1.0 Introduction
Decision-making processes have always been the differentiating point from which organization gains a competitive advantage (Dobbs, 2014, p. 34). This is attached to the criterion on organization structure that the company has. In this evaluation, the theme revolves around the organization structure for the MacDonald’s company and the Apos Company (Apos, 2016; McDonalds, 2015). With reference to industry segmentation, the two companies are different. Additionally, Apos and McDonalds did initially serve in different economic regions but find similarities with the globalization of their services. According to Brown (2012, p. 12) the decisions making of companies with such huge influence on the global markets needs be rationalized to cater for the different clientele in the different markets. Therefore, using the Pestle analysis, the Porters competitive forces and SWOT analysis that is used to examine the internal and external audit for the performance of the company (Fine, 2009).
Strategizing for the organization builds from the organization structure, their objectives and their mission (Barnes, 2008, p. 112). This is also a position that the three models will seek to develop based on the present day scenarios in mind. The report, therefore, outlines its literature to analyzing these models for McDonalds and Apos, the discussions, the evaluation and the recommendations on the future in terms of organization strategy and decision-making.
2.0 Organization strategy for McDonalds and Apos Analysis
The analysis of the organization strategy seeks to establish the strengths and the weakness of the systems that these two companies have. Marketing score (2015) suggests that in assessing strategies emphasis is laid on the achieved objectives such that have been or not yet achieved by the unit. In this case, more is revealed on the internal and external merits that the company has in its annual operations.
2.1 Internal and external audit – assessment of the SWOT analysis for McDonalds and Apos
Reading from the material presented by Yüksel (2012, p. 52) and the company website for McDonalds the organization has the following objectives. It endeavors to be consistently delivering the promise of a modern, progressive burger company with the contemporary customer experience delivered worldwide. This indicates the interest that the company objectives put to the customer acquisition, customer retentions, and customer management through the innovation of their products according to (Aspinall, et al., 2010, p. 78; Bennett, et al., 2013). On the other end, the Apos limited a clinical and health related matter and solutions detailed as a global specialist on prosthetics and orthotics provider company orders in its organization structure to the efforts to growing more (Apos, 2016; Böhm, 2008). The company has objectives to the provision of quality services for the patients.
According to Chong (2014), the SWOT analysis will be interested with the internal and the external positions that the two companies have.
2.1.1 Strengths and weakness – internal audit
Strengths Weakness
McDonalds have the advantages of having an advantage in terms of the brand supremacy globally. This creates and advantage in competition according to Dawkins & Reichheld (2011, p. 43) in new markets and provided an edge on already existing markets. Bennett et al. (2013) state that this boosts their customer confidence. MacDonald’s face still competition from newer and older brands from the USA in the global market. This entails that their menu needs to be rebranded to face this still competition. Buller & McEvoy (2012, p. 45) suggests that rebranding only will detail to creating advantages of the company and not the loss of the image.
Apos has a good reputation with the European market, in the provision of quality products. they have a good score on reliability Financial management for the company is wanting with the calls for liquidation being exhibited (Apos, 2016).
2.1.2 Opportunities and threats
Opportunities Threats
McDonalds – New and emerging markets that are yet to be penetrated by the brand presented a good opportunity for the company. MacDonald’s – Competition on prices is the biggest problem especially in markets that MacDonald is yet to venture into.
Apos has the opportunities of increasing global awareness to cater for the special markets in Europe and America for orthotics and prosthetics Apos – Capital allocation and financial muscle that the company lacks will be the downfall and the point from which it will face still competition.
2.2 Porters fives forces
With the assessment of the competition levels attached to the porters recommendations for the two companies and interesting position is noted with the advantages that the two companies may be having. According to the Dobbs (2014), the porters fives forces of competition describes in the following areas. The bargaining power of suppliers, and buyers, the threats of new entrants and those of substitutes and the industry rivalry.
