The Effects on North Korea free essay sample

â€Å"North Korea is one of the most secretive countries on earth. It’s regarded as an intelligence black hole† (â€Å"Inside North Korea†). North Korea, a communist dictatorship, is known to be very secretive, but also is one of the cruelest countries on earth to its people. â€Å"Communism is a political, social, and economic system in which the government is based on a collective society with land, property, and economic activities controlled by the state† (Lansford 9). The North Korean government does not like to show the world what really happens inside their country. â€Å"A U. S. -based rights group has estimated that there are up to 200,000 political prisoners in North Korea† (â€Å"North Korea Profile†). Many of the people living in the camps are just the family members of the prisoners. Citizens can be sent to these work camps if they talked badly against the government or other minor crimes. The communist government of North Korea causes civilians to live in extreme conditions and suffer the wrath of their leaders and soldiers. We will write a custom essay sample on The Effects on North Korea or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page The lives of the innocent could benefit if a new form of government takes place to stop the pain and suffering. Korea did not experience communism until 1948 when the north side and the south side broke up into two different countries: North and South Korea. During WWII, the Allied Forces coerced the Japanese Imperial Forces out of Korea. Communist Russia occupied the north side while the democratic U. S. backed the south. Once tension started building up between Russia and the U. S. , it was impossible to bring the two sides back together as one country. The north took in communism and the south adopted democracy (Shah). When North Korea embraced communism, a young man named Kim Il Sung began to lead the new country. He was respected by many in North Korea and even adored by some. â€Å"In 1950, Kim Il Sung invaded the south to unify the country† (â€Å"Inside North Korea†). This led to the Korean War and the south side along with the help of America fought to stop communism from entering the southern border. The south never was reunited with the north and the communist ways continue to stay with North Korea only. Currently, a 148 mile long border divides the north and south from each other. The long border is called â€Å"the 38th Parallel. † This is the most heavily guarded border in the world (â€Å"Inside North Korea†). South Korea strictly guards this border because they do not want North Korean spies or any military personnel to enter into their country and gain any information to the north that could affect them. Also, the south wants to defend their borders so much to protect them from communism spreading into their country. Because of the terrible conditions North Korean citizens live through every day, South Korea wants to stop all threats of bringing communism into their country and ruining their own way of life. Since North Korea became a country, they have had three leaders that have controlled the country under the reigns of communism. North Korea’s first communist leader was Kim Il Sung. He, along with the Russian government, founded the country and put communism in place as the North Korean form of government. Kim Il Sung set â€Å"Juche† as North Korea’s economic system (â€Å"Communism: North Korea†). â€Å"Juche† is a form of self-reliance. It is a mixture of xenophobic nationalism (unreasonably fearful of or hating anyone or anything foreign or strange), central planning and economic independence. Using this self-reliant economy, Kim Il Sung ruled until he died in 1994. After his death, his son, Kim Jong Il, ruled with identical tactics as his father. Even though North Korea tried to produce all their needs domestically, Kim Jong Il loved importing meals, goods, and clothes from other countries around the world (â€Å"Communism: North Korea†). Kim Jong Il was an absolute dictator who was worshipped in a personality cult that was more extreme than any other in any country (â€Å"Inside North Korea). A historian on North Korea, Michael Breen, says, â€Å"Kim Jong Il was the son of god in North Korea. He was the state. The notion of questioning his ability to rule never entered into things† (â€Å"Inside North Korea†). In 2011, Kim Jong Il died and all the power was given to his youngest son Kim Jong Un. After he died, Kim Jong Il was given the title â€Å"eternal general secretary† of the party and â€Å"eternal chairman† of the National Defense Commission. Kim Jong Il’s father, Kim Il Sung, had received the title â€Å"eternal president† when he passed away as well (â€Å"North Korea†). Kim Jong Un is currently the supreme leader of North Korea. He rules with an iron fist just like his father and grandfather. Because the country is based around â€Å"Juche†, it is hard to produce all the necessities people need such as food. Since the mid-1990s, aid agencies around the world have estimated around two million people have died from starvation caused by food shortages that were due to natural disasters and economic mismanagement (â€Å"North Korea Profile†). The effects on North Korean citizens are very severe because of the country’s leader’s philosophy of self-reliance, and thousands of people will continue to suffer from the lack of food and other necessary items. Communism affects citizens all over the country. Thousands of people suffer from the consequences that the government has left in North Korea. There is a major gap between North Korea’s medical care and other countries medical care. German physician and human rights activist Norbert Vollertsen said: â€Å"Of course, the North Korean government will tell you everything is free in North Korea. It’s not true because it’s not available. There is no medicine. There is no running water. There is even no soap in the hospitals (â€Å"Inside North Korea†). Since there are barely any decent medical facilities, thousands of people overcome with sickness and die a lot younger than in developed countries. Also, many thousands of people become blind because the lack of proper hospitals and the poor living conditions there. In 2006, Doctor Sanduk Ruit went into North Korea to perform one thousand surgeries on the blind. Once the surgeries were completed, the doctor and his staff began to take off the blindfolds on those who were treated. Each time a person could see, they did not thank the doctor but they walked up to a picture of Kim Il Sung and thanked him (â€Å"Inside North Korea†). The effects on the children in North Korea are devastating. Lisa Ling, a T. V. correspondent for National Geographic, explains: â€Å"The average seven year old boy is eight inches shorter and twenty-two pounds lighter than his brother in South Korea† (â€Å"Inside North Korea†). The effects of communism are oppressive, but they do not affect all citizens. A little over three million people live in North Korea’s capital city Pyongyang. Pyongyang holds most of the privileged citizens of the county. Big supporters of the government are allowed to live there (â€Å"Inside North Korea†). The capital city has countless amounts of posters of the three leaders: Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il, and Kim Jong Un. North Korea’s communist government takes a huge toll on its people, but they do not complain to anyone about it or else they have risk of going to internment camps or death. The people of North Korea worship but also fear their leaders. They rarely oppose them or else they could live in a prison camp for the rest of their lives or be killed. North Korea’s citizens depend on their communist government to provide them with food and protection. The citizens have lived with oppression for decades, but many of the people do not want to change their government because they have dealt with it for so long and they are used to it. A solution that can stop communism’s reign in North Korea is to wait out the rule. After North Korea loses it communist rule, countries around the world can work together to put in a new form of government. As soon as the communist control in the country starts to dissolve, the citizens of North Korea could start fighting the government alongside of many different world countries that want to end communism in all countries. World powers desire to end North Korea’s communism because they have recently obtained nuclear weapons that they could threaten many countries with or sell them to terrorist organizations (â€Å"Inside North Korea†). World powers do not want to have to go to war with North Korea because of the loss of lives, the cost, the damage it causes, and many other reasons; this is why waiting out the communist reign in North Korea is the best option. This idea worked with Syria and Libya because once the countries’ governments started to collapse, rebels along with other countries fought to out a new government in place. If the North Korean citizens can outlast communism’s control until the country’s government starts to diffuse, then the people of North Korea can fight the government with the help of a variety of countries. Communism has turned North Korea into one of the world’s most feared and hated countries. Their government’s ways of ruling with a communist leash has led to extreme conditions affecting the citizens there. If anyone is reported of talking or even thinking against the regime, they will most likely die or end up living the rest of their life in prison (â€Å"Inside North Korea†). Because the North Korean government has taken a huge toll on its citizens, many countries around the world wish to change their form of government. If these countries along with the citizens of North Korea wait until communism’s leash begins to die out, then they can help each other to finish off the devastating consequences the communist government of North Korea has had for decades.

