Management VS self-regulation in Russian IT companies in swatch of an effective way to run a business while promoting happiness in the modern world: empirical study results

Variance

3.06

3.11

4.49

Indicator

Flexibility Index

Satisfaction Index

Success Index

Mean

6.11

6.82

7.26

Shapiro-Wilk p

0.110

< .001

< .001

To test hypotheses we need to compute correlation matrix for the key indices. Nonparametric test should be used due to requirements of the non-normal distributions. (Spearman's rho) (Table 5).

Table 5. Correlation matrix

The values of Spearman's rho in the results of the study show a highly significant positive correlation at the trend level. (0.4 -- trend level; 0.7 -- correlation level)

CONCLUSiONS

The researches we conducted do confirm the main hypothesis as well as aditional hypothesis. There is a direct correlation between the management style, the organizational structure of the company and the level of employees' satisfaction, as well as subjective self-assessments of the success of the business as a whole.

In “flat” (horizontal) structures, the level of employee satisfaction with work and subjective self-assessments are generally higher than in hierarchical (vertical) structures.

Based on the data obtained, it can be concluded that the most important qualities that influence the positive ratings of the respondents are the friendliness of human communication in the company, both with the manager and with colleagues.

At the beginning of the study, we assumed that with an increase in the number of employees, the company becomes less flexible organizationally, business processes are more regulated, and the roles of employees are more formalized. The results of the 2-nd stage of research showed that the relationship between the growth in the number of employees and the greater regulation of internal processes does not exists. The pilot research shows the relationship. With an increase in the number of employees, companies are trying to create instructions and «principles», rules for new employees, in order to simplify their job of adapting new people. Moreover, large companies that took part in the study provide greater freedom to their employees in making decisions, choosing the methodology, methods of organizing work, and the roles of employees are less formalized.

To assess such parameters as the atmosphere in the company, shared values, and a number of others, it is important whether the interviewed employee works most of the time in the office or on the remote, as well as the duration of his work in the company. Often, to an employee who doesn't work at all / works a little in the office is difficult to evaluate these parameters. It should be borne in mind that for developers and tech support specialists there is the greatest dependence between the structure of the organization and the perception of the success of the company. Therefore, more flat companies have an advantage in attracting the best specialists in the market.

The absence of a hierarchy in a company and an orientation towards a “flat”, horizontal management structure can lead to the fact that an employee for whom vertical career development is important cannot be “realized” in a company. It may also affect the assessment of the “career prospects” parameter. On the other hand, it can be assumed, on the basis of visits to the company, that people interested in more professional than career growth are arranged in flatter organizations. This can reduce the number of “political” interactions and improve teamwork and satisfaction.

If we talk about how the perceptions of the company's success and certain aspects of the structure's flexibility are related to the opinions of the respondents, it is worth noting that the factor of flexibility most closely related to success index is a quality of communication between managers and employees. The estimates of functional flexibility are not related to the success index instead.

Among other characteristics, when assessing the degree of development of a business, many focused on the “quality” of the product/service being created. On the one hand, a quality product attracts new customers. On the other hand, attention to the quality of products, the quality of organization of processes in a company, etc., can also demonstrate the “level of development” of the company, the transition from purely quantitative parameters in assessing business success (high financial indicators, increasing the number of clients and projects, number of employees), to more qualifying, respectively.

A variety of feedback tools is especially important in large companies, where it is more difficult to convey your opinion and point of view. A variety of feedback tools allows you to choose the right way to express yourself and convey your opinion to others. Conditions are created in which even the most modest and shy employee has the opportunity to speak out. By “openness” of communication channels we can understand the following: in a company, an interaction between employees is established in such a way that “negative” and any information does not accumulate and stagnate, but easily and naturally circulates in the working environment. At this stage, the following necessary conditions for this can be singled out: respectful atmosphere, the absence of discrimination, the absence of a clear border between a “manager” and a “subordinate”, regular interaction with colleagues.

