# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 1 Resource 1: The Importance of Organizational Design and Structure

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 1 Resource 1: The Importance of Organizational Design and Structure

# data[].attributes.body
by Gill Corkindale
11 Feb 2011

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Importance of Organizational Design and Structure_HBR_2011_5sep17

# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 1 Q1: Do sport managers need to understand organisation theory?

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 1 Q1: Do sport managers need to understand organisation theory?

# data[].attributes.body
Use the resource materials in the course and contents uploaded on this padlet to respond.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 1 Resource 2: Steve Jobs on Organisational Structure 

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 1 Resource 2: Steve Jobs on Organisational Structure 

# data[].attributes.body
YouTube 1:28, 9 Apr 2014

# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 1 Resource 3: Organisation Structure & Culture of Nike 

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 1 Resource 3: Organisation Structure & Culture of Nike 

# data[].attributes.body
YouTube 10:01, Joo Hyung Park, 7 Nov 2016

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Organisation Structure & Culture of Nike

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Recorded with http://screencast-o-matic.com References: Bedbury, S & Fenichell, S. (2003) 'A New Brand World: Eight Principles for Achieving Brand Leadership in the 21st Century'. New York, NY: Penguin Books. Brenner, B. (2013) 'Inside the Nike matrix*'. Institute for International Marketing and Management, WU Vienna. online. available from: http://epub.wu.ac.at/3791/1/Nike__WU-CaseSeries.pdf 05 November 2016 Conlon, J.

# data[].attributes.body
Case written by Barbara Brenner 2013 (Institute for International Marketing & Management, WU Vienna) for class discussion.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 1 Resource 5: Nike Inc. Organizational Structure Characteristics (Analysis)

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 1 Resource 5: Nike Inc. Organizational Structure Characteristics (Analysis)

# data[].attributes.body
by Andrew Thompson7 Feb 2017

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Nike Inc.'s organizational structure reflects the abilities and limits of the business in its operations. A company's organizational structure is the composition and system design applied on the interconnections among employees, groups, and divisions of the business. In Nike's case, the corporate structure highlights the need to address differences among regional markets. As such, the company has developed its organizational structure to enable adjustments in dealing with market differences. As one of the leading players in the athletic footwear, apparel and equipment industry, Nike Inc. serves as an example of how regional variations must be included in business strategies.
Nike Inc. has an organizational structure that facilitates regionalization of business strategies. The characteristics of this organizational structure provide Nike with flexibility to address consumer preferences for athletic shoes, apparel and equipment in regional markets.
Features of Nike's Organizational Structure

Nike has a geographic divisional organizational structure. This structure is based on the company's needs in its global organization and regional markets. The following characteristics are notable in Nike's organizational structure:

1. Global corporate leadership

2. Semi-autonomous geographic divisions

3. Global divisions for Converse and brand licensing

Global Corporate Leadership. Nike's organizational structure has global corporate leadership, which involves corporate managers. The managers have offices in the company's headquarters in Oregon, USA. They decide for the global organizational structure of Nike. For example, the Global Sports Marketing group releases new athletic shoe marketing campaigns for worldwide marketing. Through this feature of Nike's organizational structure, decisions are easily implemented throughout the company. The following are the main global leadership groups headed by a President, Executive Vice President, or Chief Officer:

Office of the President & CEO, Nike, Inc.

Nike Brand

Finance

Global Human Resources

Product & Merchandising

Administration & Legal

Global Sports Marketing

Operations

Semi-Autonomous Geographic Divisions. Geographic divisions are a major organizational structure characteristic of Nike, Inc. The company's operations are divided into segments based on regional markets. Each regional division's managers optimize operations in the regional sports shoes, apparel and equipment market. Nike's organizational structure has the following regional divisions:

North America

Western Europe

Central & Eastern Europe

Greater China

Japan

Emerging Markets

Global Divisions for Converse and Brand Licensing. Nike's organizational structure also has two global divisions: one for the Converse brand and another for brand licensing. One global division is responsible for managing the worldwide operations of Converse, which is another footwear brand and subsidiary of Nike Inc. Another global division is responsible for licensing the Nike brand. This characteristic of the organizational structure offers control for brand licensing and the operations of Converse.

Nike's Organizational Structure Advantages & Disadvantages

Nike Inc.'s organizational structure's characteristics support growth and stability. Global corporate leadership has the advantage of facilitating control on the entire organization. The advantage of the semi-autonomous regional (geographic) divisions is flexibility in satisfying regional market-specific consumer preferences for Nike's athletic shoes, apparel and equipment. However, a disadvantage of Nike's organizational structure is the limited approach to managing the operations of Converse.

References

About Nike - Executives.

