Organizational structure of the NFL (Term Paper Sample)

Organizational structure of the NFL
Name:
Course:
Tutor:
Date:
Introduction
Awareness of a company’s organizational structure is very important as it explicitly outlines the hierarchy of authority in a company. It explains the delegation of powers and how the workload is divided among the various staff members in the organization. Understanding the existing structure can reveal important functional relations to coordinate efforts for optimum results. It also can show important elements in the hierarchy of power within the organization and aid in developing solutions to increase responsibility and accountability (Jozsa & Maxymuk 2010).
In this discussion, we are going to look at the organizational structure of the National Football League (NFL) in comparison to the organizational structure of two other associations; National Basketball Association (NBA) and National Hockey League (NHL). We will assess how administrative roles such as human resources, operations, finance and marketing influence the organizational structure of the particular organizations. We will then explain how designs such as service, hybrid, geographic, customer-based, product, marketing channels, matrix, functional and departmentalization helps determine which organizational structure works towards a company’s wants.
Comparison of organizational structures
Different organizations have similarities as well as differences in organizational structures. The three organizations; NFL, NBA and NHL have a similar policy that governs ownership. They generally do not allow ownership in more than one franchise by a single person of family for that matter. This is to prevent the perception of conflict of interest by such owners. For instance, the NHL original six period was marked by a failure in NHL.
NFL is made up of three executive officers; the commissioner, secretary and the treasurer. The commissioner exercises a broad authority in disputes among the teams and makes other important decisions. He is the central decision maker in NFL. Unlike NFL, NHL is ruled by a board of governors. Each team appoints a governor -- who in most cases is the owner of the club. The Board of Governor makes important decisions regarding the teams
In a small group where one-on-one interaction is regular, official structures are not necessary but in large organisations formal frameworks are important. Decisions and delegation of tasks are made formally. Thus, decision making determines the organisation structure. In an organization responsibilities of employees are described by their tasks, whom they report to and who reports to the managers. Their relationship is shown explicitly in a chart (Encyclopedia of Management, 2009).
NFL, for example is an organisation that has a very definite organisational structure influenced by different functions. Below are some of the functions that influenced the organisational structure of NFL.
Marketing
NFL officials could not only focus on winning games but also had to become more efficient and profitable in their off-field business operations. Increase in the number of coaches and salaries of the players made NFL to rethink its strategies by the owners of the organisation. This made them invest more for better services and to maximise their profit from the organisation (Jozsa & Maxymuk, 2010)
Human resource
With the rapid growth experienced in the earlier years, the HR department needed to employ more workers and staff. The organisation’s HR also needed to come up with rules and regulations that would help the organisation perform efficiently. For instance, the introduction of the Rooney rule was a step towards inclusivity of the minority groups in NFL. It also deals with the issues of employing other personnel such as the players through a strict code of ethics that is well outlined in its official contract.
Organizational design
For the NFL to meet its goals, it would need an organisation structure that would be based on different factors such as geographic, functional, customer-based, product among others. Due to the organisations diversity, matrix organisational structure best fits to help in its attainment of goals. The above organisational designs have different effects as discussed below.
Matrix organisational structure is usually good for large organisations that have many departments that have almost the same level of hierarchy. This kind of organisational structure facilitates horizontal flow of skills and information. It draws employees from different functional disciplines to another team without interrupting with their respective positions. So the movement in the organisation is usually horizontal (Baligh, 2006).
Aspects that determine an organisational structure:
Different group jobs are grouped in various ways in an organisation. The highest level of grouping – for the executives, plays an important role in shaping the organisation. There are basically some organisational designs that determine your choice of organisational structure.
Functional Departmentalization
Organisations must perform certain tasks in order to do its work. Using tasks as the base for shaping the organization in many cases has an advantage of efficiency. Consolidating jobs that would be performed by persons with same knowledge and skills enhances efficiency and also promotes development for greater expertise in the task. The downside is that, since only people with similar skills are grouped, it may develop a narrow perspective in the department and have problems acknowledging efforts from other departments. In such a case, the goals of the organisation may be sacrificed. In addition, management of tasks across the functional departments may be difficult especially in big organisations which spread to different locations like the NFL(Encyclopedia of Management, 2009)
Geographical departmentalization
When an organization spreads over a wide geographical area, it may be advantageous to consider structuring an organisation’s structure along the geographical boundaries. This makes it easier to manage events performed in an area together. A large organisation is however affected adversely by simple separations where centralisation is necessary. Unique characteristics make it valuable to promote local focus. For instance, when marketing a product in different areas, it m...