Importance and Complications of Decentralisation

Decentralisation

When the organisation grows large and complex , decentralisation is natural development. According to Henry Fuyol cited in Wood and Wood (2002) ,when subordinates importance of roles increase is decentralisation and when decrease is centralisation .Basically decentralisation is opposite of centralisation. In a centralised organisation only few people have powers for decision making and decentralised organisations are spread. Also Lilly Allen defined decentralisation as ," Decentralisation refers to the universal attempt to hand over to the least levels all power apart from that which can only  implemented at vital aim" (Akhani,2010).So even in decentralisation , since the basic management are centralised , delegation to the lowest level is not complete.

Importance of Decentralisation

Decentralisation help to improve quality decision making and in a organisation top executives are relieved by that since its reduce pressure of decision making .For example , TESCO follows decentralised structure, TESCO super chain store , in each store manager can make decision concerning their  individual store(Learning Management ,nd).Additionally empowerment can increase motivation and decision making is form of empowerment .As a result decentralised organization tend to be more motivated. There is another example of successful pharmaceutical company is ROCHE which based in Switzerland. The company is decentralised where tough decision made by the employees and innovative ideas come from them(Financial Times ,2008) cited in (Cooke ,2011) .Besides, people are lower down seems to have greater understanding with the environment of consumer and work place , some time they can bring effective decision making .Decentralisation create a positive atmosphere , where people can make decision , freedom to judge and act.

Complications

Since everyone can make decision, it can lead to multiple individuals opinions in a organization. In decentralisation organisation local manger ,may not see the bigger picture. According to Fuyol cited in wood and wood (2002), since in decentralisation there is more independence in the inferior positions, the length of control of top directors are comparatively petite. It creates great awareness of local problems by decision makers. Not everyone can make  a good judgement or decision , it effects the organisation and leader to motivate followers.

When the key human resources decision transferred to decentralized level , the roles and responsibilities for the leaders also change. Also , in crisis when needed who provides strong leadership, it impacts on individual leadership. Woods and King(2002) stated that, an autocratic style found on centralised organisation where decentralised organisation seems to be an democratic style. As a result organisational culture can be predisposed by nationwide civilization which may conclude the prevalent management approach(Rollinson, 2005). On the other hand, in Jordan, the style of leadership come into view conflicting. For instance, Al-Hajjeh (1984) understood that Middle Eastern managers are seems to be followed autocratic leadership, because they think that the followers ability is not as skilled to  carry out instructions. Furthermore , Jar-Allah (2000) also stated that in Jordan , autocratic style is most common style in industrial organisation. In contrast, Yousef (1998) assumed that a consultative style overcome in non-Western countries mainly in Arab countries, also undeniably established (Yousef, 2000) that, In Arab countries  participative or consultative leadership behaviour was widespread , as perceived by employees. On the other hand , industries that are competitive , it is important to make  decision  who are close to consumer, for example , In UK TESCO or Sainsbury's where regional manager can make decision , more like decentralised structure(Learning Management,nd). Also Karlöf, (2012, p.76) mentioned that decision making are important which are really close to consumer  to meet the customer needs , especially where elements are disseminated over the nation. According to Casserlöv (2012, p.50),Swedes  employees seems to be  motivated  by empowerment , where they can work or make decision independently , more like decentralised organisation and also they trusted with  a lot o responsibilities. The problem is for leader to motivate other cultural people, is difficult for them since no all the culture are same . Swedish work environment more like decentralised where employee cam make decision independently , but other country like Bangladesh or Pakistan are more likely centralised where one person can make decision .