Organizational change procedures are influenced by the institutionalization of power as well as the behavior of interest groups in and around organizations. The power that is embedded in formal organizations structure, as well as the process and the existing organizational arrangements, have been dramatically changing. The pressure of global competition and deregulation has driven numerous organizations and foundations to look for new types of association and diverse models for overseeing individuals.
In the theory and practice of organizational change, attention has always been paid to the importance of structure in achieving organizational goal. Initially, the concept of differentiation and integration describes the seemingly bipolar dilemma organizations face: pressures are to be different based on environment and task demands, on the other hand, and internal pressure to integrate, align and be similar to the other.
When Google, for example, went from being a privately owned company to a public owned company, it provided prospective shareholders of stock shares that were worth a single vote. At the time of the initial public offering Goodge stock, the three secretaries kept a third of their company’s stock, but that provided 80 percent of votes. Even though this structure did not make shareholders happy, the dual class stock made sense to the secretaries of Google Larry and Sergey. They intended to remain in control of Google to prevent the possibility of a hostile takeover and for future freedom. The dual ownership structure that went into effect after Google become a publicly owned company allowed Larry and Sergey to remain in control of Google’s strategy as well as culture. They additionally believed it would enable them to protect Goggles strategy better from outside influences. They believed they had developed a management structure, corporate culture, and climate for long-term innovation and growth.
Most critics examine the changes and adoptions that have been introduced in two important aspects of the managerial functions organizational structure and decisions making process. Lack of documentation often impacts all areas of the organization from general members to financial operators and makes accurate decision making very challenging (Aiken and Scott 101). Organizational culture and is therefore closely related to the team effort in a more dependent way on human behavior than it is on computerized systems. Therefore collecting archival information and recording the usable format for decision making is crucial
On the other hand, “Going Public,” selling securities to the public through IPO is not for all companies since it involves in it pros as well as cons. Especially, substantial benefits result from going public. However, serious drawbacks exist as well. Among the benefit of going public is the low cost of Capital. When equity makers are strong, the cost of capital raised through a public offering is typically lower o often substantially lower than the cost of capital raised in the private market (Burnes 978).
However, preparing a Security Act registration statement and the process of going public can be the opposite of everything because it is time-consuming and absorbs significant blocks of senior management time, time management could spend running the company instead (Kotter 170). It often takes anywhere from three to six months, or even in other cases longer, from the time a company first begins preparing a registration statement for the date the secretary declares that registration is effective. Given these, it is clear that the cons of “going public” outweigh the pros since a lot of management and useful resources goes to waste.
Works Cited
Aiken, Carolyn, and Scott Keller. "The irrational side of change management." McKinsey Quarterly 2.10 (2009): 100-109.
Burnes, Bernard. "Kurt Lewin and the planned approach to change: a re‐appraisal." Journal of Management studies 41.6 (2004): 977-1002.
Kotter, John P. "Why transformation efforts fail." The Journal of Product Innovation Management 2.13 (1996): 170.