Garden essays

Garden essays Developing a vegetable garden in the grounds of the school It has been a known issue for many years of how Eating Healthy has been an important topic and issue within the curriculum in the society and at Berala Public School. The school believes children should become aware of the health hazards that surround them, for example in the play ground area and what the children are eating. Nalenshon A, believes (www.empoweredparents.com/1childhoodonset/childhood_07), Parents are largely responsible for shaping a childs body image and eating lifestyle. Parental family participation within the school setting could encourage the knowledge of the families, community, staff regarding health hazards such as Healthy Eating. Family and staff participation in implementing a vegetable garden will encourage the co-operation and particpation in the school environment and their responsibility by enhancing the vegetable garden is well maintained and looked after now and in the near future. The school is very spacious and has lots of shading and sunny areas outdoor and has lots of trees scattered in the playground and implementing a vegetable garden will build an interest of what is planted. The year 2 class in term 3 (while I am on placement) will be undertaking the growing unit of science and technology k-6 that has been planned for the classes early in term 2. Therefore developing a vegetable garden in relation with the staff and family participation will link very well with this unit. This will fit in to the schools canteen policy and values. For example, in the policy it is said the canteen is a vital part of the school that will reinforce the students, and familys education, health and nutrition by providing a balance and nutritious food and beverage service to all the stakeholders of the school community. Therefore by integrating the veget ...

Aristotle And Politics

Aristotle And Politics Essay annonAristotle (b. 384 d. 322 BC), was a Greek philosopher, logician,and scientist. Along with his teacher Plato, Aristotle is generallyregarded as one of the most influential ancient thinkers in a numberof philosophical fields, including political theory. Aristotle wasborn in Stagira in northern Greece, and his father was a courtphysician to the king of Macedon. As a young man he studied inPlatos Academy in Athens. After Platos death he left Athens toconduct philosophical and biological research in Asia Minor andLesbos, and he was then invited by King Philip II of Macedon to tutorhis young son, Alexander the Great. Soon after Alexander succeededhis father, consolidated the conquest of the Greek city-states, andlaunched the invasion of the Persian Empire. It was in thisenvironment that Aristotles views and ideas of politics developed. As Alexanders teacher, Aristotle had a close tie to the politicalpowers of Athens. Because of this tie Aristotle wrote Politics as aguide to rulers as to how to govern a country. In Politics Aristotlelays out his ideal form of Government. It contains thought provokingdiscussions on the role of human nature in politics, the relation ofthe individual to the state, the place of morality in politics, thetheory of political justice, the rule of law, the analysis andevaluation of constitutions, the relevance of ideals to practicalpolitics, the causes and cures of political change and revolution,and the importance of a morally educated citizenry. He stressed thatthe ideal citizen and ruler must possess certain virtues, such aswisdom, temperance and courage. And the work as a whole echoesAristotles dominant theme of moderation. Politics is an excellenthistorical source because of the close tie Aristotle had to theeveryday business of government in Athens. It reflects the idealizedvalues of t he people and the influence of Aristotles teacher Plato. The importance of wisdom and justice also directly parallel theclassical Greek ideology. Aristotle believed that nature formedpolitics and the need for city-states (government) formed out ofnature. Aristotle lays the foundations for his political theory inPolitics by arguing that the city-state and political rule arenatural. The argument begins with a historical account of thedevelopment of the city-state out of simpler communities. First,individual human beings combined in pairs because they could notexist apart. The male and female joined in order to reproduce, andthe master and slave came together for self-preservation. The masteruses his intellect to rule, and the natural slave uses his body tolabor. Second, the household arose naturally from these primitivecommunities in order to serve everyday needs. Third, when severalhouseholds combined for other needs a village emerged also accordingto nature. Finally, the complete community, formed from severalvillages, is a city-state, whi ch can attain the limit ofself-sufficiency. It comes to be for the sake of life, and exists forthe sake of the good life. (I.2.1252b27-30). Aristotle backs upfour claims about the city-state: First, the city-state exists bynature, because it comes to be out of the more primitive naturalassociations and it serves as their end, because only it attainsself-sufficiency (1252b30-1253a1). Second, human beings are by naturepolitical animals, because nature, which does nothing in vain, hasequipped them with speech, which enables them to communicate moralconcepts such as justice, which are formative of the household andcity-state (1253a1-18). Third, the city-state is naturally prior tothe individuals, because individuals cannot perform their naturalfunctions apart from the city-state, since they are notself-sufficient (1253a18-29). However, these three claims areimmediately followed by a fourth: the city-state is a creation ofhuman intelligence. Therefore, everyone naturally has the impulsef or such a community, but the person who firstestablished is the cause of very great benefits. This greatbenefit may be the laws of the city-state. Aristotle points out thatthe legal system alone saves them from their own savagery. READ: Rules of Court: Parts of a Pleading EssayIts interesting to see that Aristotles view of nature transcends inhis view of the human character and what the humans should be. InAristotles Ethics he points out the popular view of what happinesswas (and maybe still is). Honor, pleasure and wealth are the thingshe believed the Greek people wanted to be happy. He stated that honoris a superficial aim because at any moment it can be taken away fromus. Pleasure is enjoyable but is more an animal quality than human,and wealth is merely a means towards a greater good. Aristotle taughtmoderation; the pursuit of the above three vices is okay, but dontmake it an all encompassing goal. In contrast to the three things hewarned against spending your life on, there were about four thingsthat he felt should be heartily sought after. Aristotle felt thateveryone should possess these qualities,and they were crucial for agood ruler. Wisdom, courage, temperance and justice