Links |
|
Links |
|||
|
An Overview of Organizational Structures | ||||
|
Social Structure | ||||
|
Organizational Structure Types | ||||
|
The Organizations of Social Structures | ||||
Do not confuse Org Structure w/ Social Structure: e.g.: peers, family | |||||
|
In general, the corporation today is organized into TWELVE Departments, but there may be more or less. They are listed in approximate order of historical appearance | ||||
|
Org Structure Charts | ||||
|
Mintzberg developed a model w/ FIVE Components in the Org Structure | ||||
Hall developed a model w/ FOUR Qualities of the Org Structure
Each of these is a variable that has high, medium, & low levels |
|||||
|
a. Complexity | ||||
|
b. Formalization | ||||
|
c. Centralization | ||||
|
d. Communications [Discussed in CO 7] | ||||
|
Organized Anarchies | ||||
|
Organizational Culture | ||||
|
Democratic Org Structure |
Links |
|
Links |
|||
- Project: Draw an Orgl Structure |
|
||||
- Project: Your Org's Structural Qualities |
|
||||
- Project: Organizational Structure Compared to Social Structure |
|
||||
SOCIAL STRUCTURE IS THE CONFIGURATION OF AN ENTIRE SYSTEM OF ORGANIZATION SUCH AS THE CONFIGURATION OF THE ECON SECTOR OF SOCIETY | |||||
It is important not to confuse social structure w/ orgl structure | |||||
Social structure is the organization of society, including institutions, social positions, the relationships among social positions, the groups or orgs that make up society, & the distribution of scarce resources w/in the society | |||||
Social structure is the patterned & relatively stable arrangement of roles & statuses found w/in societies & social institutions | |||||
The idea of social structure points out the way in which societies, & institutions w/in them, exhibit predictable patterns of organization, activity & social interaction | |||||
This relative stability of org & behavior provides the predictability that people rely on in every day social interaction | |||||
Social structures are inseparable from cultural norms & values that also shape status & social interaction | |||||
See Also: Social Structures | |||||
Social structures are all composed of groups or organizations | |||||
Each of the social structures, PF REG M CEML, is composed of orgs, & orgs w/in each of the social structures has similar structures that are unique to that social structure | |||||
Economic orgs, i.e. businesses have structures made up of the relations btwn different members of the business held together by various economic bonds | |||||
While different economic orgs, i.e. businesses, have some different features of their structures, all businesses have some structural features in common including owners, mgrs, partners; & workers, employees who are together by the bond of creation, labor, employment | |||||
ORG STRUCTURE IS THE FORMAL REPORTING RELATIONSHIPS, GROUPINGS & SYSTEMS OF AN ORG |
|
||||
Org structure is the distributions, along various lines, of people among social positions that influence the role relations among these people (Blau, 1974, p. 12 ) | |||||
|
Org structure is the established pattern of relationships among the various parts of an org & among the various workers in the org |
|
|||
Most orgs in the core nations are organized as bureaucracies, in the shape of a pyramid, w/ authoritarian lines of command & control, w/ minimal input from wkrs | |||||
|
Org structure is not visible in the same sense as the structure of a material object such as a bridge, but its consequences are just as real |
|
|||
|
Social structure is related to orgl structure, but is a more general concept used to describe such diverse phenomena as the family & the govt |
|
|||
Org & social structures specify patterns of obligations & responsibilities that the incumbents of different roles have in relation to one another | |||||
Orgl structural relationships influence the sympathies, affections, & animosities that different members of the group are likely to experience toward one another | |||||
Specific orgs, such as govt agencies, economic orgs, religious orgs, political parties, etc., have different aims, but they share in common identifiable, unique structures for the attainment of their goals | |||||
Some of the traits of all org structures are discussed below, while the traits of economic orgs, i.e. businesses are discussed elsewhere | |||||
See Also: See Also: The Organizations that Compose the Social Structures | |||||
