Influence of the organizational structure of Polish passenger railways on the process of communication with customers
 
More details
Hide details
1
University of Zielona Góra, Faculty of Economics and Management, Poland
 
2
Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, Faculty of Management, Poland
 
 
Online publication date: 2021-12-31
 
 
Management 2021;25(2):187-205
 
KEYWORDS
JEL CLASSIFICATION CODES
L92
M31
L22
 
ABSTRACT
The aim of the article is to show the influence of the complicated organizational structure of Polish railways on the process of communication with customers. A thesis was formulated that one of the significant problems significantly contributing to the low popularity of rail services compared to other countries and the poor image of Polish railways are deficiencies in communication with customers resulting from an extremely complicated and incomprehensible organizational structure for customers. The theoretical part presents the contemporary understanding of organizational structure. On the other hand, the empirical part shows, based on the analysis of secondary sources, communication problems resulting from imperfect relations between individual entities manifested in the duplication of activities and undertaking projects that are assessed by clients as chaotic and inconsistent. The results of the research can be used by Polish railways to reorganize their organizational structures towards improving communication with customers.
 
REFERENCES (39)
1.
Argyres, N., Zenger, T. R. (2013). Dynamics of organizational structure. In: A. Grandori (ed.). Handbook of economic organization: integrating economic and organization theory, pp. 210–222, Edward Elgar Publishing.
 
2.
Armstrong, O.E., & Rasheed, A., (2013). Structural Dimensions and Functions of Structure Influencing Agribusiness Enterprises: Mechanistic Vs Organic Systems Approach, Journal of Business and Management, 6 (6), pp.1-63.
 
3.
Badanie satysfakcji pasażerów kolei (2019). Urząd Transportu Kolejowego, Warszawa.
 
4.
Batisse F., (2004). Quelle nouvelle perspective l`UE elargie offer-t-elle au rail? Le Rail, No. 107.
 
5.
Brilman J., (2002). Nowoczesne koncepcje i metody zarządzania, Warszawa : PWN.
 
6.
Bryant, L. (2014). Digital transformation requires better organizational structures. Retrieved 25 Semptember, 20219 from: https://postshift.com/digital-...;.
 
7.
Cantos, P., Pastor, J. M. & Serrano, L., (2012), Evaluating European railway deregulation using different approaches. Transport Policy, 8, pp. 67-72.
 
8.
Collins K., (2012). Government is on wrong track with rail fares and franchises. The Times (UK), Friday August 17, 2012.
 
9.
Conner, D.S., & Douglas, S.C., (2005). Organizationally-induced work stress, The role of employee bureaucratic orientation, Personnel Review, 34 (2), pp. 201-224.
 
10.
De Smet D., Gagnon, C. (2018). Organizing for the age of urgency. McKinsey Dziennik Ustaw nr 84 z dnia 12.10.2000, poz. 948.
 
11.
Gamon W., Gómez M.N, (2019). Main Problems of Railway Cross-Border Transport Between Poland, Germany and Czech Republic. Sustainability, No. 11(8), pp. 1-10.
 
12.
Gawrychowski, M. (2021). PKP stracą część z 6 mld dotacji z UE. Dziennik Gazeta Prawna z dnia 5 stycznia 2011.
 
13.
Government is on wrong track with rail fares and franchises (2012). The Times (United Kingdom), August 17.
 
14.
Gronroos, C. (2000). Service Management and Marketing: A Customer Relationship Management Approach, Wiley, Chichester.
 
15.
Hopej, M. (2017). Kształtowanie struktur organizacyjnych zgodnie z zasadą prostoty. Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej. Organizacja i Zarządzanie, No. 101, pp. 101-109.
 
16.
 
17.
 
18.
https://www.cd.cz/, dostęp 09.11.2021.
 
19.
Kraśniak J., (2012). Zmiany struktur organizacyjnych przedsiębiorstw w procesie internacjonalizacji, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Poznaniu, Poznań.
 