were the fourvirtues that Ar istotle held so high. He felt that only through thesefour qualities could lead a person, or a country to true happiness. Aristotles virtues parallel the thinking of other classical Greeks. One of the obvious reasons for this is that the teacher-student bondtied many philosophers. The great Socrates taught Plato, and ofcourse Plato was Aristotles teacher. Although, the influence of theteacher is very strong, the students also have show that they canthink independently and their works have a distinctly different tasteto them. Plato said the just person is wise, temperate and courageousand the just state is ruled by wisdom. Platos just state displayedcourage over force and temperance over intemperance. Socrates, another of the famous classical Greeks, died for his viewsof wisdom and justice. Socrates used logic to tell himself and hiscolleagues that he must die for the sake of avoiding hypocrisy. Socrates whole life he preached that the states laws must be heldsupreme for justice to prevail. The state sentenced him to death,and to avoid death would be to contradict the states laws. In theprocess he would be contradicting what he had lived for. Many peoplelikened Socrates to a gadfly, always buzzing in the states face tomake sure they were doing the just thing. Aristotle also knew theimportance of justice but he approached it slightly differently. Justice, Aristotles third moral virtue, consisted of two mainaspects. The first was that the laws made citizens just; the statehad to strive to make the people act morally and good (1129a 13-24). Aristotles second aspect of justice was that people should beawarded justly, or in proportion to what they have done oraccomplished. The higher the merit the higher the honor or thehigher the crime the worse the punishment (1130b 30-32). In Politics Aristotle lays down his ideal structure of the family. His structure greatly reflected the values of the people in thepater-dominated tradition. The belief of the time was that thefather was basically the king of his house; Aristotle didnt varymuch from this. The father had supreme authority and had controlover his wife. He does concede that there is reciprocity betweenthe two but he feels that there is a permanent basic inequality. The wife should remain the ruled one and show her courage (a moralvirtue) through her obedience and her glory through silence (1260a24,30). The father also rules over his children with supremeauthority. Only through his death is his authority removed. Aristotle also included the slave as part of the family, but hedifferentiates from the practices of the time as what he considers tobe an acceptable slave. The status quo was the removal of strongbodies from conquered nations for the purpose of manual labor. Hefelt that slavery through conquest was unacceptable. Slavery hebelieved to be acceptable were those that needed the slave/masterrelationship to survive. Those that were too unintelligent to governthemselves needed this bond to get through life. In exchange fortheir daily care, the natural slaves are to do light householdduties such as cooking (1255b 26-27). It is interesting to notethat in his will Aristotle called for the emancipation of some of hisown acquired slaves. An example of the slave/master relationshipthat Aristotle discussed can be seen in todays world. Sometimes anelderly or sick person requires constant care. They need to haveeverything done for them and therefore cant govern themselves. READ: Belonging: Girl Interrupted. Lisa and Susanna EssayAnother person is required to make the persons important decisionsand is responsible for their care. In this example the distinctioncan be seen between Aristotles idea of a slave and Greekstraditional view, which was similar to the United States in the1800s. Aristotle was a brilliant person who taught moderation in governmentand in life. He stressed the importance of moral virtues as the keyto happiness and a successful government. Aristotle thought that theneed for government and authority developed on its own from nature. He taught in the Lyceum, a school he founded in Athens, how a justperson should live and how a just state should rule. His messages ofvirtue and moderation transcend time and still are a great influenceon modern western thought. SourcesThe Greco-Roman Legacy: AristotlePolitics by AristotleThe Republic by PlatoEthics by AristotleThe Greco-Roman legacy: Plato

Instructional presentation Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 1

Instructional presentation - Essay Example Jim Fay’s (1995) discussion of three major teaching styles reminders readers that feedback sends not only the overt message of the words used but the covert messages of tone, actions and general body language. Of the three teaching styles - helicopter, drill sergeants, and consultants – it is the consultant teacher who embodies the overt and covert â€Å"messages of personal worth, dignity, and strength† (Fay & Funk, 1995, p. 197). When looking to the strategies employed by consultant teachers, it becomes obvious that these can be used with all teaching styles to provide corrective feedback in a whole instruction setting. First, educators should make sure the questions being asked are of appropriate difficulty and cognitive levels while being stated as clearly as possible. Schroeder (n.d.) suggests that questions dealing with new material should be such that 80% of the responses given are correct and 90+% for review materials. Educators may find that low-level questions that ask what, where, and who are best for this. Such pedagogical procedures will promote self-esteem as well as momentum needed to progress with instructional activities. Students will then be more willing to work for answers to higher order questions dealing with the why and how. Secondly, teachers should react to responses in such a way as to encourage student answers. Quick, certain responses that are correct need only affirmation that they are indeed correct. Correct but hesitantly given responses need the affirmation of correctness as well as praise and perhaps a short review of why the response is correct. Incorrect responses that are due to a careless error need only a quick reference to the error and time for the student to be allowed to provide the correct answer. Incorrect answers based on a lack of knowledge should be met with prompts and hints that may engage the needed information. Clarifying, rephrasing, or even changing the

Short Answer Format on five different topics Essay - 1