See Also: Economic Org's Structure | |||||
THE DIVISION OF LABOR & THE RESULTING HIERARCHY ARE TWO MAJOR COMPONENTS OF ANY ORG STRUCTURE | |||||
A major factor in any orgl structure is the division of labor which is the specialized positions in an org structure | |||||
When there is a division of labor, people are given different tasks or jobs w/in orgs | |||||
Hierarchy is the authority inherent in an org structure which is specified via a top down chain of command | |||||
Hierarchy is the positions that people fill that have rules & regs that specify how people are to act in their orgl positions | |||||
ORG STRUCTURE INVOLVES THE COMPOSITION OF THE SYSTEM OF CONTROL IN AN ORG | |||||
Ranson, Hinings & Greenwood (1980) see orgl structure as "a complex medium of control which is continually produced & recreated in interaction & yet shapes that interaction: structures are constituted & constitutive" | |||||
Fombrun (1986) sees orgl structure as the juxtaposition of techl solutions, pol exchanges, & soc interpretation in & around orgs resulting in modes of structuring | |||||
For Fombrun there is a dialectical unfolding of relations among orgl actors that has consequences for orgl form | |||||
For Fombrun structure is thus continually emergent & yet retains properties of social relations from the past | |||||
Review: Each of the types of orgs generally has a form of orgl structure that is unique to it including functional, vertical & matrix orgl structures | |||||
In analyzing orgl structure, common factors are looked at across org type | |||||
Orgl structure is one component of the org's internal env which determines how activities are conducted | |||||
Orgl structure determines how authority & communications flow from management to workers |
|
||||
The trend in orgl structure is toward "flatter," decentralized orgs w/ close communications btwn internal & external participants |
|
||||
THE TASKS, MGT STRATEGY, & EXTERNAL FACTORS ALL AFFECT ORG STRUCTURE | |||||
There are THREE factors that affect orgl structure, including the: |
|
||||
a. tasks performed by an org |
|
||||
|
b. manner in which management desires to perform the task ( i.e., mgt. strategy ) |
|
|||
|
c. external factors such as customers, competitors, govt, etc. |
|
|||
|
The components of orgl structure execute basic tasks/functions, such as design, production, marketing, finance, HRM, etc. | ||||
MANY OTHER FACTORS IMPACT ORG STRUCTURE SUCH AS DEPTS, CORE COMPETENCIES, COMPLEXITY, THE SOC STRUCTURAL ENV, & MORE | |||||
|
In general, the corporation today is organized into TWELVE Departments, but there may be more or less. They are listed in approximate order of historical appearance | ||||
|
Mintzberg developed a model w/ FIVE Components in the Org Structure | ||||
|
Mintzberg developed an Org Typology based on his model of Org Structure | ||||
|
Hall developed a model w/ FOUR Qualities of the Org Structure each of these is a variable that has high, medium, & low levels |
|
|||
|
a. Complexity | ||||
|
b. Formalization | ||||
|
c. Centralization | ||||
|
d. Communications |
|
|
Links |
|
Links |
|||
THE TEN SOCIAL STRUCTURES ARE PF REG M CEML | |||||
- The TEN Social Structures PF REG M CEML:
Peers, Family Religion, Economy, Govt Military Charity, Ed, Media, Leisure |
|||||
1. PEERS ARE FRIENDS OR ANY GROUP PRIMARILY COMPOSED OF FRIENDS OR CLOSE ACQUAINTANCES | |||||
Friends are those w/ whom we have primary relationships as opposed to secondary relationships for recreational or nurturance purposes | |||||
See Also: Primary & Secondary Relationships | |||||
Most peer groups today are informal orgs |
|
||||
Examples of peer groups include frats, sororities, bowling club, bridge club; cliques, jocks, brains, grunges, preps, skanks, gangs use specific names, e.g. the CMT, etc. |
|
||||
2. THE FAMILY IS A PRIMARY GROUP THAT COMES TOGETHER FOR PROCREATION & NURTURANCE | |||||
Most family groups today are informal orgs: Smiths, Jones, etc. |
|
||||
There are many examples of types of family orgs: traditional, non-traditional family, single mom, single dad, step, extended... |
|
||||
The family is legally recognized & positions w/in the family are legally recognized |
|
||||
Some families are nearly formalized by their status or power, including
families such as the:
Rothschilds Gates Mellons Fords Carnegies Cosbys Waltons Rockefellers |
|
||||
3. RELIGION IS THAT GROUP OF ORGS FOCUSING ON A PARTICULAR SYSTEM OF FAITH |