Porters force Macdonald’s Apos
Industry rivals Eminent force to the company based on the increase of fast food company that has franchisees globally. there is also the traditional competition that is faced from the restaurants and dinners Apos faces less industry competition based on the specialization that they have made. Their market is there limited to orthotics and prosthetics.
Threats from substitutes Substitute pose fewer threats to the company as the markets already is saturated Substitute pose bigger threats here based on the specialization of the country,
Threats from new entrants Substitute pose fewer threats to the company as the markets already is saturated New entrants are shielded with the position of fewer clients to deal with therefore thy have the market to their control
Bargaining power of buyers No buyer control Lesser control based on special services being provided
Bargaining power of suppliers Supplier controls different in the different regions They are the suppliers to their market, therefore, making less of a threat the bargaining power of suppliers.
2.3 Pestle analysis
This is developed as a macro environment analysis and effective decision-making criterion for an organization (Crossan, et al., 2013, p. 567; Pahl & Richter, 2009). This is majorly and interest that is developed with the marketing criterion of the company in question. The pestles focus on the political, the economics, the social, the technological, and the legal environments that the company has built around it (Buller & McEvoy, 2012; Intangible Business, 2016).
Figure 1 Pestle framework
Developing more insights on the application of the model for these two companies, the choice of effects is surrounded by the several operations that they have locally and internationally. The political environment for examples will be affecting the operations of the Apos based on it being a provider within the medical industry. Local laws may be amended according to Crossan, Mazutis & Seijts (2013) therefore affecting, in this case, the political, the legal and the social environment. Identifying with the McDonald Company, more emphasis is laid on the technological and socials environments, as they are the fast moving market globally (Flint, et al., 2011). These environments depend on the constant interaction of the company with the clientele according to customer retention measures (Desphandé, et al., 2010, p. 27).
Therefore, in general, the measure of the two companies performance serves less interest to the pestle analysis based on the inabilities that they two companies have to offer better communication in these environments (Flint, et al., 2011, p. 219). For example, the expansion plans of McDonalds are not clearly put up such that the economic affiliation can be examined. Nevertheless, their wait on markets such as Africa can only be speculated to be having less incentive.
3.0 Discussion
In this discussion, the analysis will now center on the use of theory such that an evaluation can be presented to the effect of analysis on the position that the two companies have. With the content of the dimension of business interaction within an organization and more precisely on the internal and external workplaces, the decision-making dependents on the theory applied according to (Dawkins & Reichheld, 2011, p. 49). The main concern is the trends in the relationship and the management of people as suggested by (Kim & Brymer, 2011, p. 1023). Therefore, organization behavioral theory aims at studies the impact that is attached to the different individuals in the organization, the different groups and equally organization or business structure (Eccles, et al., 2012, p. 235). With this in mind, therefore, there are several theories that are developing and have equally been developed along the suggestions of explaining organization behavior in the different fields such as sociology, human resource, communication studies, and equally management studies.
Organization Behavioral theory seems to be more focused on the individual behavior of the workplaces compared to the other theories as handled in other discussions. Focusing on the position held in management of organizations, the major effect that the behavioral theory has are attached to the suggestions of maintaining a model under which the management leadership is given and from and equally the company of conduct if strictly defined (Kim & Brymer, 2011, p. 1021; Griffin & Moorhead, 2011).
With this, the effects may be leveled to an attachment of performance levels that is already predicted as suggested by (Barrick, et al., 2013, p. 140; Heizer & Render, 2010, p. 28). By this, the behavioral theory, therefore, is already suggestive of the goal and leaves no room for improved performance as suggested by (Podsakoff & Dennis, 2013, p. 534; Miller & Power, 2013, p. 600).
With the dimensions analyzed in the larger study of organizational behavior, the main and major concern will be concepts that these various behavioral theories seek to identify. With the terms underlying all these theories being the word behavior, the text by Griffin & Moorhead (2011, p. 20) on functionally, assert this as defining the term of a way or a mannerism in which companies perform and behave. Therefore, following on this suggestions, the main theories that this text identifies to human and organization behavior at workplaces are the scientific approach on leadership theory, the human relation approach, the dan ecision-making approach and the neo-human relations theory (Heizer & Render, 2010, p. 30).
