PDP Assessment & Strategic Project Management Combined Institution: University of Wolverhampton 2016 Table of Contents 1.1. Introduction 4 1.2. How do you fit the design 4 1.3. Topics of interest 6 1.4. Initial PDP 8 1.5. Critical Reflections 8 1.6. Final Action PDP and description 11 1.7. Conclusions 14 2. Executive Summary 15 2.1 Introduction 17 2.2. Business Case Restructuring 18 2.3. Literature Review 23 2.4. Present Restructured Organization 28 2.5. Challenges in redesign efforts 32 2.6. Comparison of existing and proposed Departmental communication system 33 2.7. Conclusions 35 References 37 Appendices 40 Appendix I: Self-Assessment 1: Personal Networking 40 Appendix II: Self- Assessment 2: Making Important Decisions 41 Appendix III: Self- Assessment 3: Corporate Culture 42 Appendix IV: Porter’s Competitive Strategies Framework 43 Appendix V: Comparison of Horizontal and Virtual Network structure 44   1. Executive Summary As a part of the Personal Development Plan, this project presents a comprehensive plan for the reorganization of the Project Management & Technical Authority Department, under the Etisalate. Etisalate, a leading Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) service provider to the Oil and Gas Sector, is a multinational organization with offices in over 29 countries and operation centers in 7 locations around the world. The Etisalate has witnessed a decrease in its performance which along with the recent slump in crude oil prices has affected the overall performance in the industry. The main problem diagnosed within the department is broken communication system leading to barriers to flow of important information and delay in decision making processes. Furthermore, the department’s standard policies and frameworks necessary for planning and implementing of projects have not been upgraded in the last few years, which in times of rapid globalization and transformation, has led to inefficient and poor quality work. For the purpose of addressing the current situation faced by the Project Management & Technical Authority Department, existing literature related to concepts of organizational effectiveness, importance of leadership, importance of communication, decision making characteristics and finally theories and frameworks available for competitive strategy planning of organization restructuring is to be reviewed. Following the literature review, a new restructured communication system for the Project Management & Technical Authority Department is proposed. The aim of this new communication system is to address the existing problems of communication of the department as well as to provide opportunities of upgrading its policies and operational frameworks. Also, this new communication system will encourage innovation and out-of-the-box thinking by ensuring free flow of information and ideas between individuals and teams. Several challenges are to be expected during the implementation of this project, some of them being delay in implementation, lack of interest or participation of team members and possibility of backlash as consequence of this project. However, with thorough assessment and commitment, these challenges can be overcome and the new project successfully implemented and established.   2.1 Introduction The organization selected for this assignment, Etisalate is a leading worldwide on-shore and off-shore Engineering, Procurement and Construction Company that provides Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) services to the Oil and Gas Sector. It is a multinational organization with seven operational centers and offices in a total of 29 countries, the Americas, Europe, Africa, Asia and In the Middle East especially in United Arab Emirates (UAE), Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Qatar and Oman. Established in 1981, Etisalate has a proven track record of quality standards, customer satisfaction and safety and has close ties with leading Operating Companies, National Oil Companies and International Oil Companies. Although its main services are engineering and procurement, Etisalate also provides services in petroleum engineering, construction, facilities engineering, Production operations, well engineering and training of professions, to operators and project owners. Etisalate is divided into two main divisions: Engineering, Construction Operations and Maintenance (ECOM) and Integrated Energy Services (IES) each with different functions and services and supported by corporate and functional teams. This organization is guided by six values of safe, innovative, cost conscious, ethical, responsive and quality, that affects all its decisions and strategy. In 2008, the Etisalate was listed in the London Stock Exchange and is also a part of the FTSE 250 index. No. Particulars Value 1 Revenue (US$ million) 6,241 2 Net Profit (US$ million) 120 3 Backlog (US$ billion) 18.9 4 EBITDA (US $ million) 935 5 Operating Income (US $ million) 684 6 No. Of Employees 20,200 7 Number of countries operating in 29 Table 1: Performance of Etisalate as of 2014. The Etisalate has recently been facing issues with its performance, especially in the face of recent oil prices drop, as a result of its stagnant planning and strategy policies, especially in its Project Management and Technical Authority Department. The primary function of this department is management and control of engineering, construction, procurement and commissioning projects by following well established frameworks and processes. Moreover, the department is also responsible for providing tailor-made project planning and management, advice related to technical services and standards and cost estimate integrity. By attempting to changing its project planning and management frameworks and policies and creating a collaborative work culture, the department can gain by devising superior projects at a faster rate, and fulfill the organization’s goals of excellence and customer satisfaction. 2.2. Business Case Restructuring Need for Change: Etisalate is Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) Services Company in the oilfield sector, with multiple offices and projects around the world. It deals with different aspects of providing infrastructure, engineering, planning and, maintenance services along with training professionals and providing human resources for the projects. With a track record of 34 years in the EPC field, Etisalate has recently witnesses a slump in its performance, as seen from its financial performance in 2014. Another important factor contributing to its overall performance is the performance of its Project Management and Technical Authority department which, in the last few years, has faced with delivery issues and has been blamed for the lack of communication and co-ordination. The strict instructions of following company policies have left no scope for innovative planning or sharing of ideas among the planning engineers. Also, the existing strategies adopted by the heads of the department have proven to be ineffective in the drastic changing oil prices situation, leading to confusion and disarray. A second factor that added to the situation is dissatisfaction of department members towards the organization’s management, especially with regards to their incentives and rewards which has invariably affected their performance. This has led to severe performance issues and barriers in the decision making process at the top management level. Consequently, department is costing the organization its competitive advantage as well as efficiency. By referring to Daft (2013), two main areas of focus within the department can be defined, for restructuring purpose: i. Improving Organization’s Competitiveness and Resilience. ii. Applying the Stakeholder’s Approach By analyzing in depth, the current situation of the organization, understanding and applying the concepts for improving competitiveness, resilience and by employing the stakeholders’ approach for improving the performance, the Etisalate can undergo a successful transformation at the department and hence organization level. Analysis of Organizational Conditions: In order to understand the external and internal factors that are contributing to the present condition of Etisalate and its Project Management and Technical Authority department, detailed analysis of the factors has to be performed. For the purpose of understanding the Etisalate’s competitive status in the present climate, the 10-sector analysis will be carried out. The 10-sector analysis is a an analysis framework tool to assess the external task environment , that is divided into ten sectors (subsections of the organization’s domain/ environmental field of action), namely industry, raw materials, human resources, financial resources, market, technology, economic conditions, government, socio-cultural and international. Industry: The EPC industry in the Middle East is at its peak, as a result of the rich oil resources. A large number of different sized EPC organizations exist in UAE alone, with intense competition at the local, national and international level and offering different range of services. As a result, there is intense competition within the EPC industry, with competitive quality services and prices along with reliable delivery and can drastically affect the performance of Etisalate in situations of low organizational efficiency. Raw Materials: The construction and engineering materials costs are included as variable costs in the initial contract plan, and in face of changing economy, rising raw material costs can drastically affect the final costs for the EPC organization. Furthermore, the Lump sum turnkey mode (LSTK) which is employed by Etisalate increases the cost fluctuations risks, especially in times of project delays. Human Resources: The EPC organizations although hire professionals directly, also need to hired sub-contractors for the bulk of the project work, especially construction. Etisalate follows the same policy, and saves considerable time and money involved in managing large groups of people, by outsourcing certain job aspects to the sub-contractors. Financial Resources: Typically, the projects are funded by banks although organizations are looking for alternative sources like private equity, bond market, project partners and export credit agencies (Brogan 2010). As a result of large varieties of options for financial resources, this sector poses less risk to the organization. Market: The EPC market is witnessing sturdy growth inspite of the economic slump and the decreasing crude oil prices, due to continued demand for oil and oil products across the world. As a result, this sector poses minimum risk to the organization’s competitive strategies. Technology: Latest software and engineering solutions are being developed and available for organizations to employ, which makes numerous tasks and processes easier, efficient and faster. This sector is the source of highest advantage for the organization. Economic Conditions: The recent years have witnessed numerable wars and political instability in the Middle East, which has affected the overall economic condition of the oil and gas industry. Furthermore, the recent drop in crude oil prices has aggravated the economic condition, proving to be a high risk sector for Etisalate. Government: In the Middle East, with fluctuating oil prices, the oil economy which is the driver of leading development projects is underthreat. Consequently, the governments of the GCC nations have been encouraging EPC projects and industry for the purpose of diversification of its source of income, thus proving to be a low risk sector. Socio-cultural: Since different international players are entering the EPC industry of Middle-East, more frequently foreigners and expats are being hired on contract basis for services, although the organizations are also balancing out the GCC governments’ nationalization plans and policies by equally hiring and training locals. International: Internationally based organizations have no barrier to operating locally, since they can hire local sub-contractors and vendors in the well-established EPC industry of Middle East. As a result, there is higher competition within this industry, thus posing high risks to Etisalate’s performance. Opportunities and Challenges By analyzing the internal and external characteristics of Etisalate, it can be concluded that the current situation has presented with opportunities for improvement. Since the Etisalate follows the mission culture, the discipline that has been imbibed within the work culture as part of its effectiveness strategy, can be used for upgrading the communication strategy among the department members. Furthermore, considering the organization’s vast technological and financial resource, they can be used for developing and upgrading the current communication system structure, which along with hierarchical structure reshuffling also needs new technology (hardware and software). Furthermore, considering the international reach of the organization’s operations, latest advances in technology, theories, concepts, planning and processes can be easily introduced and accessed. Along with opportunities, this case study is also presenting with several challenge, especially related to introduction and implementation of new strategies. The primary challenge within this project is the time period needed to design and run a changing strategy plan within such a large department, since delay can further aggravate the current situation. Furthermore, the consequences and effects of such a system in place cannot be fully predicted, which would require thorough analysis of all factors involved. Lastly, since the target department, the Project Management & Technical Authority department does the most important job of strategizing, planning, implementing and regulating the EPC projects, any undesirable changes or effects will lead to a change reaction, thereby affecting the organization’s performance. 2.3. Literature Review In the organizational theory and design literature, different analysis tools are used to assess the internal and external conditions of an organization. These methodologies and frameworks work to provide diverse set of aids and references for organizations to design and implement their strategies as well as measure their performances (Pun 2003). In the present case, the 10-sector analysis was applied for Etisalate, where the situation of 10 of its task environment sectors were defined and their influence on the organization studied (Daft 2013). As a consequence of such an analysis, a clear picture of the current situation of the organization emerges which further assists in formulating the new strategies, which in this case is improving effectiveness and resilience. A more common analysis tool used in the management field is the Strength, Weakness, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) and the McKinsey & Company’s 7S framework (Pun & White 2005; Waterman et al. 1980). While the SWOT analysis framework is used to confront internal means and capabilities with external developments, the 7S framework by McKinsey primarily deals with the role of co-ordination, rather than structure in organizational effectiveness, through its seven levers of Skills, Systems, Staffs, Style, Strategy, Structure and Shared values (Van Wijngaarden et al. 2012; Bhatti 2011). However, the conventional SWOT analysis fails to help leaders estimate the relative costs and benefits of SWOT factors for the organization nor do they help define the extent of influence of the factors on the organization (Leigh 2010). Furthermore, the McKinsey’s 7S analysis framework falls short in its complexity and ability to lead to confusion in changing global environment, since a change in one factor in the framework changes the whole strategy (Zentner 2015). The 10-sector analysis which considers all the relevant task environment sectors pertaining to an organization can help leaders define the extent of effect of factors on the organization as well as help even in dynamic and adaptable environments (Daft 2013). Organizational effectiveness, defined as proficiency of an organization having access and ability to resources and consequently achieve its aim, is general influenced by a variety of factors and can be evaluated by certain indicators like organizational performance (financial and non-financial), internal communications, organizational structure and political impact (Venkataiah 2006; Pun & White 2005). In the matter of organizational effectiveness, leadership has often been known to play a strategic role, although the other factors include organizational culture, innovation, employee satisfaction, productivity and organizational adaptability to changes (Yukl 2008; Venkataiah 