20.
Lazarević, S., Lukić, J. (2015). Building Smart Organization Through Learning and Development of Employees. In: R. Grozdanić, & D. Jovančević (eds.) Creative Education for Employment Growth, The Fourth International Conference - Employment, Education and Entrepreneurship, pp. 256-268.
 
21.
Lazarević, S., Lukić, J. (2018). Team Learning Processes and Activities in Organization: A Case Study. Economic Themes, 56(3), pp. 301-319.
 
22.
Liao, C., Chuang, S.H.; To, P.L., (2011). How Knowledge Management Mediates The Relationship Between Environment and Organizational Structure, Journal of Business Research, 64, pp.728–736.
 
23.
Lee, M. Y., Edmondson, A. C. (2017). Self-managing organizations: Exploring the limits of less hierarchical organizing. Research in Organizational Behavior. Elsevier Ltd, 37, pp. 35–58, DOI: 10.1016/j. riob.2017.10.002.
 
24.
Lichtarski J.M. (2011). Struktury zadaniowe. Składniki, własności i uwarunkowania, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu, Monografie i Opracowania, Wrocław.
 
25.
Lierop van D., Badami M., Geneidy A.El. (2018), What influences satisfaction and loyalty in public transit? A critical review of the literature. Transport Reviews Vol. 38, Iss. 1, pp.. 52-72.
 
26.
Malara, Z., (2006). Przedsiębiorstwo w globalnej gospodarce. Wyzwania współczesności. PWN, Warszawa: PWN.
 
27.
McEvily, B., Soda, G., Tortoriello, M. (2014). More formally: Rediscovering the missing link between formal organization and informal social structure. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), pp. 299–345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1941....
 
28.
Neill O., Beauvais J.W., Scholl, R.W., (2001). The Use of Organizational Culture and Structure to Guide Strategic Behavior: An Information Processing Perspective, The Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 2 (2), pp.131-149.
 
29.
Nikitinas V., Dailydka, S., (2016), The Models of Management of Railway Companies in the European Union: Holding, the German Experience, Procedia Engineering 134, pp. 80 – 88.
 
30.
Strategor (2001). Zarządzanie firmą. Strategie, struktury, decyzje, tożsamość. Warszawa: PWE.
 
31.
Tokarz, D. (2021). Unijne miliardy zagrożone. Puls biznesu z 22.02.2021.
 
32.
Tomes Z., Jandova M., (2018). Open access passenger rail services in Central Europe. Research in Transportation Economics, Vol. 72, pp. 74-81.
 
33.
Quangyen T., Yezhuang T., (2013). Organizational Structure: Influencing Factors and Impact on a Firm, American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, Vol 3, No. 2, pp. 229-236.
 
34.
Wei L., Chen H., Jiang J., Wang H., Shao H., (2015). Study on bi-level programming model of high-speed rail fares based on generalized cost function,” Journal of Railway Science and Engineering, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 250–256.
 
35.
Werr, A., Blomberg, J., Lӧwstedt, J., (2009). Gainining external knowledge – boundaries in managers knowledge relations, Journal of Knowledge management, Vol 13, No. 6, pp. 448-463, p.451.
 
36.
Wierzbicki P. (2020),, Większy może więcej! Efekt synergii skojarzonych usług. Utrzymanie ruchu Nr 4, pp. 18-19.
 
37.
Wu N., Qiu Y., Chen L. (2018), Research on Marketing Strategy of Intercity Railway in Wuhan Metropolitan Area. Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research Vol. 68, s. 657.
 
38.
Zakrzewska-Bielawska A., (2007). Struktura organizacyjna przedsiębiorstwa w ujęciu klasycznym, współczesnym i przyszłym, In: Czekaj, J. (ed.) Tradycja i współczesność w metodologicznym nurcie zarządzania (pp. 27-37), Wydawnictwo Akademii Ekonomicznej w Krakowie, Kraków.
 
39.
Zakrzewska-Bielawska, A., (2015). Struktury organizacyjne sprzyjające odnowie organizacyjnej przedsiębiorstwa: ambidextrous approach. MANAGEMENT FORUM, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 105-111.
 
eISSN:2299-193X
ISSN:1429-9321 (1997-2019)
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top