netrashetty
Netra Shetty
Organisational Structure of Alaska Air Group : Alaska Air Group Inc., is an aviation holding firm / corporation based in SeaTac, Washington which owns two certificated airlines operating in the United States: Alaska Airlines[3] and Horizon Air.[4] In 1985, it was formed and a year later the holding company acquired Horizon Air and Jet America Airlines. Jet America Airlines, and their employees were merged into Alaska Airlines in 1987. Alaska Air Group has no relationship to JetAmerica, an airline proposed in 2009.
Alaska Air Group subsidiaries employed 9,866 staff as recently as 2007, but have cut that number back substantially by 2008. It remains undetermined how many employees actually work for Alaska
Taylor is right when he emphasized the very need of rigid formulation of standards based on credible and empirical research process. In this context, new organizational processes and methods subscribe to this approach of continuous research and evaluation of the entire organization and how it become more competitive and adaptive to the rapid changes and development of time. Therefore, management research or organizational research is not really a new method or approach rather derived from the theory of scientific management.
Organizational behavior in this scope adapted a kind of approach similar to that of the scientific management. In fact, I could be suspected of patterning new organizational principle with the scientific management principle.
Hence, management research and new organizational research process are but the same principle, dealing with identifying and citing specific problems and occurrences that would eventually affect the organizations’ production and business interests.
Power, Politics, and Conflict
These three variables played an important role in the development and growth of a certain organization. First, the presence of power in an organization cannot be denied, since a leadership skills is recognized and promotion is availed, this process clearly purports an ascribed power in a certain organization. Like any fields, power suggestive of authority and manipulation. Since, for instance, a manager decided to implement a “new concept” policy, the organization, as a body of people, must and forced to follow even some are having their reservations. In this case, power is clear as a medium to implement certain policy. With this power comes conflict. The tendency is that, with the power involved between higher ranking officers, conflict may arise because of given vested interests. Herein, politics, play an important role in the organizational structure, though, in some organization this can be implicitly seen, however, most of the organizations especially those who are driven with personal ambition and interests are blanketed with the play of politics.
Trickeries, political maneuvering, and manipulation tend to create conflict among organizations personnel. In this manner, this can bring fatal injury to the growth of the organization itself. If and when this condition perseveres, tendency is that organizational culture and disembodiment of individuals on the level of behavior, attitude, and culture might vanish.
This condition is not new; however, to remedy such the need of strategic and standardized approaches should be taken into account. Like in scientific management, this process should be considered in the level of the human resource management, in which management should monitor the condition and atmosphere of the organization. The responsibility is in the hands of those assigned people capable of resolving if this condition will arise.
To a greater or lesser degree, all parts of the organization need each other. Important developments in organizational design in the last few decades of the twentieth century and the early part of the twenty-first century have been attempts to understand the nature of interdependence and improve the functioning of organizations in respect to this factor. One approach is to flatten the organization, to develop the horizontal connections and de-emphasize vertical reporting relationships. At times, this involves simply eliminating layers of middle management. For example, some Japanese companies—even very large manufacturing firms—have only four levels of management: top management, plant management, department management, and section management. Some U.S. companies also have drastically reduced the number of managers as part of a downsizing strategy; not just to reduce salary expense, but also to streamline the organization in order to improve communication and decision making
Alaska Air Group subsidiaries employed 9,866 staff as recently as 2007, but have cut that number back substantially by 2008. It remains undetermined how many employees actually work for Alaska
Taylor is right when he emphasized the very need of rigid formulation of standards based on credible and empirical research process. In this context, new organizational processes and methods subscribe to this approach of continuous research and evaluation of the entire organization and how it become more competitive and adaptive to the rapid changes and development of time. Therefore, management research or organizational research is not really a new method or approach rather derived from the theory of scientific management.
Organizational behavior in this scope adapted a kind of approach similar to that of the scientific management. In fact, I could be suspected of patterning new organizational principle with the scientific management principle.
Hence, management research and new organizational research process are but the same principle, dealing with identifying and citing specific problems and occurrences that would eventually affect the organizations’ production and business interests.
Power, Politics, and Conflict
These three variables played an important role in the development and growth of a certain organization. First, the presence of power in an organization cannot be denied, since a leadership skills is recognized and promotion is availed, this process clearly purports an ascribed power in a certain organization. Like any fields, power suggestive of authority and manipulation. Since, for instance, a manager decided to implement a “new concept” policy, the organization, as a body of people, must and forced to follow even some are having their reservations. In this case, power is clear as a medium to implement certain policy. With this power comes conflict. The tendency is that, with the power involved between higher ranking officers, conflict may arise because of given vested interests. Herein, politics, play an important role in the organizational structure, though, in some organization this can be implicitly seen, however, most of the organizations especially those who are driven with personal ambition and interests are blanketed with the play of politics.
Trickeries, political maneuvering, and manipulation tend to create conflict among organizations personnel. In this manner, this can bring fatal injury to the growth of the organization itself. If and when this condition perseveres, tendency is that organizational culture and disembodiment of individuals on the level of behavior, attitude, and culture might vanish.
This condition is not new; however, to remedy such the need of strategic and standardized approaches should be taken into account. Like in scientific management, this process should be considered in the level of the human resource management, in which management should monitor the condition and atmosphere of the organization. The responsibility is in the hands of those assigned people capable of resolving if this condition will arise.
To a greater or lesser degree, all parts of the organization need each other. Important developments in organizational design in the last few decades of the twentieth century and the early part of the twenty-first century have been attempts to understand the nature of interdependence and improve the functioning of organizations in respect to this factor. One approach is to flatten the organization, to develop the horizontal connections and de-emphasize vertical reporting relationships. At times, this involves simply eliminating layers of middle management. For example, some Japanese companies—even very large manufacturing firms—have only four levels of management: top management, plant management, department management, and section management. Some U.S. companies also have drastically reduced the number of managers as part of a downsizing strategy; not just to reduce salary expense, but also to streamline the organization in order to improve communication and decision making
Last edited by a moderator: