I sometimes look into organization charts of competitors or affiliated companies. As looking at the change of them in time, I find out each company has a tendency to change the organization.
A company tends to separate organizations into smaller ones, and I sometimes see that it integrates the small organizations into larger one a couple of years after the separation . It carry out the organization change every year. So if I don’t check the organization chart every year, I can’t keep up with it.
For another case, I figure out that when new company presidents take office, they try to reform the organizations. It may be an effective way to show their enthusiasm and their powers.
I assume that the organizations are stuff to be designed by business managers, in particular companies based on the US or Europe. I guess that it’s possible because the employees are distinguished by jobs.
On the other hand, those in Japanese companies are evaluated by the abilities, in which even if they are laymen on a production site, if they are evaluated as having an ability of a manager grade, they are moved to organizations one after another as a manager.
Therefore the organizations aren’t able to be designed as same as those in the companies in the US or Europe. Definition of the organizations becomes indistinct. Sometimes the organizations become dysfunction because superiors including directors can’t understand the real organization functions.
If the directors want to maintain of the status quo on the organizations, risks might be low. However, the society, world and companies themselves are always changing. I think that they always need to have a motivation to initiate the organization reform so as to grow the business more.