Short Answer Format on five different topics - Essay Example our war with Spain after the USS Maine was sunk on February 15, 1898 while at anchor at Havana (Cuba) harbor, resulting in the death of 266 officers and men. America’s victory marked her rise as a world power. Subsequent troubling experiences running former Spanish colonies, sending soldiers to die in two world wars, and leading the war against Communism (Cold War) and terrorism continue to fuel debates on whether the US should be isolationist or accept the interdependence of nations in an age of globalization and perform its unique role as the world’s democratic superpower (Cole 85-89). Eleanor Roosevelt was the wife of four-term (1933-1945) US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the niece of two-term (1901-1909) President Theodore Roosevelt. She was born on October 11, 1884 and died on November 7, 1962. Many consider Mrs. Roosevelt as the woman who redefined the role of the First Lady in American history, becoming the model for later First Ladies. She turned her marital problems with her husband into an opportunity to shine and show that she was the better person. During and even after serving as our First Lady, she worked to uplift the social conditions of American women, African Americans, and the poor. She was appointed our representative to the United Nations from 1945-1963. President Harry S. Truman called her the â€Å"First Lady of the World.† Unlike previous First Ladies, she was active in public life as a writer, diplomat, and social activist. She wrote and published her autobiography (2000) before her death. Women’s suffrage is concerned with the right of women to vote in elections. This right was not enjoyed by women because US laws of at the time considered women incapable of exercising it. Such a simple assumption of the incapacity of half of the world to choose who should rule over them reflects the social attitude prevailing in America, where women were seen as weak and inferior to men (Stevens 107-108). Fortunately, a group

The Changing Verbal Portraits of Emily in A Rose for Emily Essay

The Changing Verbal Portraits of Emily in A Rose for Emily  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   "A Rose for Emily," by Faulkner, provides not only innumerable details but also a complex structure. Long after the reader has learned to identify and discuss the function of significant detail, they often continue to struggle with the influence of structure on a story. The imagery of changing portraits in "A Rose for Emily" allows the reader to explore both to find meaning. In addition to the literal portrait of Emily's father, Faulkner creates numerous figurative portraits of Emily herself by framing her in doorways or windows. The chronological organization of Emily's portraits visually imprints the changes occurring throughout her life. Like an impressionist painting that changes as the viewer moves to different positions, however, the structural organization provides clues to the "whole picture" or to the motivations behind her transformations. Chronologically, the "back-flung" front door creates the first tableau of a youthful Miss Emily, assiduously guarded by her father. Miss Emily, a "slender figure in white,"1 typifies the vulnerable virgin, hovering in the background, subordinate and passive. The father, "a spraddled silhouette in the foreground, his back to her and clutching a horsewhip" (CS 123), is a menacing dark image assuming the dominant front position. His turned back suggests a disregard for her emotional welfare as he wards off potential danger--or violation of her maidenhead--with his horsewhip. The back-flung door invites suitors in, but only those who meet Grierson standards. Unfortunately, those standards are unattainable--"The Griersons held themselves a little too high for what they really were" (CS 123)--and Miss Emily remains... ...cefully on her funeral bier with a simple image of love and loss, a strand of iron-gray hair resting on the yellowed pillow of an impotent bridal bed. This haunting image is the fianl pen stroke whispering the eulogy of her wasted life. Notes 1 Collected Stories of William Faulkner (New York: Vintage, 1977), 123. Hereafter CS. 2 The southern planter patterned his lifestyle after the English country gentleman (Daniel Boorstin, The American:   The Colonial Experience [Random House, 1958]).   In doing so, he developed a code of conduct that reflected the romanticism of the medevial age.   A feudal mind set--replete with courtly love, a code of honor, and a romantic quest--is evident in several of Faulkner's male characters, e.g., Sutpen in Abaslom, Absalom! and Hightower in Light in August. 3 The Sound and the Fury (New York:   Random House, 1992), 78. The Changing Verbal Portraits of Emily in A Rose for Emily Essay The Changing Verbal Portraits of Emily in A Rose for Emily  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   "A Rose for Emily," by Faulkner, provides not only innumerable details but also a complex structure. Long after the reader has learned to identify and discuss the function of significant detail, they often continue to struggle with the influence of structure on a story. The imagery of changing portraits in "A Rose for Emily" allows the reader to explore both to find meaning. In addition to the literal portrait of Emily's father, Faulkner creates numerous figurative portraits of Emily herself by framing her in doorways or windows. The chronological organization of Emily's portraits visually imprints the changes occurring throughout her life. Like an impressionist painting that changes as the viewer moves to different positions, however, the structural organization provides clues to the "whole picture" or to the motivations behind her transformations. Chronologically, the "back-flung" front door creates the first tableau of a youthful Miss Emily, assiduously guarded by her father. Miss Emily, a "slender figure in white,"1 typifies the vulnerable virgin, hovering in the background, subordinate and passive. The father, "a spraddled silhouette in the foreground, his back to her and clutching a horsewhip" (CS 123), is a menacing dark image assuming the dominant front position. His turned back suggests a disregard for her emotional welfare as he wards off potential danger--or violation of her maidenhead--with his horsewhip. The back-flung door invites suitors in, but only those who meet Grierson standards. Unfortunately, those standards are unattainable--"The Griersons held themselves a little too high for what they really were" (CS 123)--and Miss Emily remains... ...cefully on her funeral bier with a simple image of love and loss, a strand of iron-gray hair resting on the yellowed pillow of an impotent bridal bed. This haunting image is the fianl pen stroke whispering the eulogy of her wasted life. Notes 1 Collected Stories of William Faulkner (New York: Vintage, 1977), 123. Hereafter CS. 2 The southern planter patterned his lifestyle after the English country gentleman (Daniel Boorstin, The American:   The Colonial Experience [Random House, 1958]).   In doing so, he developed a code of conduct that reflected the romanticism of the medevial age.   A feudal mind set--replete with courtly love, a code of honor, and a romantic quest--is evident in several of Faulkner's male characters, e.g., Sutpen in Abaslom, Absalom! and Hightower in Light in August. 3 The Sound and the Fury (New York:   Random House, 1992), 78.

