The paradoxical

twin: Acme and

Omega Electronics

“Case Study
Analysis”

Submitted By: Diala Alkhawaldeh

Reg. ID: 8090018
Course: Organizational Theory, Design, and Change
Supervised By: Dr. Samer Dheyat

Table of Contents
Introduction.................................................................3
Management Styles in Omega and Acme........................4
Effect of Management Style on Coordination at both
Companies...................................................................5
The Final Decision.........................................................6
Recommended Changes for better Competition..............7
The Pros and Cons of Acme and Omega Merger..............8
Introduction

In this case study analysis report, the case of Omega and Acme
electronics plants will be analyzed.

Both plants used to be divisions in the same organization-

Technological Products of Erie-, but currently are individual and
competing entities after they have been sold out to external
investors.

The case we will be focusing on is an incident where both plants

were competing to become a subcontractor for a photocopy
manufacturer.

Management styles and the process for meeting the

specifications and the deadline of the subcontract will be
analyzed. Suggestions for better competition will be presented,
and merger between both plants will be evaluated
Management Styles in Omega and Acme

Although both plants were divisions under the same company

before, management styles differed when they became separate
entities.

In brief, Table 1 below compares those styles with reference to

attributes in the first column, that serve as attributes for
determining whether an organization is more like a mechanistic or
an organic structure.

Structure Acme Omega

Argument
Specializa At Acme, the At Omega, the
tion president retained president was had
the original structure more tendency
Type
the plant had before towards getting the
it became a separate job done rather that
entity. The defining a structure
organizational for the organization.
structure was well People worked jointly
defined, with high to coordinate their
degree of division of activities and
labor. Each accomplish their
department goals. Hence, type of
performed its task specialization here
separately. Hence, is : Joint
type of specialization
here is : Individual
Integratin Due to the well As inspired by the
g defined, tall hierarchy president, high level
Mechanis of the organization, of communication
m the basic integrating was fostered, where
mechanism in Acme members simply met
is: Authority. Who face to face or
does what and who dropped by to
reports to whom were discuss to talk things
dictated clearly in the over. Hence,
organization’s chart integrating
mechanism used
was: Direct Contact
Distributi Most decisions were Authority was
on of issued from top of the distributed as seen
Authority organization down to suitable. Important
its lower levels. decisions were made
Distribution of by the management
Authority was mostly team, and others
centralized. were left for
specialists. This
approach is more of
a decentralized
rather than
centralized
distribution of
authority
Standardi Most work was being Written memos were
zation of done in an already not allowed, verbal
Rules defined way, were communication was
orders to start highly encouraged
activities were issued but didn’t follow any
between managers of workflow. Mutual
departments, which adjustment was
tell us that Rules adopted rather than
were standardized following written
in a formal fashion. rules and instructions
Effect of Management Style on Coordination
at both Companies

Based on the previous section, structure arguments per plant had

an effect on the coordination style as follows:

At Acme: The high formality of coordination, and the tall

hierarchy of the organizational chart, has affected the way
activities were being done. The most important effects can be
summarized as follows:

1- Little information was communicated with the organization

as a whole and between different departments.
2- Lack of motivation, as some manager’s voiced.
3- Some inertia against trying new methods of work existed.
4- Coordination between divisions was not high enough that
some important decisions were wrongly taken.

At Omega:

1- Due to the highly informal fashion work was being done in,
employees had an ambiguous view of their own roles.
2- Information sharing was high among all levels, with
sometimes caused a waste of time.
3- Innovative thinking was encouraged.
4- The work was highly collaborative.
The Final Decision

Acme has shipped the 100 prototypes on 2 shifts, and 20% of

these units were found defective. While Omega has shipped the
100 units on time, and no defective items were detected. Despite
of these facts, and although, as seen in the previous section,
Omega was more effective than Acme, the photocopier
manufacturer decided to split the final contract between Acme
and Omega, under the conditions of maintaining zero defects and
lowering the final cost

Justifications of this decision could be:

1- Acme retained the original structure of Technological

Products of Erie, and has been able to bean Omega in
profitable contracts in the past. This has formed a good
reputation for Acme that might have contributed in giving
them a chance to have a portion of this contract.
2- Acmes price was slightly lower than Omega’s, and since the
photocopier manufacturer have conditioned high quality, it
might have been more profitable to choose Acme as well as
Omega.
3- Omega was not rejected because that would be unethical
and maybe illegal since they met the deadline and provided
high quality inputs to photocopier manufacturer
4- It could also be possible that photocopier manufacturer
protect itself from opportunistic acts by having link with
more than one supplier.
Recommended Changes for better Competition
Some changes can be made at both plants that would increase
efficiency of work and hence enhance their competitive
advantage against each other.

At Acme:

I would be of great benefit of cross functional teams were

introduced into the structure to handle jobs such as the one in
this case study (assembling a new product).

It would also be a great motivator and booster of quality of work if

managers as well as specialists were given some open space to
share their view collectively rather than the unidirectional
channels that are adopted at Acme. This will also need a higher
level of coordination between departments.

Innovation should also be highly encouraged, due to the high

pace of change and introduction of new products in Acme’s
industry.

At Omega:

The informal nature of the structure seems to be working fine,

except that it needs a bit of formalization and clarification of
people’s roles. This structure was a point of strength for Omega in
this bid; however, it won’t work for other tasks that need faster
accomplishments of activities. For example, instead of
exchanging opinions and suggestions most of the time, this can
be organized using information sharing systems that centralized
al data that everyone in the organization needs.
The Pros and Cons of Acme and Omega Merger

In the case of Acme and Omega, the high level of competition

seems to be the main motivator for both plants to strive
excellence, once they merge, this motivator will vanish.

Another problem that might arise is a cross cultural conflict

between members of the two plants. At Acme, every role is
clearly defined, and the specialization level is high, while at
Omega, roles are spread among members and specialization is
not that high, conciliating such differences will be a hectic job.

If those two issues were overcome, combining the well defined

structure that Acme holds and the skills of its workers, with
flexibility and the innovative nature of work that Omega provides,
An Acme Omega merger would be a successful one and a great
competitor to other plants in their industry.