2006; Zheng et al. 2010). For the purpose of guiding leaders and top managers in achieving organizational effectiveness under turbulent conditions, the Flexible Leadership Theory was designed, that focuses on strategies and management practices advantageous as well as flexible leadership characteristics for three important determinants of organizational performance: efficiency, adaptability and human capital (Yukl 2008). Furthermore, organizational effectiveness can be improved by process mapping and measurement, process improvement, coherent management teams, facilitation of internal intervention, monitoring and evaluation, assessing work climate and culture, improving communication and team building and finally rationalizing the organizational structure complexities (Venkataiah 2006). Different models for assessing the organization’s effectiveness exist, which focus on organizational goals, stakeholders’ satisfaction, productivity, employee commitment and leadership skills (Venkataiah 2006). Common organizational effectiveness models include, Goal Approach, System resource Approach, Process Approach and Strategic Constituency Approach, mostly based on Cameron’s study of organizational effectiveness of colleges in 1978 (Ashraf & Abd Kadir 2012; Cameron 1978). The organization’s effectiveness can also be achieved by strategically fulfilling the needs and interests of different stakeholders involved in an organization, using the Stakeholders Approach. The Stakeholder theory considers an organization as a series of groups with complex relationships among them, either contributing to or benefiting from the organization but all adding to the final value of the organization (Freeman 2001). The stakeholders normally consists of internal organization members like managers, employees, board members and external members like owners, customers, suppliers, competitors (Schneider 2002). Leaders and managers while attempting to change strategies for sake of improving organizational effectiveness, have to consider the stakeholders since satisfied stakeholders contribute more to the organization’s performance (Schneider 2002; Freeman 2010). This change of strategy is often costly, since there is a demand for reexamination of the organization’s values and goals and a shift from internal to external focus of control (Denison & Mishra 2013). However, the long term effect of the stakeholder approach is satisfied stakeholders, which can benefit the organization through its performance, like satisfied employees performing better, satisfied customers and vendors ensure sustained business and satisfied managers take up new initiatives for the organization’s further benefit. Based on the stakeholder relationship with organizational effectiveness, the Stakeholder Model of Organizational Leadership was designed, which helps predict leadership’s effectiveness in the modern organizations of fuzzy boundaries, horizontal hierarchy and unique dynamic work relationships (Schneider 2002). Stakeholders approach strategy also benefits the organization by giving it a competitive advantage, since organizations with policies of managing-for-stakeholders create and share values of trust, justice and quality assurance with all stakeholders and thereby gain a reputation for the same (Harrison et al. 2010). Different frameworks and models are available to design and select strategies suitable for different situations and industries, some of them being Porter’s Competitive Strategies, Miles and Snow Strategy Typology, Competitive Strategy Framework by McFarlan and McKenney, Strategic Opportunities Framework and Porter and Millar’s Strategic Advantage Framework among others (Pun 2003; Daft 2013). Porter, in his famous work of organizational strategy and competitive forces influencing the organizational effectiveness in industrial settings, designed the Porter’s Model for competitive strategy, a tool to determine the ideal business strategy by balancing between competitive scope and advantage (Daft 2013). The Porter’s Competitive strategy framework, which examines the linkage between business activity and its competitive environment, essentially helps leaders, especially transformational leaders to analyze the competitive context of their business strategies and identify points of creating advantage in the face of competition (Pun 2003; Daft 2013). While Miles and Snow Strategy typology deals with fitting the organization’s internal characteristics according to strategy and external environment, the Competitive Strategy Framework, based on the value added chain concept, pertains with setting up structural barriers and exploiting competitive opportunities (Pun 2003). Furthermore, the Strategic Opportunities Framework helps organizations determine ideal strategies based on its internal and external operations as well as its products and systems, while the Porter and Millar’s Strategic Advantage Framework helps organizations determine strategies based on its competitive context within its industry (Pun 2003). Comparing these frameworks and their strategies, Porter’s Competitive Strategies Framework has advantage over the others with its simple decision making process as well as differentiating the organizational focus into efficiency or unique services and products (unique market for market competitive advantage) (Daft 2013) Considering the current situation of Etisalate and its sector analysis, the Porter’s framework for competitive strategy is applied(Appendix) (Daft 2013). The framework focuses on two basic styles of leadership, Differentiation (developing and providing different and unique products and services) and Low- Cost leadership (focusing on improved processes and manufacturing efficiency) (Figure 1). Since the Etisalate is an already established and is currently the leading organization in the EPC industry with strict policies and operating procedures, the Differentiation strategy should be applied to within the Project Management and Technical Authority department in order to deal with the changing EPC industry. In this style of leadership, more emphasis is laid on creativity, research, innovation and risk-taking as well as increased communication and collaboration within different individuals and teams. Applying this strategy, a new departmental structure is designed and implemented, which is discussed in detail in the next section. During the designing of the new strategy, special emphasis is laid on concepts of communication, coordination and collaboration, decision-making styles of leadership and networking structure within the department, to support the new strategy. 2.4. Present Restructured Organization A firm’s effectiveness is dependent on its structure, mission and values, management and leadership, stakeholders’ relationship and performance indicators. The main goal of this assignment is to design and implement a new restructured strategy within the Project Management and Technical Authority department. New strategies and frameworks were considered and referred to and different theories and concepts related to organizational effectiveness, leadership styles and stakeholders’ approach. By referring to Porter’s Competitive Strategies framework, it was determined that the Differentiation strategy of leadership will be applied in the new departmental strategy with special focus on building communication systems and networking and employing stakeholders approach in the departmental mission. Communication is also known to contribute towards learning and strategy formulation through coordination activities and sharing of knowledge and information within teams for problem solving purposes (Daft 2013). Effective communications within organizations can be explained as, ‘a strategy of co-alignment of diverse interests, concerns, and contributions through the use of an open flexible communication system allowing for the co-alignment of both similarities and differences in an innovative, flexible and rapid response system’ (Conrad 1994as quoted in Langan-Fox 2001, p.189). Communication within an organization is also important is explaining to the stakeholders the values and goals of the organization and the modes of benefits for the stakeholders. Communication is not only important for day-to-day activities and tasks of the department but also during the change management, when strategies and processes are changed, leaders are tasked with ensuring transparency, openness, clarity and integrity in the communication process of change (Singh 2013; Daft 2013). While restructuring communication systems within teams departments or organizations, there is a shift seen in communication styles, values and modes which further affect the communication networks and groups existing in the target group (Langan-Fox 2001). Taking communication systems in organizations one step further, it can be observed that relationships and communication directions between different individuals and groups of an organization gives rise to communication network systems and can be either of Formal or Informal type, depending on the relationship status of the relevant parties (Langan-Fox 2001). The leader’s role in firm’s effectiveness also depends on the decision-making style, especially under challenging and conflicting times. Leaders have to consider different factors like the current situation status, missions, goals and objectives of the organization, stakeholders and resources available, while making decisions pertaining to organizational strategy and processes (Snowden & Boone 2007). While focusing on the strategic outcomes, leaders traditionally focused on the economic outcomes, such as profit, sales growth, cost control etc. and implemented only those strategies that led to better organizational performance. However, another aspect which leaders have started focusing upon recently is the stakeholders, by balancing the different stakeholders’ needs (Luque et al. 2008). These two approaches have been considered to be mutually exclusive, affect the firm performance differently and possess disadvantages. While the stakeholder approach can create difficulties and confusion for the leader in considering different, often conflicting, needs of the stakeholders, the economic strategy often involves short term goals rather than ensuring long term organizational success (Luque et al. 2008). Considering the concepts and frameworks related to organizational effectiveness, communication and leadership decision-making, a new structured department has been designed. The aim of this new structure is to employ effective communication culture and networks for the purpose of improving effectiveness, performance and innovation of the department. Figure 1: Restructured Communication System in the Project Management & Technical Authority Department As seen from the figure, a new communication-based hierarchy is developed for the Project Management & Technical Authority department which includes not only the department heads, Strategic Manager and Assistant Strategic Manager, but also the low management level Project Manager and Senior Planning Engineer for the purpose of decision making and strategy formulation. Since the Senior Planning Engineer is the main