Деловой иностранный язык - страница 21

a) reorganised b) wholly destroyed

3. severely understaffed:

a) very low down in the hierarchy b) with many too few workers

4. alienated:

a) feeling that you don’t belong b) feeling like a foreigner

Task 8. Discussion 1

Work in groups of three, consult Speaking References p. 126–130 and discuss the following issues:

▪ If you are already working: according to what you have read in this unit, would you say that your organisation is adequately structured, and that your job is correctly defined?

▪ If you are still studying: explain what kind of job you hope to get, and in what kind of organisational structure, and why?

▪ After reading Cringely, how do you think businesses should deal with change? Should structures be nearly permanent? Or should people be moved around frequently if projects and products are changing rapidly? How can we balance the necessity for change with the personal need for stability?

Here is the structure of a company, the City Petrol Service (Yerevan, Armenia). While preparing for the discussion, think of a structure in your real or potential company.

The example is taken from the Internet: www.cps.am/en/company-structure/1

Figure 3

President: Ashot Salazaryan

Vice-President: Ara Hovhannisyan

Chief Accountant: Svetlana Muradyan

Task 9. Reading 3

Getting started

▪ Before reading the text, discuss in small groups what you know about delayering or downsizing in the companies.

▪ What are the reasons of delayering?

▪ Who usually suffers more from delayering – directors, middle management or workforce?

▪ Read the text and consult Vocabulary p. 144–145.

HIERARCHICAL STRUCTURES AND SPAN OF CONTROL DELAYERING THE ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE

Figure 4

Figure 4 represents the situation of the late 1990s and 2010s with the advent of delayering or downsizing.

1. DIRECTORS

2. SENIOR/MIDDLE (combined functions; removal of several layers)

3. JUNIOR/SUPERVISORY (combined functions; removal of several layers)

4. WORKFORCE (reduced drastically with technology replacing labour in 1980s)

The late 1980s and early 1990s saw a substantial increase in the use of capital to replace labour (blue-collar workers) in the assembly line production process. Partly this was to take advantages of the latest technological developments, first used widely by Japanese industry, and partly to effect operational cost savings. The consequence of this was a reduction in the demand for unskilled labour across Europe and rising unemployment as remaining demand was for semi-skilled and skilled labour.

With the impact of the recession of the early 2000s and the major increase in competition from low-cost cheap-labour countries of the Pacific Rim, especially PR China, further cost savings were needed. This time white-collar workers or management were most affected by redundancies. Whole layers of management, junior, middle and senior, were removed from the organisational structure. This had the effect of creating businesses whose structure was shorter and squatter, giving much wider spans of control. It is argued that this gives more power to employees at the bottom of the organisational structure and creates a hierarchical structure. However, it also has the impact of increasing the workload of remaining staff significantly and causing increased stress. Moreover, delayering also has the negative effect of undermining staff loyalty and making staff retention more difficult, particularly in times of economic boom.