The Devil Wears Prada Commerce Essay

The disoblige Wears Prada Commerce EssayThis reports investigates the c argon room, constitutional finishing, provide and politics and employee corroborate lessons of Runway. A conclusion is made in the fifth chapter. It is great to nvirtuoso that the movie is a caricature on organisational level. Quotes from the movie are referenced with the first name of the character.M any(prenominal) authors essential many models to analyse the above fields. In this report however, a very(prenominal) brief selection was made due to the limited word count.The 6th chapter reflects how this relates to Duo2, the organisation I feated in. The last chapter offers recomm kiboshations.Management agencyThe management style in runway fits the well up-nigh the fortuity approach. Different theories also let on the behavioural leading.Contingency approachScott states the essence of contingency theory the startflank way to organise depends on the nature of the environment to which the or ganisation relates (Scott 1998 96). The vogue industry is very dependent on their environment, which is very fluctuating. This means that Runways opera hat way in constantly changing as well, answering the trends in the industry. Miranda often does last-minute changes such as rescheduling meetings or changing promotions due to external factors.Team working stimulates the spread of bare-ass ideas, which are racy for change (Burns and Stalker 1966). More all over, this change or aim is vital for most companies, especially in the fashion industry. Runway uses teamwork in order to beget new fresh ideas. Miranda lets her team situate suggestions to develop a new prohibitedfit for Runway-cover. Lawrence and Lorsch (1968) state the magnificence of balancing several(predicate)iation and integration of those teams, modify them to be best equipped to adapt to environmental changes. The balance in Runway tends more to be towards integration instead of differentiation, due to Mirand as secretive control and the strong organisational close (see adjacent chapter).Taylor (scientific management) did already emphasize the importance of choosing the general type of management best suited to a special(a) case (Bizcovering 2009). Follet (human relations approach) formulated the law of the situation the necessity of playacting in accordance with the specific requirements of a given situation (Bizcovering 2009). As Andy develops and improves, Mirandas approach and attitude to her changes as well.The contingency approach is criticised because of its lack of hypothetic foundation and universe basically intuitive (Bizcovering 2009).Miranda has absolute causation and controls altogether Runway. This enables her to act in accordance with the specific requirements of a given situation. A more democratic approach would lack the flexibility expected to richly benefit the contingency approach. However, Mirandas decisions are indeed basically intuitive.Behavioural leade rshipThe character of Miranda is autocratic. She uses direct control over her employees. It could be argued that creative cheats need more prudent autonomy. However, at Runway the direct control seems to work for most of the employees.On Tannebaum and Schmidts continuum, she scores highest on use of authority by the manager and lowest on area of immunity for subordinates. Andy literally change her freedom to her. She does non seduce any private life anymore, illustrated by the loss of her friends and boyfriend. Tannebaum and Schmidt describe Mirandas behaviour as the manager decides and announces the decision. ( stemmaballs 2009).Purcell and Sisson (1983) identify her as a traditiona listing, having curt attention to the employee needs. Traditionalists oppose craft unions. For the size of a guild such as Runway, it is however likely that there is trade union presence.The management style fits the business. The high autocratic behaviour exploits richly all opportunities the contingency approach offers. Moreover, it is unrivaled of the roots of the organisational culture, discussed in the next chapter.Organisational cultureRunway has a strong organisational culture. This is because of the employees alignment to the organisational values. The best performing organisations are those with a strong culture (Deal and Kennedy 1999). Moreover, Peters and Waterman (1982) argue that thin organisations have a strong cooperate culture.However, despite all the attributed rightness there is major risk in strong ethnic organisation groupthink. This name was given by Janis as a quick and balmy way to refer to a mode of thinking that wad learn when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in group, when members strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternatives of action. (Janis 1982 9). This means that employees do not challenge the current organisational ideas, resulting in very poor innovation and low flexibility.Johnsons cultural webJohnsons et al (2002) cultural web consists come out of six interrelated elements. Together they form the paradigm of the organisation. These six factors are described below.StoriesStories can be almost people as well as events. On Andys first day, she hears from Emily that her precedents only lasted a fewer weeks. Moreover, Andy became a story herself because of her unfashionable taste in the beginning (Rebecca and Emily talking), and at the end because of her achievements (Emily talking to the new girl and Mirandas rememberation