Q1

Organizational environment refers to various institutions as well as the forces that surround an
organization and may have an impact on its performance, resources, and operations. It comprises
all those components that exist beyond the boundaries often the organization and has the
potential to impact part or whole of the organizational activities and operations. Therefore,
consideration of an organization’s environment is crucial for its success. The organizational
environment is also considered to be the source of all the resources that an organization may
require (Voiculet et al., 2010). 
An overview and analysis of an organizational environment offer great deals of opportunities to
improve and enhance the business as well as to detect various threats that can potentially harm
the organization. Thus, the organizational environment influences the strategic decisions of the
organization (Aktaş, Çiçek, & Kıyak, 2011). 
For a car manufacturing company like that of Toyota, it needs to analyze the environment to see
what its competitors are doing so that it can provide unique, differentiated, and more innovative
services in comparison to the rivals in the industry. Like, Tesla is preparing electronic and hybrid
cars so, Toyota needs to cater to the need of time as well as consumer preferences so that it can
continue to lead the market.
Assessing and understanding the organizational environment gives executives of the organization
better control of the external environment. Like, Toyota is aware of what its competitor is doing,
and keeping in view the steps that Tesla is taking, it can organize and allocate its resources
accordingly to come up with the more innovative and unique product and better compete with
Tesla.
Moreover, no organization is self-sufficient and needs various resources to be able to accomplish
its business goals and objectives. For example, a human also needs various resources to survive
such as air to breathe, water to drink, and food to consume without which survival is impossible.
All these resources that are needed for survival come from the environment in which a human
lives. The same is the case with organizations. They cannot survive without the support of their
environment. Car manufacturers like Toyota need different players in the market to support them
to be able to survive in the market such as suppliers to provide them different parts of the car,
customers to purchase their products and help them make revenues and profits, investors to
provide funding, employees to offer their services and build their products, and so on.
Furthermore, an environmental scan of an organization also helps Toyota in seeking different
business opportunities and determining any trends and events that may harm or weaken its brand.
Thus, the more complex the environment of the organization is, the more difficult it is for the
organization to be able to scan and analyze it. It is because the involvement of more factors will
make it more uncertain and complex to come up with a better decision. However, whether
complex or simple, the organizational environment is important in strategic decision making and
must be analyzed by the organization as much as possible to achieve and accomplish
organizational goals and objectives in a more successful manner (Achcaoucaou, Bernardo, &
Castan, 2009).
Q2
Organizational structure helps in outlining how to direct several activities so that it can be able to
accomplish its goals and objectives. These may include roles and responsibilities of various
employees, rules and policies of the organization, hierarchies, flow of information between
different organizational levels, and so on. An organizational structure is very important because
it gives employees more clarity in terms of what they are anticipated to do and how they can
manage their expectations from them. This also helps them in making better decisions and
coming up with more consistency (Maduenyi et al., 2015). Organizational structure is also used
to assign and delegate responsibilities, organize the workflow, and ensure the timely completion
of various tasks across the organization. So, an organization must have a proper structure to be
more productive, efficient, and successful in comparison to its competitors.
There are different types of organizational structures which are adopted based on their
functionality. One of such structures that are very helpful in controlling various problems
resulting from customers, products, or geographies is divisional structure. 
The divisional organizational structure works on the ground of specific demand and functions of
markets, products, and customers. This type of structure is specifically helpful in creating smaller
and more organized subunits in the organization that are easily manageable. It is because this
structure allows specific control on the problems (Ashton, 2004). 
Organizational structure divided according to the problems regarding the number and complexity
of the products is said to be using a product structure. For example, Microsoft Office is a
commonly used computer software, but Microsoft has two distinct customer groups to sell the
same product i.e., Microsoft Office for general home users and Office 365 for its business users.
Organizational structure depended on different locations where an organization operates and
sells its products has a geographic divisional structure. For example, a fast-food chain which
several branches all over the world like that of KFC, McDonald's, Subway, etc. is the perfect
example of this type of organizational structure every day that have different geographies that
they have to cater to and comply with the local environment, culture, and law.
An organizational structure with a large number of diverse customer groups is said to have a
market structure. For example, a fast-food chain like McDonald's needs to analyze what its
customers in a local market may like or dislike. As India has more of a Hindu population,
Hinduism forbids eating beef. Thus, McDonald's will fail if it sells cow’s meat in its products.
However, it can still be successful if it offers variety in terms of offering chicken or another kind
of meat or making more vegetable products.
This highlights why an organization must consider its various problems and respond to the needs
of markets, products, and customers. And this is only possible if an organization has a well-
developed organizational structure divided according to its span of control so that it can focus on
the specific problem it is experiencing to better manage and resolve it (Dubey, & Singhal, 2016).
Q3
Value creation is significant for a business to stand out from the competition. The value
proposition is a kind of promise to deliver, communicate and acknowledge value from the
product or service being offered to the customers. It is like a belief from the customers'
perspective that they will get the required value acquired, delivered, and experienced from the
organization for the amount of money they have invested in for the product or service they have
purchased from the organization (Smith, & Colgate, 2007). The value is created when an
organization uses its resources and work so that it can create a product or service that can give
value to its customer base in return for the money, they pay for it. And consequently, businesses
enjoy profits over it and customers are also happy that their needs are fulfilled as they wanted. 
Organizations seek to create value from various aspects to accomplish their needs and satisfy
their customers. However, an organization that does not get successful in creating more value in
the domain that it is serving currently looks for new domains in which it can better compete with
its limited resources to create something of more value to its customer base. This kind of value
creation strategy is called corporate-level strategy (Haksever, Chaganti, & Cook, 2004). It is all
about exploring new domains we value can be created, and documentation can exploit and
defend its ability of value creation by using differentiation competency or low-cost strategy.
This strategy is a perpetuation of business-level strategy. It is because the organization competes
in new sectors using existing resources and core competencies. However, an organization can
pursue this level of strategy in terms of vertical integration which is taking over and buying
operations to make some of the inputs or distributing the output by the organization itself.
For example, Netflix used to be at the end of its supply chain as it used to show and deliver
movies and TV programs from others but then it realizes the potential and adopted vertical
integration by started making its content.
An example of implementation of corporate level vertical integration strategy in a fast-food
chain restaurant can be delivering the food at the doorsteps of their customers. this is not just
vertical integration in terms of forwarding integration to deliver the food to the end consumer by
themselves but also an unrelated diversification strategy as this is not the major domain of the
business and they are entering into a new domain and doing something unrelated to the main
business.
However, there are some drawbacks of corporate-level vertical strategy that organizations need
to consider why adopting this strategy. These include inefficient organization and misappropriate
organizational structure. These are important to consider because if the top-level management
does not effectively and efficiently organize and restructure the operations, reduce bureaucratic
costs, and focus on improving the profitability and value creation, then it will not be able to
achieve its value creation goal in an unrelated diversification strategy. Similarly, if the
organization does not have an appropriate structure, then it will not be able to realize the value
interlinked with vertical integration (Tarver, 2021).
Q4
Decision-making is involved at every step in an organizational setting. Whether it is small or big,
the employees and executives of the organization have to consider various alternatives available
in the organization to come up with the best possible choice for the betterment of the
organization. Thus, it is a rational process in which the managers and executives of the
organization make decisions on the behalf of the organization according to the need and
suitability of the environment invite the organization operates (Milkman, Chugh, & Bazerman,
2009).
The authors further assert that since decision-making is a very significant process, it is given core
value. If decision-making is not given such importance, then the managers and executives grope
for solutions may come up with choices that may not be very favorable for the organization and
its stakeholders. There are various decision-making models which are used by different
organizations. Two of these models have been explored here as under.
The Carnegie Model is helpful to better come up with vivid realities of the process of making
decisions. This model is further useful in recognizing the impact of satisficing, bounded
rationality as well as a coalition of the organizations (Lau, 2003). 
In terms of satisficing, the model directs managers of the organization in collecting the needed
information from limited information searches to be able to recognize the challenges and based
on the analysis come up with alternative solutions. This model is opposite to the rational
decision-making model in which managers seek all the possible solutions to a problem as this
model asserts on satisficing.
On grounds of bounded rationality, this model keeps the managers restricted where they have
limited capacity for processing the information they have about different alternatives. The model
also can improve the decision-making skills of the managers in the organization despite being
limited in terms of information processing capacity as it demands managers to be more
analytically strong. However, the rational model allows managers to use their intellect and
evaluate different alternatives available.
One of the examples of this model can be the use of technology by managers in the organizations
such as using computers or other smart gadgets to improve their decision-making skills. And this
is how it is also useful in improving their skills and abilities and motivates them to be better.
This model is comparatively better than the rational decision-making model. The advantages of
this model include saving time and cost of the managers and the same time and cost can be
allocated to doing something else or implementing the decision taken. According to this model,
the managers of the organization have to pick a collection of the problems to a specific criteria or
steps based on which evaluation of different probable solutions is made (Lau, 2003). Another
important advantage of this model shared by the author in comparison to the rational model is
working together to develop various best alternative solutions and choosing the one that perfectly
fits the criteria.
References

