Morning Star: A Unique Organizational Structure and SHRM Model - Essay Sample

Introduction

The morning star lattice structure is one that is interesting when comparing to other factors of organizational structure that exist in the world. Also, the Morning star human resource department seems to be well conversant with the new model of strategized human resource management (SHRM), which most companies are adopting to continue with their operations in general. However, just like any other organizational structure, every place has culture and code of conduct for the employee, of which in case an individual decides to violet any, they might face the company's disciplinary actions. Moreover, the self-management philosophy seems to be the best strategy for Morning star lattice since it has been in operation for a long time, and that is why it keeps on expanding and increasing its tomato sales over the years. Also, the company's vision is to make sure that it appears among the best places to work for in the future by trying as much as possible to align with the trending mechanisms in the business and to deal with its competitors in the market. This paper will analyze the case study of the Morning star lattice structure through the use of end questions asked by the end of the study.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Question 1

From a personal point of view and the case analysis is that Morning star seems like the best place to start a career and retire at the same workplace. However, the self-management philosophy of the Morning star operation is easy to adopt and maintain since it entails freedom. With freedom, an individual can set personal goals and how to accomplish any assigned tasks before the deadlines. One of the benefits of working at the Morning Star is that freedom, and this shows everyone is guided by his/her morals and principles to fulfill his duties and be part of the company's success. Even though many individuals love freedom and working under no boss is somehow tricky since the employees might feel that they own the job and go against their colleague's letter of understanding (CLOU).On the other hand, working in a bureaucratic organization, a person is entitled to some benefits such as room for career and financial growth since they operate from a centralized structure, meaning there are more opportunities for bonuses and promotions (Nielsen, Babic, Stojanovic-Aleksic & Nikolic, 2019). However, in a bureaucratic organization, there is no freedom of employees, which means they work under strict supervision, and they cannot be there because of passion but to meet their basic needs.

Question 2

The self-management criterion which Morning Star Company uses works best for most of the companies in the world. The self- management core philosophy is freedom, and every human being in the world loves freedom, which gives him/her enthusiasm and even performs better at tasks assigned to him or her. However, there are no many disadvantages of the self-management philosophy, but a few changes in the structure to adapt to the centralized form of operation will boost the company's revenue and expand its service in the country. One of the recommended structures by most experts in the employment of the boss scene because there are accrued advantages rather than the full exercise of freedom for the workers (Rosli, Hasan, Alkahari & Tokoroyama, 2017). For instance, in self-management, every individual is dedicated to the colleague's letter of understanding as to the strategy of accomplishing their roles, but this cannot work effectively because they might set their schedule and work in paces which do not allow them achieving the targets. But with the addition of a supervisor or a team leader, this can make sure that things are moving as planned and also employees can even clarify some of the instructions if they are unclear.

Question 3

Even though the lattice structure promotes so many benefits, such as natural leadership qualities still cannot be applied to some circumstances in life because it has some cons by itself. The lattice structure cannot work in a place like the military because there is no policy enforcement, and everyone acts as his/her boss, who makes it hard to delegate duties, and this might lead to chaos. In a lattice structure, every individual is accountable only to himself, and hence coming up with policies and implementing those makes it hard to accomplish (Azmi, Ismail, Hasan, Alkahari & Tokoroyama, 2017). Also, the lattice structure accommodates workers whose discipline and motivation are off their chart, but if it meets those employees who are focused, the company will not progress because every worker needs motivation and motivations can be in terms of promotions and bonuses. However, the motives cannot happen without evaluations, and the lattice structure offers no room for evaluating the employees since they operate under their authority and in teams.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the lattice structure and traditional bureaucratic structure can work effectively if incorporated at some point within the organization. For instance, at some hierarchical point, lattice should involve the supervisors at the junior level to oversee how things are done but no strict measures applied to the employees, but they work at their freedom.

References

Azmi, M. S., Ismail, R., Hasan, R., Alkahari, M. R., & Tokoroyama, T. (2017, September). Vibration analysis of FDM printed lattice structure bar. In Proceedings of SAKURA Symposium on Mechanical Science and Engineering (pp. 33-35).

Nielsen, J. E., Babic, V., Stojanovic-Aleksic, V., & Nikolic, J. (2019). Driving Forces of Employees' Entrepreneurial Intentions-Leadership Style and Organizational Structure. Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies, 24(3), 59-71.

Rosli, N. A., Hasan, R., Alkahari, M. R., & Tokoroyama, T. (2017, November). Effect of process parameters on the geometrical quality of ABS polymer lattice structure. In Proceedings of SAKURA Symposium on Mechanical Science and Engineering (pp. 3-5).