player for the development, implementation and control of the project schedules, it is important to note that the team members, under the planning engineer, are also involved during the scheduling period (depicted by double headed arrow between Senior Planning Engineer and Team). Consequently, the new role of the Senior Planning Engineer is to ensure active interaction and participation of all team members during all stages of the project, especially planning. Furthermore, there is a network of exchange of information between the Project Managers responsible for guiding/ supervising different projects, such that ideas and latest data flow freely among the supervisors, which can then be of advantage for the Planning Engineer and project teams. A third and an important feature of this new communication system is the Feedback System- that exists between the Project Managers/ Supervisors and the head of the department- Strategic Manager. The main purpose of this feedback system is timely update and sharing of data and opinions from middle to top management, in order to ensure continuous development and learning within the department. Furthermore, this communication network is not rigid or set with established company policies, but is in fact designed to undergo regular changes, in response to changing environment situations. Overall, this new communication strategy of the department focuses on the properties of collaboration and co-ordination for a free flow of information and ideas and resulting in faster and efficient problem solving. A second aspect of the new communication based departmental strategy is special stress on upgrading and induction of new technology (not shown in the figure, not only for communication purpose but also related to software, data analysis and different stages of project planning and implementation. The mode of communication between individuals can influence the individual behavior, outcomes such as productivity and also effect the type and frequency of problems (Langan-Fox 2001). When organizations employ communication and information technology, the resulting communication structure has been found to influence and change the organizational structure since information technology can influence hierarchy, power and roles within the organizations (Langan-Fox 2001). Consequently, it becomes easier for the department to employ and use a ‘Virtual Network Structure’, a modification of the horizontal hierarchical structure extending outside of the organization, mostly in situations of sub-contractors and sub-vendor hiring procedures (Appendix) (Daft 2013). A third and the final aspect of this new communication system is special emphasis on the importance of innovation and knowledge for the purpose of improving organizational efficiency. Innovative ideas and out-of-the-box- thinking is known to be a source of alternative solutions that can solve problems with greater efficiency and at lesser costs and time period, increasing reliability and quality standards. The department and the organization has to continuously upgrade and change its policies and procedures, along with processes and strategies to avoid business stagnation and consequent losing of competitive advantage. This can be achieved by organizing several workshops and talks from experts in the strategic management field, which can help individuals as well as the department to succeed in their mission of excellence. 2.5. Challenges in redesign efforts The current strategy for restructuring of the communication system of the Project Management and Technical Authority department can be expected to face several challenges. They are listed below: i. There could be a delay in implementation of the new communication strategy either due to slow decision making process, lack of resources or infrastructure or lack of participation of department members. ii. Due to the serious situation of recent slump in crude oil prices, there is a possibility of the upper management refusing the resources (financial as well as technological) needed for upgrading of communication system of the department. iii. The members of the department may not be convinced to attend the intra-department workshops and activities. iv. During the system change, there will be a possibility of confusion and chaos among different team members, especially the top management, which could affect the existing processes and jobs, drastically, thereby creating more harm than benefit. v. The feedback system may or may not succeed, since department employees who are suddenly tasked with giving feedback may hesitate or fear repercussions. vi. The most important challenge is the unpredictability of the consequence of the new communication structure, either success or failure, for a wide range of determined and undetermined reasons. 