fax).One event crystalise stands out as well the fashion week in capital of France. capital of France is fabulous. Its the best thing that could ever happen to a person (Emily). Miranda confesses she lives towards this week during the whole year. These stories show how much Runway values the fashion week in Paris.Rituals and routinesWhen Miranda arrives at Runway in the morning, the morning-routine can be clear observed. Everything i s prepared in a fashionable way before her arrival. When she arrives, people avoid her at any cost a girl gets out of the lift for her and apologises, people in the corridor turn back the way they came from, etc. Dealing with Miranda requires about rituals. The most important one is to never withdraw her anything. When Andy goes to deliver the book to Mirandas house, Emily informs her about the strict book-ritual, described in appendix 1.SymbolsRunway is fashion. This figureism can be found in the vestments style and even the eating habits of the staff, the design of the offices. Its product, the magazine, became a clear symbol in the fashion industry.Organizational structureThe entire organisation is create around Miranda. Hierarchical structure at disappoint levels is not shown in the film. It is for example unclear how Nigel leads his de procedurement.Control systemsThere is no information about financial, quality or reward systems. Miranda exercises all control by make all employees fear her. This pushed the staff into certain rituals and routines, all in process to please Miranda. military group structuresMiranda has all the real advocator. During the film this is obvious in the way she leads Runway. Even in the end, when they try to replace her, she has a list of people who will go with her if she goes. This proves her former. This topic will be further specified in the next chapter.In addition to Johnsons cultural web, an synopsis according to Schein (1985), who argued culture could be analyzed at several different levels, is included in appendix 2.Handys foursome culturesHandy (1985) identifies the following four cultures. Trompenaars et al (2003) also distinguishes four incorporated cultures, showing similarities with Handys model (appendix 3).Power culturePower cultures give complete supply to a few who control everything. This allows them to make fast decisions and does not require much rules or bureaucracy.Miranda enjoys absolute top executive, which indeed enables here to make swift decisions. She makes the whole company run for her by constantly advancing deadlines. She is storied for being aleatory because her position allows her to be unpredictable (Doug).Role cultureA reference culture has a highly defined structure, where everybody has its own role. These are plebeian hierarchical bureaucracies.At Runway, people do not seem to have a clearly defined role, especially Andy she is Mirandas secretary, but also makes her childrens science-project, goes to deplume up orders, buys food and drinks for Miranda and arranges the unpublished Harry Potter book for Mirandas children. assign cultureIn deputes cultures, employees work as teams to focus on a particular problem. Expertise is military unit.There is not much proof of teamwork at Runway, unless initiated by Miranda. Everybody does what Miranda wishes, despite their expertness.Person culturePerson cultures all shew on egalitarian individuals. Andy however does not have the same magnate as Miranda has. Whole Runway is just built on one individual Miranda.Organisational mightiness and politicsFrench and guttleFrench and Raven (1959) argued that power is based on the following five categoriesCoercive powerThis is the power of dictators such as Miranda. though often identified as being physical, this is not the case here. The use of threats characterises coercive power. The fear of losing their reflect is the coarsegest threat for Runways employees. Employees only want to survive.Reward powerAs a single decision maker, Miranda can decide who gets promoted, or who joins her to celebrations. For example the famous Paris week was taken away from Emily and given to Andy. However, employees are not rewarded for their compliance. Nigel explains Andy Dont be surprised Miranda does not give you a kiss on the forehead and a golden star on your homework. Later on, he, one of the most loyal employees, did not receive a promised promot ion because of Mirandas self-interest. lucid powerMost people believe Miranda can make any demands, just because she is famous. As a leader of Runway she has legitimate power. However, this power is not only from her position even when she would lose that position she has a group of people who would obey her.Referent powerAs being famous, Miranda enjoys a mass of referent power. A million girls would kill for that job which Andy has (Dough) or people are dying to work here (Nigel). around employees perform beyond their capacity, because it is for Miranda. Emily for example comes to work when she is ill, telling herself I retire my job, I love my job. Miranda uses her referent power as coercion. Maybe Emily did not come to work for Miranda (only) but out of fear of Miranda.Expert powerIn this category Miranda has a power base as well. Her expertise made her famous, which gave her referent power. Therefore she was given legitimate power as well. Miranda turned all powers into coerc ion, to have maximum control to do what she considers to be best for the magazine.Amitai EtzioniEtzioni (1968) discovered an association between the mental of power intermix typically use by an organization and the modal participation of its lower participant. Highly coercive mixes tend to be met with intensive negative involvement, prescriptive mixes with intense positive involvement, and remunerative mixes with less intense positive or negative involvement, depending on the mix. (Etzioni 1968 103).Coercive powerCoercive power, typified by prisons, is discussed previously (3.1.1).Remunerative powerRemunerative power, typical in factories, is discussed previously as well (3.1.4).Normative powerNormative power relies on the power of symbols, typified by churches. The Runway magazine can be seen as a symbol of fashion. Nigel tells Andy the magazine represented hope for him when he was a little boy.Alientive involvementAlientive involvement describes Andys attitude, as an answer to Mirandas coercive power. She is pushed to do things against her will, such as helping on the science project of the twins.Calculative/ monetary involvementCalculative involvement is based on extrinsic reward. This kind of involvement comes forth out of remunerative power. Emily is calculative involved because of the Paris week and all the clothes she would receive.Moral involvementMoral involvement is based on individual beliefs. At Runway, most employees are clean-living involved because they believe in Miranda for what she represents or symbolises, answering her normative power.Employee support lessonsIt is important to define the psychological contract first to understand what goes on in the workplace. It is defined as the expectations or perceptions of the two parties, employee and employer, of what their mutual obligations are towards each other. (Guest and Conway 2001). Andys and Mirandas expectations are different. The table in appendix 4 illustrates some of the differences .The psychological contract is based on employees sense of fairness and give and their belief that the employer is honouring the deal between them. (CIPD 2008). Andy does not have this sense of fairness, she has feels as Mirandas slave, resulting in alientive involvement. However, this psychological contract does work for other employees, as they do not expect any fairness and believe that Miranda is doing what is best.Nigel plays a big role in Andys support lessons. Paternalistically he takes care of her appearance large her shoes, choosing clothes for her, taking her to the beauty department, etc.Emily tells her what she has to do practically taking Mirandas coat, how to deliver the book to Miranda, not talking to Miranda, studying all guests call of the party, etc.Nigel and Emily helped Andy to fit into Runways organisational culture. Moreover, they explained the employers side of the psychological contract.There is a clear evolution in Andys behaviour and attitude, as she le arns about Runways psychological contract. existence stressed out after Mirandas first demanding request, she is able to execute her posterior even more demanding tasks perfectly, as she learnt what Miranda expects. Not only did she find the unpublished Harry Potter script, she also knew that Miranda expected two copies, and made authentic these copies were delivered to the twins before they went to their grandmother.In the end, even Miranda helps Andy understand that she expects the job to be more important than her personal life, because that is what it takes to do this job (Miranda). Andy evolutes into this kind of person, pass judgment Runways psychological contract. However, finally she decides that she does not want to be like this, and lay off her job.ConclusionMiranda is an autocratic dictator, using her own best practise way. This contingency approach gives her a lot of freedom. She is the base of Runways strong organisational culture. Johnsons et al (2002) cultural w eb and Scheins (1985) three levels describe this culture. Runway is typified by a power culture, giving Miranda maximum control and flexibility (Handy 1985).This power is based in all the categories identified by French and Raven (1959). Mirandas personal power sources (expert and referent power) gave her positional power sources (legitimate, reward and coercive power). She (ab)uses coercive power the most. Unlike Etzioni (1968) suggests, employees are mostly moral involved instead of alientive involved. Andy is the exception, not sharing the organisational beliefs in fashion, resulting in alientive involvement.The problem with the psychological contract is that it is unwritten, and thusly difficult to find out (Guest and Conway 2001). Andy has the help from Nigel, Emily and even Miranda in instinct the psychological contract at Runways. As she becomes aware of Mirandas expectations, she adapts herself (and her expectations) to fulfil Mirandas. However, eventually she decides that her job does not come before her personal life. This difference in expectations makes her quit her job.Application to the organisation Duo2Duo2 was a sustainable marketing and conference agency founded by me and five other students for two months, as part of our degree in marketing.A modern management style was used. Duo2 was a learning organisation (Garvin and Cizik 1991), acquiring knowledge to fulfil certain tasks. We develop a course book for entrepreneurship in the tourism industry, though no(prenominal) of us was familiar with tourism. Consequence learning about tourism.Our CEO suitable a laissez-faire approach, giving us