Liao, C., Chuang, S. H., & To, P. L. (2011). How knowledge management mediates the relationship between environment and organizational structure. Journal of Business Research, 64(7), 728-736.

Markides, C. C., & Williamson, P. J. (1996). Corporate diversification and organizational structure: A resource-based view. Academy of Management journal, 39(2), 340-367.

Martin, R., Muuls, M., de Preux, L. B., & Wagner, U. J. (2012). Anatomy of a paradox: Management practices, organizational structure and energy efficiency. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 63(2), 208-223.

Menguc, B., & Auh, S. (2010). Development and return on execution of product innovation capabilities: The role of organizational structure. Industrial marketing management, 39(5), 820-831.

Nike, Inc. Form 10-K, 2015.

Tang, F., Mu, J., & MacLachlan, D. L. (2010). Disseminative capacity, organizational structure and knowledge transfer. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(2), 1586-1593.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nike Inc. Organizational Structure Characteristics (Analysis) - Panmore Institute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Nike Inc.'s organizational structure reflects the abilities and limits of the business in its operations. A company's organizational structure is the composition and system design applied on the interconnections among employees, groups, and divisions of the business. In Nike's case, the corporate structure highlights the need to address differences among regional markets.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 1 Resource 6 : Nike to cut 2 per cent of work force, simplify organizational structure 

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 1 Resource 6 : Nike to cut 2 per cent of work force, simplify organizational structure 

# data[].attributes.body
Siddharth Cavale, Bengaluru, Reuters, 15 Jun 2017

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Nike Inc said on Thursday it would cut about 2 per cent of its global workforce as it simplifies its organizational structure by reducing the number of business segments.

As part of a new initiative called "Consumer Direct Offense," the company said it plans to drive growth by focusing on 12 key cities in 10 countries, cutting down production lead times and eliminating a quarter of its shoe styles.

Trevor Edwards, the president of the Nike brand, will lead the new initiative, which will also involve making several changes to its leadership structure, the company said.

Starting in fiscal 2018, the company will report results based on four new operating segments: North America, Europe, Middle East and Africa, Greater China, and Asia Pacific and Latin America.

Previously the company used to report results for six units that included Western Europe, Central & Eastern Europe, and Japan and emerging markets as separate units.

Nike also said it would reduce the number of its shoe styles by a quarter, focusing on key brands such as ZoomX, Air VaporMax and Nike React.

To react faster to consumer trends, the company also said it would cut production lead times by half.

As part of the organizational changes, about 1,400 employees are expected to lose their jobs. Nike had 70,700 employees as of May 31, 2016.

Nike's shares were down 2 per cent at $53.59 in morning trading.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nike to cut 2 per cent of work force, simplify organizational structure

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Nike Inc said on Thursday it would cut about 2 per cent of its global workforce as it simplifies its organizational structure by reducing the number of business segments. As part of a new initiative called "Consumer Direct Offense," the company said it plans to drive growth by focusing on 12 key cities in 10 countries, cutting down production lead times and eliminating a quarter of its shoe styles.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 1 Activity 5 Resource: What is your organisation like?

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 1 Activity 5 Resource: What is your organisation like?

# data[].attributes.body
by Max McKeown, 14 Jun 2006

# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 1 Activity 1 Resource: Orchid Country Club

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 1 Activity 1 Resource: Orchid Country Club

# data[].attributes.body
YouTube Video, 13 Nov 2011 (1:10)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Orchid Country Club, Singapore - Club Overview by Asiatravel.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Asiatravel.com offers over 500,000 Hotels, Flights, Travel Packages, Tours & Attractions up to 75% discount. All with last minute availability & instant confirmation plus up to 5% cash rebate exclusively for our customers.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 1 Resource 7: Frederick Taylor and Scientific Management

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 1 Resource 7: Frederick Taylor and Scientific Management

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 1909, Taylor published " The Principles of Scientific Management." [1] In this, he proposed that by optimizing and simplifying jobs, productivity would increase. He also advanced the idea that workers and managers needed to cooperate with one another. This was very different from the way work was typically done in businesses beforehand. A factory manager at that time had very little contact with the workers, and he left them on their own to produce the necessary product. There was no standardization, and a worker's main motivation was often continued employment, so there was no incentive to work as quickly or as efficiently as possible.

Taylor believed that all workers were motivated by money, so he promoted the idea of "a fair day's pay for a fair day's work." In other words, if a worker didn't achieve enough in a day, he didn't deserve to be paid as much as another worker who was highly productive.