2.6. Comparison of existing and proposed Departmental communication system Currently, the Project Management & Technical Authority department, whose primary role is planning, developing strategy, procurement and commissioning of EPC projects of the oilfield sector, follows a rigid communication top-bottom hierarchy. According to this system, mission, targets and goals devised by the head of the department (Strategic Manager) are passed down the hierarchy, to be fulfilled by the subordinates. Figure 2: Current Communication System in the Project Management & Technical Authority Department Comparing the current and newly designed communication system, there is a stark contrast in the direction of the communication. As seen in the current structure, the goals and targets are set by the top management (Strategic Manager) which has to be followed and completed by the employees. However, in the new structure, the direction is reversed and in few levels, multi-directional. In the proposed system, although the targets are set by the top management, the communication flows in the bottom-top direction, meaning the top management simply plays a superficial supervisory and guiding role while the work is achieved by the middle management (project managers and Senior Planning engineers), who exchange ideas and information among each other for efficient and faster target achievement. In the current organization, no co-ordination, collaboration or exchange or ideas takes place at any level and the top management plays the role of controlling the implementation of projects. Also, currently there is no influence of innovation and knowledge exchange in the work culture of the department, which although does not prove detrimental to the department, but has led to stagnation of processes. Overall, the main difference in communication system structure is direction of flow of communication and influence of innovation and knowledge exchange. 2.7. Conclusions The Strategic Project Management report defined and addressed the several problems that have plagued the case organization specifically its Project Management and Technical Authority Department. Etisalate is a multinational corporation providing Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) services to the Oil and Gas Sector around the world. Although the organization has not undergone loses, it was unable to meet its performance capacity. Through extensive analysis of the Etisalate and its environmental conditions using Daft's(2013) 10-sector analysis framework, it was concluded that organization was at medium risk from its environment. Furthermore, it could be seen that the department lacked a reliable and effective communication system which was leading to delay in decision making and barriers to information flow. Extensive literature research was conducted on the concepts of improving organizational effectiveness on the basis of leadership skills and strategic planning/ frameworks, for the purpose of designing a new strategy to be implemented in the Project Management and Technical Authority Department of Etisalate. Special focus was given to the importance of communication, decision making styles and leadership characteristic contributing to organizational effectiveness. Using Daft (2013) as reference, the new strategy was developed on basis of following Porter’s Competitive Strategies Framework. According to the new communication system, the flow of communication was reversed from the traditional top-bottom to multi-directional with dominant bottom-top flow. Besides this, as per the new system, specific importance is given to upgrading of technology and knowledge processes as well as the innovation culture. Although the new structure was designed following thorough analysis, some challenges and drawbacks were predicted and defined, so that solutions to those problems can be devised and the situations prevented from happening during the implementation stage.   References Ashraf, G. & Abd Kadir, S. bte, 2012. A review on the models of organizational effectiveness: A look at Cameron’s model in higher education. International Education Studies, 5(2), pp.80–87. Bhatti, O.K., 2011. Strategy Implementation: an Alternative Choice of 8S ’ S. Annals of Management Research, 1(2), pp.52–59. Brogan, A., 2010. Funding challenges in the oil and gas sector. Ernst & Young (Oil and Gas). Cameron, K., 1978. Measuring organizational effectiveness in institutions of higher education. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23(4), pp.604–632. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2392582 [Accessed February 16, 2016]. Conrad, C., 1994. Strategic organizational communication: In a global economy, Available at: https://books.google.co.in/books?hl=en&lr=&id=RNzO_9MbaYoC&oi=fnd&pg=PA244&dq=conrad+strategic+organizational+communication&ots=RHjdfuoIS9&sig=Ut3FideXIL08tEiRnYVXJm6HJ1w [Accessed February 16, 2016]. Daft, R.L., 2013. Organisation Theory & Design 11th Editi., South-Western College Publishing. Denison, D.R. & Mishra, A.K., 2013. Toward a theory of organizational culture and effectiveness. Organization Science, 6(2), pp.204–223. Freeman, E.R., 2001. A Stakeholder Theory of the Modern Corporation. In L. Hartman & A. Chatterjee, eds. Perspectives in Business Ethics SIE. New Delhi, India: Tata-McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, pp. 144–154. Available at: http://www.business.uzh.ch/professorships/strategy/stu/BS/lecture/Evan_Freeman_1988.pdf. Freeman, R., 2010. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach, Available at: https://books.google.co.in/books?hl=en&lr=&id=NpmA_qEiOpkC&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=stakeholder+freeman+&ots=6-ghD5K9VO&sig=eiOIOxm9ZNApPwP6RX9oNpEDpmI [Accessed January 6, 2016]. Harrison, J.S., Bosse, D. a & Phillips, R. a, 2010. Managing for stakholders, stakeholder utility functions, and competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 31, pp.58–74. Jokinen, T., 2005. Global leadership competencies: a review and discussion. Journal of European Industrial Training, 29(3), pp.199–216. Langan-Fox, J., 2001. Communication in Orgnaizations: Speed, Diversity, Networks and Influence on Organizational Effectiveness, Human Health and Relationships. In Handbook of Industrial, Work & Organizational Psychology. SAGE Publications, pp. 188–205. Leigh, D., 2010. SWOT Analysis. In J. A. Pershing, ed. Handbook of Human Performance Technology. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer. Available at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/9780470592663.ch24. Luque, M.S. De, Washburn, N.T. & Waldman, D.A., 2008. Nathan T. Washburn. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(4), pp.626–654. Pun, K.F., 2003. A synergy model for strategic planning in manufacturing enterprises. West Indian Journal of Engineering, 26(1), pp.29–43. Pun, K.F. & White, A.S., 2005. A performance measurement paradigm for integrating strategy formulation: A review of systems and frameworks. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7(1), pp.49–71. Reeds, M. & Hughes, M., 1993. Rethinking organization: New directions in organization theory and analysis, London: SAGE Publications. Available at: https://books.google.co.in/books?hl=en&lr=&id=_kPswElSFRoC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=organization+theory&ots=WflPVQoLZm&sig=2ZhGNnWBAWUXTuygFqINGm0GHHc [Accessed February 15, 2016]. Schneider, M., 2002. A Stakeholder Model of Organizational Leadership. Organizational Science, 13(2), pp.209–220. Singh, A., 2013. A Study of Role of McKinsey’s 7S Framework in Achieving Organizational Excellence. Organization Development Journal, 31(3), pp.39–50. Available at: http://search.proquest.com/openview/2841540659b291c4faf9b654e032e310/1?pq-origsite=gscholar [Accessed February 16, 2016]. Snowden, D. & Boone, M., 2007. A leader’s framework for decision making. Harvard Business Review, (November), pp.1–8. Available at: http://aacu-secure.nisgroup.com/meetings/ild/documents/Symonette.MakeAssessmentWork.ALeadersFramework.pdf [Accessed February 14, 2016]. Venkataiah, P., 2006. Models of Organizational Effectiveness. Osmania Journal of Management, 2(2), pp.1–7. Waterman, R., Peters, T. & Phillips, J., 1980. The 7-S framework. In Chapter 6. pp. 309–314. Available at: https://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?q=waterman%2C+peters%2C+philips%2C+The+7S+Framework&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5#1 [Accessed February 15, 2016]. Van Wijngaarden, J.D.H., Scholten, G.R.M. & Van Wijk, K.P., 2012. Strategic analysis for health care organizations: The suitability of the SWOT-analysis. International Journal of Health Planning and Management, 27(1), pp.34–49. Yukl, G., 2008. How leaders influence organizational effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(6), pp.708–722. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S104898430800129X [Accessed February 15, 2016]. Zentner, A., 2015. A fork in the road of change : A comparison of simple and complex organizational change models. Available at SSRN, (October). Zheng, W., Yang, B. & McLean, G., 2010. Linking organizational culture, structure, strategy, and organizational effectiveness: Mediating role of knowledge management. Journal of Business research, 63(7), pp.763–771. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296309001714 [Accessed February 15, 2016].   Appendices Appendix I: Self-Assessment 1: Personal Networking Scoring: 1:F, 2:F, 3:T, 4:T, 5:F, 6:T, 7:F, 8:F, 9:F, 10:T Final Score: 4   Appendix II: Self- Assessment 2: Making Important Decisions No. Contributing Factor Score 1. Logic +1 2. Inner Knowledge -1 3. Data 4. Felt Sense 5. Facts +1 6. Instinct 7. Concepts +1 8. Hunch 9. Reason +1 10. Feelings Final Score: +3   Appendix III: Self- Assessment 3: Corporate Culture No. Items Ranking 1 The organization is very personal, much like an extended family. 4 2 The organization is dynamic and changing, where people take risks. 7 3 The organization is achievement oriented, with the focus on competition and getting jobs done. 4 4 The organization is stable and structured, with clarity and established procedure. 7 5 Management style is characterized by teamwork and participation. 6 6 Management style is characterized by innovation and risk-taking. 6 7 Management style is characterized by high performance demands and achievement. 5 8 Management style is characterized by security and predictability. 7 Clan Culture: low 10; Adaptability Culture: high 13; Mission culture: low 9; Bureaucratic culture: high 14 Appendix IV: Porter’s Competitive Strategies Framework Broad Low-Cost Leadership Differentiation Competitive Scope Focused Low-Cost Leadership Focused Differentiation Narrow Low Cost Competitive Advantage Uniqueness   Appendix V: Comparison of Horizontal and Virtual Network structure Strength Weakness Horizontal Structure Promotes flexibility and rapid response to changes in customer needs Determining core processes is difficult and time consuming Promotes a focus on teamwork and collaboration Requires changes in culture, job design, management philosophy and information and reward systems Improves quality of life for employees by offering them the opportunity to share responsibilities, make decisions and be accountable for outcomes Requires significant training of employees to work effectively in a horizontal team environment Virtual Network Structure Enables even small organizations to obtain talent and resources worldwide Requires a great deal of time to manage relationships and potential conflicts with contract partners Gives a company immediate scale and reach without huge investments in factories, equipment, or distribution facilities There is a risk of organizational failure if a partner fails to deliver or goes out of business Enables the organization to be highly flexible and responsive to changing needs Employee loyalty and corporate culture might be weak because employees feel they can be replaced by contract services