Discuss whether ABC should adopt a divisional structure for its e-waste operations.

• A. A divisional structure could give the e-waste business clear focus and accountability, but it might duplicate functions and increase costs.
• B. A divisional structure would always reduce costs.
• C. A divisional structure guarantees no functional duplication.
• D. A divisional structure eliminates the need for coordination.

Answer: (A)

The main idea here is weighing how a divisional setup affects control, focus, and costs in e-waste operations. Organizing by divisions can give each area clear responsibility for performance, enabling tighter decision-making, faster responses to regional regulations and customer needs, and a sharper focus on outcomes within that segment. But it also tends to duplicate support services—HR, finance, IT, procurement—and potentially other functions across divisions, which can push up fixed costs and reduce scale efficiencies. It also requires ongoing coordination to keep standards, policies, and corporate goals aligned across the whole e-waste program.

So the best choice recognizes both sides: a divisional structure could improve focus and accountability while potentially increasing costs through duplication. The other views are overly absolute, suggesting cost reductions are guaranteed, no duplication occurs, or coordination is unnecessary, which isn’t realistic in a divisional setup.