With a background in mechanical engineering, Taylor was very interested in efficiency. While advancing his career at a U.S. steel manufacturer, he designed workplace experiments to determine optimal performance levels. In one, he experimented with shovel design until he had a design that would allow workers to shovel for several hours straight. With bricklayers, he experimented with the various motions required and developed an efficient way to lay bricks. And he applied the scientific method to study the optimal way to do any type of workplace task. As such, he found that by calculating the time needed for the various elements of a task, he could develop the "best" way to complete that task.

These "time and motion" studies also led Taylor to conclude that certain people could work more efficiently than others. These were the people whom managers should seek to hire where possible. Therefore, selecting the right people for the job was another important part of workplace efficiency. Taking what he learned from these workplace experiments, Taylor developed four principles of scientific management. These principles are also known simply as "Taylorism".

Four Principles of Scientific Management

Taylor's four principles are as follows:

1. Replace working by "rule of thumb," or simple habit and common sense, and instead use the scientific method to study work and determine the most efficient way to perform specific tasks.

2. Rather than simply assign workers to just any job, match workers to their jobs based on capability and motivation, and train them to work at maximum efficiency.

3. Monitor worker performance, and provide instructions and supervision to ensure that they're using the most efficient ways of working.

4. Allocate the work between managers and workers so that the managers spend their time planning and training, allowing the workers to perform their tasks efficiently.

Critiques of Taylorism

Taylor's Scientific Management Theory promotes the idea that there is "one right way" to do something. As such, it is at odds with current approaches such as MBO (Management By Objectives), Continuous Improvement initiatives, BPR (Business Process Reengineering), and other tools like them. These promote individual responsibility, and seek to push decision making through all levels of the organization.

The idea here is that workers are given as much autonomy as practically possible, so that they can use the most appropriate approaches for the situation at hand. (Reflect here on your own experience - are you happier and more motivated when you're following tightly controlled procedures, or when you're working using your own judgment?) What's more, front line workers need to show this sort of flexibility in a rapidly-changing environment. Rigid, rules-driven organizations really struggle to adapt in these situations.

Teamwork is another area where pure Taylorism is in opposition to current practice. Essentially, Taylorism breaks tasks down into tiny steps, and focuses on how each person can do his or her specific series of steps best. Modern methodologies prefer to examine work systems more holistically in order to evaluate efficiency and maximize productivity. The extreme specialization that Taylorism promotes is contrary to modern ideals of how to provide a motivating and satisfying workplace.

Where Taylorism separates manual from mental work, modern productivity enhancement practices seek to incorporate worker's ideas, experience and knowledge into best practice. Scientific management in its pure form focuses too much on the mechanics, and fails to value the people side of work, whereby motivation and workplace satisfaction are key elements in an efficient and productive organization.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Frederick Taylor and Scientific Management - Understanding Taylorism and Early Management Theory

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 1909, Taylor published " The Principles of Scientific Management." [1] In this, he proposed that by optimizing and simplifying jobs, productivity would increase. He also advanced the idea that workers and managers needed to cooperate with one another. This was very different from the way work was typically done in businesses beforehand.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 3 Resource 3: The Determinants of Effectiveness of Sporting Associations in Singapore

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 3 Resource 3: The Determinants of Effectiveness of Sporting Associations in Singapore

# data[].attributes.body
Koh-Tan, Angela, Managing Leisure, 2011

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Determinants of Sporting Associations in Singapore_AKT_Managing Leisure2011

# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 3 Resource 2: Measuring the Organizational Effectiveness of National Sport Governing Bodies

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 3 Resource 2: Measuring the Organizational Effectiveness of National Sport Governing Bodies

# data[].attributes.body
Frisby, Wendy, Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, Jul 1986

# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 4 Resource 1: The Zheng Qingjin controversy – SBA issues unconvincing, unsatisfactory reply

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 4 Resource 1: The Zheng Qingjin controversy – SBA issues unconvincing, unsatisfactory reply

# data[].attributes.body
Redsports 15 Oct 2008

# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 4 Resource 2: Badminton: Chief coach Chua, assistant national coach Fu quit SBA

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 4 Resource 2: Badminton: Chief coach Chua, assistant national coach Fu quit SBA

# data[].attributes.body
ST 21 Jul 2107

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Badminton_Chief coach Chua, assistant national coach Fu quit SBA_ST21jul17_28sep17

# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 4 Resource 3: Badminton: Third badminton coach leaves

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 4 Resource 3: Badminton: Third badminton coach leaves

# data[].attributes.body
ST 26 Sep 2017

# data[].attributes.body
Elberse, Anita, HBR, Oct 2013

# data[].attributes.headline
Ch 7 Resource 1: Case study -  Creation of the Canadian National Sport Centres

# data[].attributes.subject
Ch 7 Resource 1: Case study -  Creation of the Canadian National Sport Centres

# data[].attributes.body
p 146-7 of Slack & Parent (2006)