|
||||
Most religious groups today are formal orgs |
|
||||
The major religions of the world include: Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Judaism, et al |
|
||||
Supplement: Map of Religions Origins |
|
||||
Supplement: Map of Modern Religions |
|
||||
1,063 mm Christians
The Catholic Church fragmented to form 7 other "Protestant" churches including the - Presbyterians - Baptists - Lutherans - Methodists - Episcopalians - Congregationals - Mormons |
|
||||
Islam aka Muslims 554 mm
Muslims are separated into the sects of the: - Sunnis - Shiites |
|||||
Hinduism 461 mm |
|
||||
Buddhism 250 mm |
|
||||
Confucianism 158 mm |
|
||||
Judaism 17 mm
Jews are separated into the sects of the: - orthodox - 'non orthodox' |
|||||
US religious demographics:
64.8 % all Protestant denominations 24.2 Catholic 1.4 Jewish 9.6 Other (including none) |
|||||
4. THE ECONOMY (AKA WORK, BUSINESS, ETC.) IS THAT SET OF ORGS FOCUSED ON THE SYSTEM OF PRODUCING, DISTRIBUTING & CONSUMING GOODS & SERVICES | |||||
There are FOUR sectors of the modern econ including: the:
- agricultural sector Subsistence agriculture Production farming Processing - industrial sector Extractive Manufacturing Distribution - service sector Financial Production services (advertising, etc.) Personal - technology sector |
|||||
Major Econ Orgs: | |||||
The Global 100 | |||||
The Fortune 500 | |||||
5. GOVERNMENT IS THE ADMINISTRATION OF A NATION OR OTHER SOVEREIGN ENTITY | |||||
See Also: Montesquieu's Forms of Govt | |||||
There are EIGHT types of govt orgs including the hunter gatherer govt, the tribal govt, the authoritarian govt, the totalitarian govt, the monarchical govt, the aristocratic govt, the representative democracy govt, the direct democracy govt | |||||
Note: Types 1 - 6 are often called autocracies | |||||
1. The hunter gatherer form of govt is usually a small govt w/ a hereditary or merit based leadership in its simplest form | |||||
2. The tribal form of govt is usually a small govt w/ hereditary or merit based leadership in more complex forms such as councils, & often includes alliances w/ other tribes | |||||
3. The authoritarian form of govt usually excludes the of majority of people from political participation but w/ little govt intervention | |||||
4. The totalitarian form of govt usually excludes the of majority of people from political participation but w/ extensive govt intervention | |||||
5. The monarchical form of govt usually excluded the of majority of people from political participation but w/ extensive govt intervention; power is passed from generation to generation w/in a single family | |||||
6. The aristocratic form of govt usually excludes the of majority of people from political participation but w/ extensive govt intervention; power is passed from generation to generation w/in a ruling class | |||||
Many political sci from Plato to Tocqueville thought the aristocratic form of govt was the best form & it is only w/ the recent advent of democracy that people in general believe that it is superior | |||||
7. The representative democracy form of govt exercises power by the people as a whole through democratic representatives | |||||
8. The direct democracy form of govt exercises power by people through direct legislation | |||||
Today there are about 200 nations in the world | |||||
6. THE MILITARY IS THAT SET OF ORGS CONCERNED W/ OFFENSE & DEFENSE, INCLUDING THE MICEC | |||||
Most military groups today are formal orgs, though some guerilla, terrorist, or war lord types of military units are more informal, or loose networks | |||||
US: 4 services:
Marines Air Force Army Navy |
|||||
Evolution of Military Orgs | |||||
Many military orgs have the same hierarchical structure as the econ (econ based on military model) except that obedience is total | |||||
Modern mil orgs have evolved new strategies & tactics as technology has changed | |||||
The org structure of the mil has changed to reflect this new strat & tactics & all services are more integrated into one military | |||||
THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL CONGRESSIONAL EXECUTIVE COMPLEX (MICEC) IS THAT SET OF ORGS CONCERNED W/ THE PRODUCTION & CONSUMPTION OF WAR MATERIAL | |||||
CW Mills studied the military industrial complex (MIC) & found it to be a major force in modern societies | |||||
The mil is seen as part of a tripartite org network which includes:
- the military - industry - govt |