Achcaoucaou, F., Bernardo, M., & Castan, J. M. (2009). Determinants of organisational

structures: an empirical study. Review of International Comparative Management, 10(3), 566-
577.

Aktaş, E., Çiçek, I., & Kıyak, M. (2011). The effect of organizational culture on organizational
efficiency: The moderating role of organizational environment and CEO values. Procedia-Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 24, 1560-1573.

Ashton, D. N. (2004). The impact of organisational structure and practices on learning in the
workplace. International journal of training and development, 8(1), 43-53.

Dubey, A., & Singhal, A. K. (2016). Role of organisational structure in empolyee's

empowerment. International Journal of Education and Management Studies, 6(1), 110.

Haksever, C., Chaganti, R., & Cook, R. G. (2004). A model of value creation: Strategic
view. Journal of Business Ethics, 49(3), 295-307.

Lau, R. R. (2003). Models of decision-making.

Maduenyi, S., Oke, A. O., Fadeyi, O., & Ajagbe, A. M. (2015). Impact of organisational
structure on organisational performance.

Milkman, K. L., Chugh, D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2009). How can decision making be
improved?. Perspectives on psychological science, 4(4), 379-383.

Smith, J. B., & Colgate, M. (2007). Customer value creation: a practical framework. Journal of
marketing Theory and Practice, 15(1), 7-23.

Tarver, E. (2021). Horizontal vs. Vertical Integration: What's the Difference?. Investopedia.

Retrieved 22 January 2022, from https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/051315/what-
difference-between-horizontal-integration-and-vertical-integration.asp.

Voiculet, A., Belu, N., Parpandel, D. E., & Rizea, I. C. (2010). The impact of external
environment on organizational development strategy.