In essence, the effects attached to these theories are different when compared, the effects of the scientific leadership focus on how the job needs to be done efficiently. On the other hand, the human relations theory examines the norms that formal groups and informal groups have on the works productivity as per the suggestions of (Eccles, Ioannou, & Serafeim, 2012, p. 265). On the third theory, decision-making emphasizes on the compromise that is made between the goal-oriented behavior and the behavior that do not optimize the goals and objectives of the company (Griffin & Moorhead, 2011, p. 15). Lastly, the neo-human relation theory deliberates along the moderns days structures as held by Podsakoff & Dennis (2013, p. 536), this implies of a very different position in terms of the worker motivation levels in the different set up exhibited. In essence, the effect of the neo-human relations theory develops on the suggestions of a hierarchy of needs as suggested by (Griffin & Moorhead, 2011, p. 17).
4.0 Evaluation
With the traditional position that the theory holds in the management on organizations and the overall and dimensions of decision making, there are concerns on what to consider with the functionality and the efficiency exhibited by the theories. Based on this suggestion, the theory is found to be somehow immobile to present and diverse position that organizations require, practically looking and the position that McDonalds and Apos have. Along the same suggestions, the theory is positioned as having been distorted with the upcoming theories taking more detail to its original concern; in fact, this is evident from the position held by the comparison with the various theories choosing to specifically deal with singular issues (Podsakoff & Dennis, 2013, p. 532).
Basically looking at the trend and the finding that have been presented with the presentation of the analysis point of view before heading into the discussions. The positions of the management organization and the decisions making processes need to be having better angles into the management of employees and the management of clients (Zimmerman & Yahya-Zadeh, 2012, p. 260). In real sense, these are the two most important groups that the company will be having. In fact, basing the facts sheet on the SWOT analysis and the behavioral management theory. This is attached to the interest that the companies will be having in terms of seeking their introduction goals. Decisions making in a majority of the occasion is made on an interactive position, this is therefore attached to the interest that one will be having in terms of the management analysis of the effects of using such theory in reflecting the management decisions making for the company (Zimmerman & Yahya-Zadeh, 2012).
Significantly looking at the environment that the pestle analysis had suggested, the effect that the company takes is one that is not all inclusive to the use of the theory of the perspectives. This is attached to the needs and the interest that the two companies have in terms of achieving their quality and customer management objectives (Wardman, et al., 2013, p. 3). In this case, the interest that this evaluation presents is that based on the theory the reliability of the decisions making process for the two companies can be wanting. this is because that have failed to score in a number of the fields that are seen as valid and essential on the pestle and the porters five forces of competition.
5.0 Conclusions and recommendation
Recommendation on the current decision-making process for the two companies is based on informed literature on organization structure for the companies. Looking at the motives that the two companies have, their decision-making process will less effects the goals that they have. For McDonalds they need to have more rooting into their lower decision-making ranks, this will entail that they will have better control of the customer numbers and the social environments that can translate to sales. Equally, their decision-making needs to be aggressive and find ways to penetrate the yet to controlled or fully dominated emerging markets. On the other end, with Apos more is required in their distribution channels since less can be done to their locations. Therefore, the company needs to focus more on the establishing of supply networks that will have to root out competition and create better client base according to (Ang & Buttle, 2012, p. 300).
This text has sufficed to examine the position that is held by the behavioral theory in human resource management as the main inference to organizational decisions making. In fact, the effect of the theory has been highlighted based on the knowledge exhibited by the text on the management of organizations by (Griffin & Moorhead, 2011, p. 25). Equally, this text has managed to outline the comparison to other theories to the suggestive positions provided by the business environment for the MacDonald and the Apos companies. This has managed to develop more findings into the less aggressive nature of decisions making theta the two companies have. Their control of the SWOT is found wanting, similar to the lack of control on the Pestle environments and the forces of competition.