Organisation Behaviour

Option 3: Evaluate the statement that ‘organisational structure reflects and reinforces an unrealistic view of human rationality (Knights & Willmott, 2007)’. Introduction: Different authors have different definition toward organizational structure. Mintzberg (1979) defines the organization structure is defined as ‘The sum total of the ways in which it divides its labour into distinct task and then achieves coordination between them’ (Mintzberg, 1979, p. cited in Knights and Willmott, 2007, p. 197). In simple words, organizational structure is talking about the structure of an organization, how a company categorise their workers or management to achieve their goals. Basically, organizational structure is talking about the management system that include organic and mechanistic management system. In an organization, there will be a lot of matters happened because of the organization structure.Hence, people keep discover different management structure to assist in organizational structure like Taylor and Ford that influence the organization structure by using scientific method to classified the work of an organization and control the achievement of the organization (Fayol, 1949; Taylor, 1911cited in Singh, 2009). Lewin (1958) cited in Burnes (1996) provided that the planned model that designed for the organizational change is the best model.However, is there any the best structure for organization? When we treat one structure as the best structure for organization, we must consider the factors that will make the structure no longer applicable. Environment is the important influences that we cannot ignore about. The unstable of environment led the organization structure keep on changing. One of the changes in the structure of organizational was from mechanistic management system to organic management system.Mechanistic and organic of organizational structure are two formally form of management system that applied in organizational structure (Burns and Stalker, 1961). As what Kulmala and Uusi-Rauva (2005) claims that competition was changing from firm level to network level, which means from centralisation to decentralisation. Changing Of Environment More than 2,000 years ago the Greek philosopher Heraclitus(536-470 BC) claims that everything was continuous keep on changing and there was nothing permanent (Smith, 2011).Organizational structure is also the same, there are no the best structure for an organization since the environment is keep on changing. ‘‘There is no one best way to organize’’ and ‘‘any ways of organizing are not equally effective’’ (Galbraith, 1973 cited in Singh, 2009, p. 954). Environment and organization are interdependent, they depend on each other between an organization (pugh et al. 1963 cited in Child, n. d. ). Burns and Stalker (1961) cited in Singh (2009) proposed that appropriate organizational structure depends on environmental factors.Co ulson-Thomas (1991) cited in Strachan (1996) argues that business organizational is increasingly face unprecedented change in social, economic, political and business environment. Burn and Stalker (1961) cited in McMillan (n. d. ) claims that an organization must match and follow with the rate of change in its environment if the organization want to reach a maximum performance or achieve their goals. The performance of an organization depend on how they construct their structure to align with the environment (Mintzberg, 1979 cited in Nandakumar , Ghobadian and O’Regan, 2010).An example that shows the change of technology that led to the changes of organizational structure, the manner of hardware and software development resulted in architectures evolving over time, at the same time organization structures developed special forms to suit and fit their specific environmental and strategic requirements (Mukherji, 2002). An effective structure or strategy can promotes competitive advantage to strengthen an organization performance (Oosthuizen, 1997 cited in Nandakumar , Ghobadian and O’Regan, 2010 ) .Besides, there are a wide range of structures given to an organization to choose whether which structure is appropriate to them and can align to the environmental factors that they face, they can choose the most few effective structure mixed that fix to their different environmental problem faced since there are no one universal structure that applied by all organization (Singh, 2009). However, when environment is change again no matter due to technological or political factor, organization need to aware that whether their structure now is consists with the changing of the environment.If their structure is not the best in current environment, then they need to revise their structure again to get the most productive outcome. Otherwise, the change of environment may either lead to some benefit or harms to the organization. Thevenet (1988) cited in Soparnot (2011) believe that the change of organizational structure is always beneficial. However, Soparnot (2005) cited in Soparnot (2011) argued that the changes of structure can destabilize organization and it is risky and costly.In an organization, if they are manage according to hierarchy structure, there are different level of manager and different opinion towards the change of the organization exist, different people have their own idea, each will suggest different idea and this will wasting time and resources to test for it. Walston and Chou (2011) said that the greater the differences between hierarchical perceptions, the inefficiency of the organization change and effort.Therefore, there are no any best constant structure of organization, because the environment is keep on changing, what an organization can do is only keep on changing that align with the environmental changes. Mechanistic System Mechanistic management system is consist of hierarchic structure of control, authority , specialization , differentiation and centralized decision making (Burns and Stalker, 1961). Hierarchical structure is commonly carry out in an organizational chart form.Organizational chart show us the management structure or hierarchical structure, how the organization manage according to different department, or specialization. During the mid 20th century there was a trend for organizations to create huge corporate structures, often composed of many varied and different businesses, for instance, the Hanson Trust, Unilever, Trafalgar House, and GNK in the UK and General Electric in the USA (Mabey, Salaman and Storey, 2001 cited in McMillan, (n. . ). Hales and Rabey (2011) held that a good management is consists of specific job for specific person, clear role definitions for each job, clear job specification and so on. It is talking about mechanic system of organizational structure. In the hierarchical structure, decisions are made by top level and task are delegated to different department manager of middle level, and these managers will make sure the workers under them is kept in line with them (Hales and Rabey, 2011).Since that are not a teamwork which they do not share common interest but they need to do more than the person who make decision and thus make them do not have any motivation to do their best or produce the best idea. This may occur because everyone have different perceptions. As mentioned earlier, the greater difference between hierarchical perception, the inefficiency of the effort (Walston and Chou, 2011). When everyone have their own perception, but decision is not made by them, conflict will occur.Conflict usually occur in relation to decision and sometimes it may lead to threat (Beckhard and Dyer, 1983 cited in Frank et al. , 2011). Decision making of hierarchical structure is also a waste of time since there are different level in the organization, decision making need to go through from low to middle and the top, it take time and wast e of resources, when there are something happen between the level of authority, it need even more time than usual. Wang and Ahmed (2003) cited in Kulmala and Uusi-Rauva (2005) highlight organizational structure influence its decision making and the internal processes.Employees in an organization should not wait for manager comments or negotiations for organization sake (Kuitunen et al, 1999 cited in Kulmala and Uusi-Rauva, 2005). In order to reduce the conflict of decision making of the hierarchical structure and waste of time, the changes of this hierarchical structure is needed. Burns and Stalker (1961) highlight that in organic system, position in an organization is