maximum freedom and responsible autonomy. We could chose our hours and place of work. Further it can be described as a manager who joins (Tannebaum and Schmidt cited in Businessballs 2009) as we made all decisions together. Purcell and Sisson (1983) identify this as sophisticated constitutionalists moderns.We had a very weak organisational culture, with no organisational- or power structure, no control systems and no rituals. Stories were limited to gossips about lectors. The only symbol was our logo (Johnson et al 2002). Our mission and vision captured our underlying values and beliefs (Schein 1985).We worked in teams focussing on different tasks (task culture) in an egalitarian and informal style (incubator culture) (Handy 1985 and Trompenaars et al 2003). Some people worked on the tourism course book, others focussed on other clients or other tasks such as creating the website, distinct clients, etc.Power was based on expertise (French and Raven 1959). individual with superior writing skills was leading the writing team. Creative talents had authority over the website. Our involvement was calculative we worked only hard enough to pass and for the money, which was every bit divided.With no different positional power sources and legality there was a perfect psychological contract We did not have different expectations for ourse lves than for others. Though some had different levels perceptions of qualitative work, generally we all expected the same from each other.Appendix 5 compares the discussed topics of Runways with Duo2sRecommendations(if Duo2 would still exist)The management style, organisational culture and equity provided a lot of freedom in Duo2. To sustain this freedom, a lot of communication is needed (who works where on what?). Therefore I recommend the implication of a better communication system. Weekly office meetings at the same time would help. Especially a personal logbook/task curriculum on hand(predicate) to everybody would be useful. This means that everybody can see who did, is doing, or exit to do certain tasks at which location.This would enhance the current task culture and create more efficiency. Moreover, the personal logbook can also be used as a way of performance management. We had a lot of freedom which made us happy and generally performed well. Though for some individual s it is honourable to have some kind of control system in place, to make sure they perform equally well and to communicate performances of everybody (which cannot always be noticed). This would make sure that everybody works the same hard, supporting our egalitarian culture and Adams equity theory.At the weekly office meetings everybody could present their logbook, the work they did, and their task plan, the work they plan doing the next week. This control system makes the employees freedom excusable and does not undermine it.It is important to state that the freedom was very important for our motivation and inspiration, as most tasks were creative. Moreover, this allowed us to get the maximum out of ourselves. The freedom needs to be kept, however I recommend the above control system to be implemented in order to see and check upon the productivity of that freedom.List of ReferencesBizcovering (2009) Contingency Approach to Management online available from 20 March 2007Burns, T . and Stalker, G., M. (1966) The Management of Innovation. London Tavistock Publ.Businessballs (2009) Tannenbaum and Schmidt continuum online available from 8 April 2009Changing Minds (2009) Trompenaars four renewing cultures online available from 22 February 2009CIPD (2008) The psychological contract online available from 12 April 2008Deal, T., E. and Kennedy, A., A. (1999) The in the altogether Corporate Cultures. in the altogether York Perseus PublishingEtzioni, A. (1968) Organizational Dimensions and their Interrelationships A Theory of Compliance. Indik, B. and Berrien, K. (eds.) People, Groups, and Organizations, 94-109Frankel, D. (2006) The Devil Wears Prada online available from 21 February 2009French, J.R.P. and Raven, B. (1959) The bases of genial power. Studies in Social Power Ann Arbor University of Michigan Press.Garvin, D. (2003) Learning in Action A Guide to Putting the Learning Organization to Work. Harvard Harvard Business PressGuest, D.E. and Conway, N. (2 001) Organisational Change and the Psychological Contract. London CIPDHandy, C., B. (1985) 3rd edn. Understanding Organizations. Harmondsworth Penguin BooksHedges, P. (2005) The Devil Wears Prada online available from 19 February 2009Janis, I., L. (1982) 2nd edn. Groupthink Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Boston Houghton MifflinJohnson, G., K., Scholes and R., Whittington (2002) 8th edn. Exploring corporate strategy. London Prentice HallLawrence, P. and Lorsch, J. (1968) Differentiation and Integrations in Complex Organisations. administrative Science Quarterly 12, 1-30Peters, T., J. and Waterman, R., H (1982) In search of excellence Lessons from Americas best-run companies. refreshed York Harper Row.Purcell, J. and Sisson, K. (1983) Strategies and practice in the management of industrial relations. Bain, G. (editor) Industrial dealing in Britain. Oxford BlackwellSchein, E.,H. (1985) 3rd edn. Organizational Culture and Leadership. Chichester WileyScott, W ., R. (1998) 4th edn. Organisations rational, natural, and open systems. New Jersey Prentice-HallTrompenaars, F. and Woolliams, P. (2003) Business Across Cultures. Chichester Wiley