will work together but they responsible for different aspect of the site development.In an organization there may be specialists who advise and support managers and their staff. These specialists may act across the organization. In those case, civil and structural engineer projects staff is the found staff and the administrations staff is the manage staff.Where the functional specialist supports or has authority over certain activities of a particular department there is said to be a functional relationship. For example, the structural engineering project team and administration team could be a functional relationship.Other relationships that can exist are the Staff Relationship and Lateral Relationships. Lateral relationships are those that exist between staff at the same level in the organization. These are important for the coordination of the various functions of the organizations. In this case John, David and Neil is in the lateral relationship.(5) The Authority, responsibility and delegation should be exercised within the new structure.An organisation that has formally appointed managers who then have subordinates reporting to them has a line structure. Line relationships are found within functions and departments,with line managers being responsible for everything that happens within their department. In the side of their partner, the responsibility were difficult to set part, According to the companys benefit, the responsibility should distribution through their special skill. For example, John is a chartered civil engineer he is suit on responsible for engineer project team.The line structure provides routs for upward and downward communication and links departments together to an ultimate source of authority. The authority of the manage all changing after Babour Brown merger with John Colbert senior Civil Engineering Contractors. At first, all the system turn to complete, is no longer a info