An organizational truce of this taxonomy is presented in figure 2. Figure 1. 1 : The organizational structure of Schema as presented in the annual report of 2013. The organizational structure of Schema contains three main divisions: the distribution division (orange), the product division (green) and remaining business units (purple). Each of these divisions has its own purpose and tasks and even within the divisions unit roles can differ. In order to have a better insight in the organizational structure, the taxonomy of Gold and Campbell is used, see figure 12.
Figure 1. 2 will be explained in the next arcograph. Figure 1. 2: The organizational structure of Schema after using the Gold & Campbell taxonomy. The Schema taxonomy consists of four different unit roles. First, the circles will be discussed. The circles are parent units. Parent units are upper level-units that carry out obligatory corporate tasks, and influence and add value to other units (Gold & Campbell, 2002)2. The main circle is the ‘Schema’ circle and stands for the board of Schema. Market Strategy has a parental function because strategy is an upper-level unit which has a lot of influence on he way the organization is designed and presented to the environment. It is unclear in what extent business units can set their own course, but the fact that market strategy has its own block in the original organizational structure arouses the suspicion that the board have at least some influence. ‘Staff services’ serve many units within the organization and is therefore labeled as a shared service unit.
They report directly to the board, as the line shows. The rest of the taxonomy is formed with information from the annual report of Schema N. V. (2013)3. The following information about the Schema structure and activities is presented (PA): “The primary activities for Schema Gerrymandering N. V. And its subsidiaries are performed in the Care and Health of Schema B. V. The companies use all Schema distribution channels for their product sales: the direct distribution channel (e. G.
Silvered Kuris), distribution through the banking channel (Interposes), the broker channel through insurance brokers (e. G. VA©ro) and direct distribution aimed at the large corporate market. Distribution via the direct channel largely takes place within the Care and Health division itself. Distribution for the Interposes brand takes place within the Banking Distribution division, distribution for the VA©ro Schema brand via the Intermediary Distribution division. With this information, the rest of the taxonomy can be explained.
The companies use all the distribution channels for their product channels. Because it is not clear which business unit uses which one, only the brands are named in the previous phrase, my choice was to combine all the distribution channels in to one distribution division in order to keep an easy view in figure 2. The striation division is an overlay unit because it develops specialist skills and influence value chain activities for serving target market segments, defined along different dimensions from business units.
The distribution channels report directly to the Schema board. This brings us to the business units that are left. As can be seen in figure 1. 2, Schema has five business units, namely ‘Damage & Income’, ‘Care & Health’, ‘Pension & Life’, ‘Schema Bank’ and an ‘International Division’ These five units are business units because they all have the purpose to achieve benefits from focusing on a product/market segment and developing vocalists skills to serve the customers in that segment. The last part are the subsidiaries. Streetwalkers’, ‘Fairyland Hallucinates’ and ‘Sentry Schema’ are all a subsidiary. Just as with the distribution channels, the subsidiaries are combined in one business unit to keep the figure orderly. But in fact each of the three is a separate business unit, while they are separate subsidiaries with different purposes (Schema, 2013). They report directly to the Schema board. 2. Design Test Schema decided to split the business in a distribution and a product division. This was the result of a report presented in 2012.
One of the report’s key findings was that the changes needed to operate in a way that is more in keeping with the needs and priorities of customers require long-term planning (Schema, 2013)4. With splitting the business in two different divisions, the product divisions have more time available to focus on the customers’ needs. The product business units are able to specialize themselves on a market segment and develop skills in a more effective and efficient way. The same applies for the distribution channels.
Within these distribution channels, knowledge can be shared in order to perfect the ways of working of all distribution channels. This serves the same goal: Applying efficient and effective working methods to be able to serve the customer and its needs. But why did this separation of divisions fail? It could be that the links between the two main divisions (product and distribution) were not efficient enough. A lack of communication between the units or managers and their perceptions could play a role. This can be detected with a good design test: the difficult link test (Gold & Campbell, 2002).