The Organizational ContextAll the previous section discussed about the external environment and this topic discussed how the internal environment should be arranged in accordance to international operations. Again we touched upon areas such as importance of culture in HRM and also the organization strategy and HRM etc. Although these areas are very interesting we found it difficult to see the practicality of it. For an example in one point it was said that if a certain culture is high in power distance and have respect for authority then the authority should be centralized and if not it should decentralized. But in practice it is not the culture that influences the structure most but the objectives and the task of the organization (manufacturing companies are more centralized while service oriented companies are decentralized).The most interesting form of structure for us it was the Matrix structure; it was different from all other traditional structure and had certain unique features. A matrix structure creates dual lines of authority and combines functional and product departmentalization (Robbins, Millett, 2004, p.g. 475). The most interesting part about the Matrix structure was that it broke the departmental boundaries and goes against the unity of command where now one employee reports to two mangers. This type of structure is ideal for a large matured organization. When an organization grows its information processing capacity could get overloaded, under a matrix structure this can be changed as it allows the flow of communication and greater flexibility.But what we found out was even large complex organizations are reluctant to move along with a matrix structure. First of all it is a complex structure, and secondly breaking departmental boundaries has its own repercussions such as there is greater room for conflicts, there will be constant issues about span of control and level of authority and there will always be a struggle for power among managers etc.What was clear for us is that it's difficult to look at an organization and say this is the best structure for you. Whatever the structure selected it must be flexible enough to change according to situations and most importantly factors such as national culture, employee behavior must be taken into account prior to deciding on a structure.An organizations structure is the spine that allows it to stand still, the HR activities of the organization and all other activities will depend on the support it gets from the structure. Thus HR has a greater responsibility in designing the structure, the structure should be strong enough not only to stand still against the internal environment but also against the external environment as well. That is why in IHRM we look at aspects such as national cultures, work practices, ethics, norms, behaviors etc. So that HR managers can design a structure that is suitable for the external environment.HRM in the Host Country ContextHost country is the place where the subsidiary is going to be set out. HRM in host country is how you organize your employees, recruit them, train them and compensate them once the subsidiary is operational. But as always the subject went a step further than what I anticipated. Certain type of questions an international HR manager would ask himself. Such as should pay for performance be implemented? Should CEO or senior management be practiced here? How far are we going to distribute authority?