differentiated by the expertise, whoever have greater expertise can lead the team and he or she will have the best authority.For mechanistic system, people who control the organization is according to standardization of skill, it is control by the person who have undergone extensive training and socialization (Friedso n, 1970 cited in Abernethy and Stoelwinder, n. d. ). Burns and Stalker (1961) claims that the position of the leader is settled by consensus via voting in an organic system. When the position of the leader is agreed by voting, then it may consider fair because there are no any conflict of interest exist. However, for mechanistic system, position of the manager is the decision of the top level management.When the position of the leader is decided by the top level management people, there are inequality exists. Guy (1999) highlight that the increase of earnings inequality from the late 1970s until now is due to changes of organizational structure. When the decision is not reach the consensus of all but just solely based on the top level management, it seems like it is unfair. The top level may choose the one that is beneficial to him or her and promotes him or her to get higher position and this is not agreed by all. Organic SystemHence, Covin and Slevin(1990) cited in Altinay and Alt inay (2004) claims that organization often decentralize decision making authority, minimize the hierarchical structure and adopt free flow communication channels to make sure organization achieved higher performance. When talk about decentralization, actually it is talking about organic management system, Burns and Stalker(1961) said that organic management system is appropriate to the changing of environment, he describe organic management system as a network structure of control ,authority and communication, there are not alking about responsibilities of a person, but the responsible of the people in the network. Therefore, It is just like a team that achieve the same goals. However, the claimant that organization need to decentralize decision making was argued by Shields and Shields (1998) cited in Subramaniam and Mia (2001), said that not all managers accept the decentralization of organization structure because it will make outcomes of job unfavorable related such as low job sa tisfaction. For example, as what we have study now, we are choosing courses of education according to our interest.It is also the same as career, we will choose our job according to what we studied or what we like, if decentralize means that they are all working together without departmentalize, then we might need to do the job that we do not like and make us do not have the feeling of satisfaction when rushing for the work. Conclusion In conclusion, organizational structure is not fixed, it is not constant as all organization is using the same structure and monitor their work of organization.There will be no consensus on one particular structure of organization and thus make the organizational structure do not fixed. Actually, each structure will show their good and bad, when the structure is align with the change of environment or the structure is reach the consensus of all and thus achieve higher performance of organization, then this structure is consider as good. However, when the environment is change again , and people no longer agree on this structure, then this structure is no longer applicable , if this structure is insist in using, then it may bring harm to organization.Hence, there is no the best or the smartest structure for an organization (Mintzberg, 1979 cited in Wang and Ahmed, 2002). When the environment of the organization change, the structure of the organization also change according to the environment, this dynamism of the organization structure makes the organization do not have a fixed or constant strucuture (Martinsons & Martinsons, 1994 cited in Wang and Ahmed, 2002). No matter organic or mechanistic management system, as long as it is an effective structure that align with the environment, it will lead he organization to achieve superior performance. Organization structure do not fixed because mechanistic management system is applicable in some situation or organic management system is suitable in some situation or mixed of these two management system is necessary for some situation. In details, an organization can mixed the centralization and decentralization by apply both in their structure. Decentralization can motivate employees to enable them showing out their creative and innovative but not stop by top level manager.At the same time, some others part can be centralize to make sure employees follow the rules and regulation because some decision if freely make by employees on their own may create troublesome such as financing and investing decision. Hence, structure cannot fixed on whether it is centralization or decentralization (Buchanan and huczynski, 2010). Therefore, we cannot say that which structure is the best structure for organization because each of these structures play their own roles in different environmental changes. (2092 words) Bibliography: 1. Abernethy M. A. nd Stoelwinder, J. U. (n. d) â€Å"The relationship between organization structure and management control in hospitals: An elabora tion and test of Mintzberg’s professional bureaucracy model†, pp. 18-33. 2. Altinay, L. and Altinay, M. (2004) â€Å"The influence of organisational structure on entrepreneurial orientation and expansion performance†, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 16(6), pp. 334-344. 3. Burnes, B. (1996) â€Å"No such thing as †¦ a â€Å"one best way† to manage organizational change’, Management Decision, 34/10, pp. 11-18. 4. Burns, T. and Stalker, G.M. (1961) â€Å"The management of innovation†, London: Tavistock, pp. 103-108. 5. Child, J. (n. d) â€Å"Organizational strucuture, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice†, Sage Social Science Collections. 6. Frank, M. , Kessler, A. , Nose, L. , Suchy, D. (2011) â€Å"Conflicts in family firms: state of the art and perspectives for future research†, Journal of Family Business Management, 1(2), pp. 130-153. 7. Hales, S. and Rabey, G. (2011) â⠂¬Å"The frontline manager: fronting up to organisational change†, Industrial and Commercial Trainning, 43(6), pp. 368-376. 8. Knights, D. nd Willmott, H. (2007) Introducing organizational behaviour and management, South-Western Cengage Learning. 9. Kulmala, H. I. and Uusi-Rauva, E. (2005) â€Å"Network as a business environment: experiences from software industry†, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 10/3, pp. 169-178. 10. McMillan, E. (n. d. ) â€Å"Considering organization structure and design from a complexity paradigm perspective†, Open University. 11. Mukherji, A. (2002) â€Å"The evolution of information systems: their impact on organizations and structures†, Management Decision, 40/5, pp. 497-507. 12.Nandakumar, M. K. , Ghobadian, A. , O’Regan, N. (2010) â€Å"Business-level strategy and Performance: The moderating effects of environment and structure†, Management Decision, 48(6), pp. 907-939. 13. Singh, S. K. (2009) â⠂¬Å"Structuring organizations across industries in India†, Management Research News, 32(10), pp. 953-969. 14. Singh, S. K. (2009) â€Å"Structuring organizations across industries in India†, Management Research News, 32(10), pp. 953-969. 15. Smith, I. (2011) â€Å"Organisational quality and organisational change: Interconnecting paths to effectiveness†, Library Management, 32(1/2), pp. 11-128. 16. Strachan, P. A. (1996) â€Å"Managing transformational change: the learning organization and teamworking†, Team Performance Management: An International Journal, (2)2, pp. 32-40. 17. Subramaniam, N. and Mia, L. (2001) â€Å"The relation between decentralised structure, budgetary participation and organisational commitment: The moderating role of managers' value orientation towards innovation†, Accounting, Auditing ; Accountability Journal, 14(1), pp. 12-29. 18. Walston, S. and Chou, A. 2011) â€Å"CEO perceptions of organizational consensus and its impact on hospital restructuring outcomes†, Journal of Health Organization and Management, 25(2), pp. 176-194. 