JEFMS Journal

ABSTRACT:

This research was aimed to analyze organizational performance through organizational design and decision making process. Garuda Indonesia was chosen as the case study object of this research, because the condition of organizational design and decision making process were taken through decentralization method. This research result referred that the organizational design and decision making process could affect positively on organizational performance, which in this recent research, the organizational design was proven to deliver positive effects on organizational performance, but only on organic org. form. Garuda Indonesia as a full service airline needed innovation to keep improving and being customer choice, which the strategic decision making was taken through decentralization method according to the dynamic needs in the middle of competitive environment with full of uncertainties.

KEYWORDS:

Organizational Design, Decision Making Process, Organizational Performance

REFERENCES:

1) Annual Report PT Garuda Indonesia (Persero) Tbk. 2019.( acsess on 11 Juli 2021).

2) Ağar. 2012. The Relationship Between Organizational Structure And Job Involvement In Labour And TechnologyIntensive Industrial Enterprises: A Comparative Analysis Based on a Field Study, International Journal of Business and Commerce, 2 (2), 2-20

3) Amstrong, O and Rasheed, A. 2013. Structural Dimensions and Functions of Structure Influencing Agribusiness Enterprises: Mechanistic Vs Organic Systems Approach. IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR-JBM). ISSN: 2278-487X. Volume 6, Issue 6.

4) Avci, U., Madanoglu, M. and Okumus, F. 2011. Strategic Orientation and Performance of Tourism Firms: Evidence from a Developing Country. Tourism Management, 32, 147-157.

5) Ballantyne, S. (2012). Leadership Decisionmaking Utilizing A Strategic Focus To Enhance Global Achievement. Journal of Management & Marketing Research, l, 1-6.

6) Board Manual Human Capital PT Garuda Indonesia Tbk. 2019. https://www.garuda-indonesia.com/content/dam/ garuda/pdf/ investorrelations/corporategovernance/Board_Manual.pdf. (acsess on 11 Juli 2021).

7) Dragomir. 2012. Causes generating risks in business management. Review of General Management, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp. 160-166.

8) Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202

9) Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & Kuppelwieser, V. G. (2014). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business research. European Business Review, 26(2), 106–121. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-10-2013-0128

10) Idawati, W. 2011. Pendekatan Teori Kontigensi Dalam Prespektif Pengambilan Keputusan Manajemen. Jurnal Akuntansi Bisnis, Vol 4 No. 1 P 54-67.

11) Imam, M. 2015. Analisa Desain dan Struktur Organisasi PT. Garuda Indonesia (Persero) Tbk. https://mohdimam.wordpress.com/2015/05/28/analisa-desain-dan-struktur-organisasi-pt-garuda-indonesia-persero-tbk/ (acsess on 10 Juli 2021).

12) Jewczyn, N. 2010. Assessing Mechanistic and Organic Organizational Structures: Measuring Organizational Uncertainty and Determining an Organization's Proper Structure. Journal of Business Management and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 1 Issue 6.

13) Mehrabi J., Alemzadeh M., Jadidi, M. 2013. Explaining the Relationship between Organizational Structure and Dimensions of Learn ing Organizations (Case study: Education Organization in Boroojerd County and the Related Departments). International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 3 (4), 116-128.

14) Musso F and Francioni, B. 2012. The Influence of Decision-Maker Characteristics On The International Strategic Decision-Making Process: An SME Perspective. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Science 58. Musso, J. (2011). Forward, Planning in Reverse : A Viable Approach to Organizational Leadership. Lanham, MD : Rowman & Littlefield Publisher.

15) Negulescu. 2014. The Quality of Decision Making Process Related to Organizations Effectiveness. Procedia Economics and Finance 15.

16) Oshita, Pavao dan Borges. 2017. Analysis of The Organizational Structure of Enterprises of Technological Basis with Projects Without Incubators. International Journal of Innovation (IJI Journal), Vol 5 Issue 2.

17) Papadakis, VM. 2006. Do CEOs Shape The Process of Making Strategic Decisions? Evidence From Grecee. Management Decision, Vol 44 No. 3 pp 367-394. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

18) Purwati, A dan Zulaikha, S. 2006. Teori Kontinjensi, Sistem Pengendalian Manajemen Dan Outcomes Perusahaan: Implikasinya Dalam Riset Masa Kini Dan Masa Yang Akan Datang. Performance, Vol: 4 No.1 September 2006.

19) Rahmawati, T. 2015. Mengenal Contigency Theory: It All Depend Theory.

20) http://smtp.lipi.go.id/berita431-Mengenal--E2-80-9CIt-All-Depends-Theory-E2-80-9D.html (acsess on 20 Oktober 2021)

21) Rutherford-Silvers J. 2008. The risk management process, tools, and techniques in Risk Management for Meetings and Events. A volume in Events Management, pp. 24–52.

22) Sekliuckiene and Hopeniene. 2011. Strategic Position of Lithuanian Travel Services Companies: Response To The Tourism Trends. Social Sciences 71 (1) : 24-33.

23) Stefanescu. 2013. Risk Management In Economic Crisis. Review of General Management, Volume 18, Issue 2, p.90-97.

24) Tarigan S. 2009. Anteseden Keberhasilan Eksekusi Strategi: Sebuah Model dan Proposisi Berdasarkan Studi Kasus di Industri Telekomunikasi.

25) Wang, Wang, Patel & Patel. 2004. A Layered Reference Model of The Brain (LRMB). IEE Transactions on System, Man and Cybernetics. Vol 36 No 2.

26) Wang, Y., & Ruhe, G. R. 2007. The Cognitive Process of Decision Making. International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence, 1(2), 73-85.