Target Corporation: Analysis of Outputs

Brief introduction

            Every organization decisively focuses on the organizational components of input and output. By earmarking the “input” has to consider three elements that are significantly critical to the overall operation of an organization, such as the environment, the historical situation and the needed resources. However, providing the input for the sound organizational operation is to indicate predictable factors and determine the “output” as a core component measure for the organization to continuously exist.

            In David A. Nadler and Michael L. Tushman’s (1980) ‘A Model for Diagnosing Organizational Behavior’, the Congruence Model discusses the elements of “outputs” that are prescribed for the purpose of organizational performance to achieve the goals. In this paper, the congruence model will be examined and analyzed in the organizational perspective of Target Corporation, being a globally diversified enterprise that withstands the competition in the marketplace for long generations.

Measuring Output

From the previous paper, we have defined congruence in layman’s term as “fitting in together”.  It may be rationalized that input and output are entwined results in the performance of an organization. Therefore, output has key result areas that may determine the capability, viability and sustainability of an organization. Thus, it is important to examine how “output” is measured.

Reflective of the ‘Organizational Diagnostic Models: A Review and Synthesis’, measuring output equaled to organizational performance can be probed by three questions, such as (1) how organizations achieves its goals, specific objectives and strategies; (2) how organization utilizes and optimizes its resources; and (3) what feasible strategies the organization can position being adaptable to environmental change (Falletta, 2005).

Analyzing key outputs

Based on the congruence model the functionalities of organizational units, referring to structured composition of manpower deployment or grouping, contributes to organizational-based outputs. The key organizational outputs are predisposed by interacting behaviors, reactions and responses that may positively or negatively affect the performance of work, the quantitative and qualitative operation.

As cited, the “system components” on key outputs that propel the organizational transformation processes are identified, such as (1) informal organizational arrangement, (2) formal organizational arrangement, and (3) tasking on individual components (Nadler & Tushman, 1980).

Informal organizational arrangement

This key output of the congruence model can be cited as depicting Target Corporation’s upbringing for a performance-based company that provide equal opportunities for everyone who perform (Target Corporation, 2007).

The capability to employ people with diverse culture, characters, skills and lifestyles has able to develop a key factor of “informal multiculturalism” within an organization. The treatment of workforce as team members informally arranged the “internal collectiveness” in the workplace that also consolidates the beliefs of non-representation for a labor union, of which the overall workforce believes in “no third-party involvement” in order to resolve issues (Target Corporation, 2007).

It may be perceived, the informal organizational arrangement for a consolidated belief is central to the overall performance of Target Corporation that focuses on the value of work and quality of service for their “know-our-guest-policy”, wherein organizational behavior is work-driven and client-focused. The quality of internal work output is expressed in the organizational life and business values.

Formal organizational arrangement

As described by Nadler and Tushman, the formal organizational arrangement refers to the structured or hierarchical disposition of work. The “leveling” of functions according to skills, job description and positioning of manpower corroborates to strategic composition of roles and teaming. With Target Corporation’s human resource program for manpower deployment, the variations of human development cater to individual and group functions. In this aspect, Target Corporation’s Chairman and CEO Bob Ulrich emphasize commitment to diversity because it is essential and gives competitive advantage” (Target Corporation, 2007).

Probing Bob Ulrich’s commitment to diversity, the formal organizational arrangement is found to bring impact on the informal or “loosened internal partnership” of individuals and groups. It has been further found the effects of broadened interactions that “tie the binds” and fit together the performance output. Meaning, formal organizational arrangement is the “converging point” that unifies the flexibilities and harmonizes the administrative functions of the organization.

It may be analyzed that the relevance of “formalization” of diversity towards consolidating organizational activities is the key-link to the “informal partnership” that emanates from the individual co-existence of the workforce to “fit in” with the multi-faceted or diverse environment of the workplace. This analysis addresses the effects of outputs pertaining to the organizational elements (workforce and functions) and performance-output of the organization as a whole.

Tasking on individual components

Nadler and Tushman implied on the critical component of tasking that would specifically enable the output of individual capabilities, and generally optimize the organizational performance. This key output can be well exemplified by Target Corporation’s “function of task” to team members (employees). The simplification of expression on “how, when and how they want it” attributes to the tasks of employees in familiarizing their product lines, clients and handling of services (Target Corporation, 2007).

At Target Corporation’s day-one business-work orientation convey the basic [can I help you find something] communication to the client. The adaptability to this particular task ensures organizational representation and the “able” individual personality to exhibit the business character and value of the organization. We may add that it is the individual portrayal as the main task of making organizational output. Vis-à-vis, the task in the congruent model rationalizes the quality of individual output, in which can be synthesized by Target Corporation employees’ undertaking of tasks cognizant to business output. It may be then said “the strength of many, the power of one” business credo of Target Corporation assigns the multiple tasks for each and every member of the organization.

Findings and conclusion

            The review of literature on the Congruent Model guides and relates the organizational perspectives of Target Corporation that indicated the examination of possible problems and significant synergies in the transformation process of organization based on the key outputs.

            It has been found that key outputs exhibited in the congruent model points out to the organizational ideals of Target Corporation. Based on the congruent model, we may summarized the transformation processes of Target Corporation as ushered by the qualities of its organizational elements and complementing the same output to those who have capably delivered. The manifestation of output-to-output or output-input-output synergies harmonizes the “cyclical flow” of capabilities resulting overall efficiency and effective performance.

            By indicating the deliberate and accurate application of key outputs, we may conclude that Target Corporation has truly achieved the corporate responsibility as its fundamental output to establish the cornerstone of its business character and values for future generation.

References

Falletta, S.V. (2005). ‘Organizational Diagnostic Models: A Review and Synthesis’.

Leadersphere Incorporated. Retrieved 25 August 2008 from

http://www.leadersphere.com/img/Orgmodels.pdf.

Nadler, D.A. and Tushman, M.L. (1980). ‘A Model for Diagnosing Organizational Behavior

Organizational Dynamics’. Retrieved 25 August 2008 from

http://cpmcnet.columbia.edu/dept/pi/ppf/Congruence-Model.pdf.

Target Corporation (2007) ‘Target Corporate Responsibility Report 2007‘.

            Retrieved 25 August 2008 from

            http://sites.target.com/site/en/corporate/page.jsp?contentId=PRD03-004325.