19. Wang, L. and Ahmed, P. K. (2002) â€Å"The Informal Structure: Hidden energies within the organization†, University of Wolverhampton, UK. 20. Guy, F. (1999) â€Å"Information technology, organization structure, and earnings inequality†, Birkbeck College, Malet St. 21. Buchanan D. A. and Huczynski, A. A. (2010) Organizational behaviour, Seventh edition, Pearson Education Limited. Organisation Behaviour Option 3: Evaluate the statement that ‘organisational structure reflects and reinforces an unrealistic view of human rationality (Knights & Willmott, 2007)’. Introduction: Different authors have different definition toward organizational structure. Mintzberg (1979) defines the organization structure is defined as ‘The sum total of the ways in which it divides its labour into distinct task and then achieves coordination between them’ (Mintzberg, 1979, p. cited in Knights and Willmott, 2007, p. 197). In simple words, organizational structure is talking about the structure of an organization, how a company categorise their workers or management to achieve their goals. Basically, organizational structure is talking about the management system that include organic and mechanistic management system. In an organization, there will be a lot of matters happened because of the organization structure.Hence, people keep discover different management structure to assist in organizational structure like Taylor and Ford that influence the organization structure by using scientific method to classified the work of an organization and control the achievement of the organization (Fayol, 1949; Taylor, 1911cited in Singh, 2009). Lewin (1958) cited in Burnes (1996) provided that the planned model that designed for the organizational change is the best model.However, is there any the best structure for organization? When we treat one structure as the best structure for organization, we must consider the factors that will make the structure no longer applicable. Environment is the important influences that we cannot ignore about. The unstable of environment led the organization structure keep on changing. One of the changes in the structure of organizational was from mechanistic management system to organic management system.Mechanistic and organic of organizational structure are two formally form of management system that applied in organizational structure (Burns and Stalker, 1961). As what Kulmala and Uusi-Rauva (2005) claims that competition was changing from firm level to network level, which means from centralisation to decentralisation. Changing Of Environment More than 2,000 years ago the Greek philosopher Heraclitus(536-470 BC) claims that everything was continuous keep on changing and there was nothing permanent (Smith, 2011).Organizational structure is also the same, there are no the best structure for an organization since the environment is keep on changing. ‘‘There is no one best way to organize’’ and ‘‘any ways of organizing are not equally effective’’ (Galbraith, 1973 cited in Singh, 2009, p. 954). Environment and organization are interdependent, they depend on each other between an organization (pugh et al. 1963 cited in Child, n. d. ). Burns and Stalker (1961) cited in Singh (2009) proposed that appropriate organizational structure depends on environmental factors.Co ulson-Thomas (1991) cited in Strachan (1996) argues that business organizational is increasingly face unprecedented change in social, economic, political and business environment. Burn and Stalker (1961) cited in McMillan (n. d. ) claims that an organization must match and follow with the rate of change in its environment if the organization want to reach a maximum performance or achieve their goals. The performance of an organization depend on how they construct their structure to align with the environment (Mintzberg, 1979 cited in Nandakumar , Ghobadian and O’Regan, 2010).An example that shows the change of technology that led to the changes of organizational structure, the manner of hardware and software development resulted in architectures evolving over time, at the same time organization structures developed special forms to suit and fit their specific environmental and strategic requirements (Mukherji, 2002). An effective structure or strategy can promotes competitive advantage to strengthen an organization performance (Oosthuizen, 1997 cited in Nandakumar , Ghobadian and O’Regan, 2010 ) .Besides, there are a wide range of structures given to an organization to choose whether which structure is appropriate to them and can align to the environmental factors that they face, they can choose the most few effective structure mixed that fix to their different environmental problem faced since there are no one universal structure that applied by all organization (Singh, 2009). However, when environment is change again no matter due to technological or political factor, organization need to aware that whether their structure now is consists with the changing of the environment.If their structure is not the best in current environment, then they need to revise their structure again to get the most productive outcome. Otherwise, the change of environment may either lead to some benefit or harms to the organization. Thevenet (1988) cited in Soparnot (2011) believe that the change of organizational structure is always beneficial. However, Soparnot (2005) cited in Soparnot (2011) argued that the changes of structure can destabilize organization and it is risky and costly.In an organization, if they are manage according to hierarchy structure, there are different level of manager and different opinion towards the change of the organization exist, different people have their own idea, each will suggest different idea and this will wasting time and resources to test for it. Walston and Chou (2011) said that the greater the differences between hierarchical perceptions, the inefficiency of the organization change and effort.Therefore, there are no any best constant structure of organization, because the environment is keep on changing, what an organization can do is only keep on changing that align with the environmental changes. Mechanistic System Mechanistic management system is consist of hierarchic structure of control, authority , specialization , differentiation and centralized decision making (Burns and Stalker, 1961). Hierarchical structure is commonly carry out in an organizational chart form.Organizational chart show us the management structure or hierarchical structure, how the organization manage according to different department, or specialization. During the mid 20th century there was a trend for organizations to create huge corporate structures, often composed of many varied and different businesses, for instance, the Hanson Trust, Unilever, Trafalgar House, and GNK in the UK and General Electric in the USA (Mabey, Salaman and Storey, 2001 cited in McMillan, (n. . ). Hales and Rabey (2011) held that a good management is consists of specific job for specific person, clear role definitions for each job, clear job specification and so on. It is talking about mechanic system of organizational structure. In the hierarchical structure, decisions are made by top level and task are delegated to different department manager of middle level, and these managers will make sure the workers under them is kept in line with them (Hales and Rabey, 2011).Since that are not a teamwork which they do not share common interest but they need to do more than the person who make decision and thus make them do not have any motivation to do their best or produce the best idea. This may occur because everyone have different perceptions. As mentioned earlier, the greater difference between hierarchical perception, the inefficiency of the effort (Walston and Chou, 2011). When everyone have their own perception, but decision is not made by them, conflict will occur.Conflict usually occur in relation to decision and sometimes it may lead to threat (Beckhard and Dyer, 1983 cited in Frank et al. , 2011). Decision making of hierarchical structure is also a waste of time since there are different level in the organization, decision making need to go through from low to middle and the top, it take time and wast e of resources, when there are something happen between the level of authority, it need even more time than usual. Wang and Ahmed (2003) cited in Kulmala and Uusi-Rauva (2005) highlight organizational structure influence its decision making and the internal processes.Employees in an organization should not wait for manager comments or negotiations for organization sake (Kuitunen et al, 1999 cited in Kulmala and Uusi-Rauva, 2005). In order to reduce the conflict of decision making of the hierarchical structure and waste of time, the changes of this hierarchical structure is needed. Burns and Stalker (1961) highlight that in organic system, position in an organization is