MANAGERIAL iMPLiCATiONS

Based on our empirical data, we can drive to practical recommendations that can be very easily applied in both -- flat and hierarchical companies:

As soon as there is direct correlation between level of employees' satisfaction and organizational structure, we suggest to implement elements of flat companies' organizational culture not only into the flat, but also to hierarchical organizations as well. Such as, friendly and respectful atmosphere, the absence of a clear border between a "manager" and a "subordinate", regular interaction with colleagues. This will strengthen even more the flat companies from the inside, and will compensate “strict bureaucratic” management in the hierarchical organizations. As a result - level of satisfaction and subjective feeling of happiness will increase among employees in companies that will follow the recommendations with whatever organizational structure.

As soon as it was estimated that feedback, provided by managers, also has impact on employees' satisfaction and subjective feeling of happiness, it can be recommended to companies with all types of organizational structure to regularly implement such feedback in the form of constant on-line forums for employees on thier web-sites, sociological researches, corporative meetings... etc.

Friendly atmosphere which turns out to play decisive role, does not depend on organizational structure. We can consider that flat organizational structure contributes greatly to establishing and sustaining such atmosphere but we can't deny that the same atmosphere can be created in hierarchical organizational structures as well. Not only organizational structures influence the atmosphere in organization. By proper management that is eager to make their employees feeling comfortable and happy we can promote the values of flat organization into the hierarchical ones. As well as by implementing recommendations developed we can lessen the staff turnover, higher the level of production, lessen the amount of conflicts and increase the subjective feeling of employees' happiness.

References

Journal articles:

Carzo, Rocco Jr. & Yanouzas, John N. (1969). Effects of flat and tall organization structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 14 (2), pp. 178-191.

Ceschi. M, Sillitti. A., Succi G., De Panfilis. S. (2005) Project management in plan-based and agile companies. IEEE Software No. 22(3), pp. 21-27

Meltzer, Leo & Salter, James. (1962). Organization Structure and the Performance and Job Satisfaction of Physiologists. American Sociological Review. Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 351-362.

Parsons, Talcott (1956). Suggestions for a Sociological Approach to the Theory of Organizations-I. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 63-85.

Parsons, Talcott (1956). Suggestions for a Sociological Approach to the Theory of Organizations- II. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 225-239.

Porter, Lyman W. & e. Lawler III, Edward. (1964). The Effects of “Tall” Versus “Flat” Organization Structure on Managerial Job Satisfaction. Personnel Psychology. No. 17, pp. 135-148.

Porter, Lyman. W. & Siegel, J. (1965). Relationships of tall and flat organization structures to the satisfactions of foreign managers. Personnel Psychology, No. 18(4), pp. 379-392.

Dmitrieva O. A. (2018) Skype interview in qualitative research: an overview of reflections. Monitoring of Public Opinion : Economic and Social Changes. No. 1. P 107-116.

Books in English:

Awad, M. A. (2005). A comparison between agile and traditional software development methodologies. University of Western Australia.

Beck Don Edward, Cowan Christopher C. (2005). Spiral Dynamics: Mastering Values, Leadership and Change.

Ken Wilber (2000). A Theory of Everything: An Integral Vision for Business, Politics, Science, and Spirituality.

Clare W. Graves (1971). Levels of Human Existence.

Frederic Laloux (2014). Reinventing Organizations.

Books/articles in a language other than English:

Fayol, Anri (1992). Obshcheje i promyshlennoje upravl'enije. Moscow, Kontrolling.

Milner, Boris (2000). Teorija organizatsii. Moscow, Infra-M.

Parsons, Talcott (2018). Sotsial'naya sistema. Moscow. Akademicheskiy Projekt.

Taylor, Frederick Winslow (1991). Printsipy nauchnogo menedzhmenta. Moscow, Kontrolling.

Internet source:

The 12th Annual State of Agile Report of 2018, conducted by VersionOne.

Collier, Ken W. (2011). Agile Analytics: A Value-Driven Approach to Business Intelligence and Data Warehousing. Boston, Pearson Education, Inc. [online].

Gardner, B. B., & Moore, D. G. (1947). Human relations in industry. Chicago, Richard.D.Irwin, Inc. [online].

Swedberg, Richard, and Agevall, Ola (2015). The Max Weber Dictionary. Key Words and Central Concepts. Stanford, Stanford University Press. [online].

Upravlenije chelovecheskimi resyrsami: menedzhment i konsultirovanoje, red. by prof. Shcherbina V. V. (2004), Moscow, Nezavisimyj Instityt Grazhdanskogo Obshchestva. [online].

Размещено на Allbest.ru