differentiated by the expertise, whoever have greater expertise can lead the team and he or she will have the best authority.For mechanistic system, people who control the organization is according to standardization of skill, it is control by the person who have undergone extensive training and socialization (Friedso n, 1970 cited in Abernethy and Stoelwinder, n. d. ). Burns and Stalker (1961) claims that the position of the leader is settled by consensus via voting in an organic system. When the position of the leader is agreed by voting, then it may consider fair because there are no any conflict of interest exist. However, for mechanistic system, position of the manager is the decision of the top level management.When the position of the leader is decided by the top level management people, there are inequality exists. Guy (1999) highlight that the increase of earnings inequality from the late 1970s until now is due to changes of organizational structure. When the decision is not reach the consensus of all but just solely based on the top level management, it seems like it is unfair. The top level may choose the one that is beneficial to him or her and promotes him or her to get higher position and this is not agreed by all. Organic SystemHence, Covin and Slevin(1990) cited in Altinay and Alt inay (2004) claims that organization often decentralize decision making authority, minimize the hierarchical structure and adopt free flow communication channels to make sure organization achieved higher performance. When talk about decentralization, actually it is talking about organic management system, Burns and Stalker(1961) said that organic management system is appropriate to the changing of environment, he describe organic management system as a network structure of control ,authority and communication, there are not alking about responsibilities of a person, but the responsible of the people in the network. Therefore, It is just like a team that achieve the same goals. However, the claimant that organization need to decentralize decision making was argued by Shields and Shields (1998) cited in Subramaniam and Mia (2001), said that not all managers accept the decentralization of organization structure because it will make outcomes of job unfavorable related such as low job sa tisfaction. For example, as what we have study now, we are choosing courses of education according to our interest.It is also the same as career, we will choose our job according to what we studied or what we like, if decentralize means that they are all working together without departmentalize, then we might need to do the job that we do not like and make us do not have the feeling of satisfaction when rushing for the work. Conclusion In conclusion, organizational structure is not fixed, it is not constant as all organization is using the same structure and monitor their work of organization.There will be no consensus on one particular structure of organization and thus make the organizational structure do not fixed. Actually, each structure will show their good and bad, when the structure is align with the change of environment or the structure is reach the consensus of all and thus achieve higher performance of organization, then this structure is consider as good. However, when the environment is change again , and people no longer agree on this structure, then this structure is no longer applicable , if this structure is insist in using, then it may bring harm to organization.Hence, there is no the best or the smartest structure for an organization (Mintzberg, 1979 cited in Wang and Ahmed, 2002). When the environment of the organization change, the structure of the organization also change according to the environment, this dynamism of the organization structure makes the organization do not have a fixed or constant strucuture (Martinsons & Martinsons, 1994 cited in Wang and Ahmed, 2002). No matter organic or mechanistic management system, as long as it is an effective structure that align with the environment, it will lead he organization to achieve superior performance. Organization structure do not fixed because mechanistic management system is applicable in some situation or organic management system is suitable in some situation or mixed of these two management system is necessary for some situation. In details, an organization can mixed the centralization and decentralization by apply both in their structure. Decentralization can motivate employees to enable them showing out their creative and innovative but not stop by top level manager.At the same time, some others part can be centralize to make sure employees follow the rules and regulation because some decision if freely make by employees on their own may create troublesome such as financing and investing decision. Hence, structure cannot fixed on whether it is centralization or decentralization (Buchanan and huczynski, 2010). Therefore, we cannot say that which structure is the best structure for organization because each of these structures play their own roles in different environmental changes. (2092 words) Bibliography: 1. Abernethy M. A. nd Stoelwinder, J. U. (n. d) â€Å"The relationship between organization structure and management control in hospitals: An elabora tion and test of Mintzberg’s professional bureaucracy model†, pp. 18-33. 2. Altinay, L. and Altinay, M. (2004) â€Å"The influence of organisational structure on entrepreneurial orientation and expansion performance†, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 16(6), pp. 334-344. 3. Burnes, B. (1996) â€Å"No such thing as †¦ a â€Å"one best way† to manage organizational change’, Management Decision, 34/10, pp. 11-18. 4. Burns, T. and Stalker, G.M. (1961) â€Å"The management of innovation†, London: Tavistock, pp. 103-108. 5. Child, J. (n. d) â€Å"Organizational strucuture, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice†, Sage Social Science Collections. 6. Frank, M. , Kessler, A. , Nose, L. , Suchy, D. (2011) â€Å"Conflicts in family firms: state of the art and perspectives for future research†, Journal of Family Business Management, 1(2), pp. 130-153. 7. Hales, S. and Rabey, G. (2011) â⠂¬Å"The frontline manager: fronting up to organisational change†, Industrial and Commercial Trainning, 43(6), pp. 368-376. 8. Knights, D. nd Willmott, H. (2007) Introducing organizational behaviour and management, South-Western Cengage Learning. 9. Kulmala, H. I. and Uusi-Rauva, E. (2005) â€Å"Network as a business environment: experiences from software industry†, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 10/3, pp. 169-178. 10. McMillan, E. (n. d. ) â€Å"Considering organization structure and design from a complexity paradigm perspective†, Open University. 11. Mukherji, A. (2002) â€Å"The evolution of information systems: their impact on organizations and structures†, Management Decision, 40/5, pp. 497-507. 12.Nandakumar, M. K. , Ghobadian, A. , O’Regan, N. (2010) â€Å"Business-level strategy and Performance: The moderating effects of environment and structure†, Management Decision, 48(6), pp. 907-939. 13. Singh, S. K. (2009) â⠂¬Å"Structuring organizations across industries in India†, Management Research News, 32(10), pp. 953-969. 14. Singh, S. K. (2009) â€Å"Structuring organizations across industries in India†, Management Research News, 32(10), pp. 953-969. 15. Smith, I. (2011) â€Å"Organisational quality and organisational change: Interconnecting paths to effectiveness†, Library Management, 32(1/2), pp. 11-128. 16. Strachan, P. A. (1996) â€Å"Managing transformational change: the learning organization and teamworking†, Team Performance Management: An International Journal, (2)2, pp. 32-40. 17. Subramaniam, N. and Mia, L. (2001) â€Å"The relation between decentralised structure, budgetary participation and organisational commitment: The moderating role of managers' value orientation towards innovation†, Accounting, Auditing ; Accountability Journal, 14(1), pp. 12-29. 18. Walston, S. and Chou, A. 2011) â€Å"CEO perceptions of organizational consensus and its impact on hospital restructuring outcomes†, Journal of Health Organization and Management, 25(2), pp. 176-194. 19. Wang, L. and Ahmed, P. K. (2002) â€Å"The Informal Structure: Hidden energies within the organization†, University of Wolverhampton, UK. 20. Guy, F. (1999) â€Å"Information technology, organization structure, and earnings inequality†, Birkbeck College, Malet St. 21. Buchanan D. A. and Huczynski, A. A. (2010) Organizational behaviour, Seventh edition, Pearson Education Limited.