|||||
Today the concept of the MIC has been developed by social theorists to include the military industrial congressional executive complex (MICEC) because of the heavy involvement of these other branches of govt | |||||
In the MICEC, elites circulate into positions of power in any of these 3 areas, usually more than one | |||||
The fact that Clinton was the first non-military President since WW1 demonstrates the prevalence of the MICEC | |||||
The fact that most high govt officials have worked in private sector in military related industries, & have been in the military demonstrates the prevalence of the MICEC | |||||
7. CHARITY IS THAT SET OF ORGS W/ THE VALUE BASED GOAL TO GIVE ASSISTANCE TO PEOPLE & ORGS | |||||
Most charitable groups that raise large amounts of $$ today are formalorgs, but many informal groups also exist | |||||
The two other social structures have similar goals as charitable orgs
are
1. the religion soc struc 2. the welfare sector of the govt soc struc |
|||||
Major Charitable Orgs include:
United Way Salvation Army Red Cross |
|||||
8. EDUCATION IS THAT SET OF ORGS CONCERNED W/ SEARCHING FOR KNOWLEDGE & SKILL & TEACHING IT | |||||
Most ed groups today are formal orgs | |||||
Today the major sectors of the ed soc struc today are pre-school, elementary, middle, high, community college, college, graduate school | |||||
The orgl characteristics of ed are that it is:
- decentralized (becoming more centralized) - private & public - linked to the religious social structure |
|||||
9. THE MEDIA IS THAT SET OF ORGS
CONCERNED W/ DISCOVERY OF INFO & MASS DISSEMINATION OF THAT INFO, INCLUDING
ENTERTAINMENT
|
|||||
Most media groups today are formal orgs | |||||
Media sectors include
- entertainment - news - education - advertising |
|||||
The media soc struc is highly networked | |||||
The entertainment sector of the media soc struc is similar to the leisure / recreation soc struc | |||||
The media soc struc is networked to the ed soc struc | |||||
The advertising sector of the media soc struc is networked to econ / wk social structure | |||||
The news sector of the media soc struc is networked to govt social structure & others | |||||
Media Orgs
NBC CBS ABC Time Warner CNN Fox Movie & performing arts Books & print media |
|||||
10. LEISURE / RECREATION IS THAT SET OF PEER & ECON BASED ORGS CONCERNED W/ THE PRODUCTION & CONSUMPTION OF AMUSEMENT, SPORTS, RELAXATION, ETC. | |||||
Most recreation groups (friends, bridge clubs, etc.) today are informal orgs that purchase recreation services from formal orgs | |||||
Leisure is being commercialized by media orgs | |||||
|
Informal Leisure Orgs |
|
|||
In informal leisure orgs, friendship circles form around various activities | |||||
Female oriented leisure /rec activities organize around:
- work - home, birthing, childcare - family extra curricular activities - kitchen & home activities - ladies' night out group - shopping - hobbies - sports participation |
|||||
Male oriented leisure /rec activities organize around:
- work - family extra curricular activities - yard & garage activities - men's night out group - hunting - hobbies - sports watching - sports participation |
|||||
|
Formal Leisure Orgs |
|
|||
Small formal groups may form around any of the act. discussed above, e.g. bowling club may be formalized & even linked to nat level org | |||||
Media & entertainment soc strucs have strong influence on all of society |
Links |
|
Links |
|
Organizations today are rational, bureaucratic, corporations which are organized into departments | |||
|
In general, the corporation today is organized into TWELVE departments, but there may be more or less. They are listed in approximate order of historical appearance | ||
|
1. OPERATIONS | ||
Originally the owner was the manager in charge of operations | |||
Operations had the most influence in early organizations | |||
2. ENGINEERING | |||
3. MARKETING | |||
4. FINANCE | |||
5. ACCOUNTING | |||
6. SALES | |||
Sales has the most influence in orgs today | |||
In the 1970s, Perrow believed the sales department had the most power in organizations, but he believes that today management has the most power | |||
7. ADVERTISING | |||
8. PERSONNEL | |||
9. PURCHASING | |||
10. RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT | |||
11. SHIPPING / DISTRIBUTION | |||
12. MANAGEMENT / ADMINISTRATION | |||
INFORMAL STRUCTURES PERMEATE & LINK THE FORMAL STRUCTURES / DEPTS OF ORGS | |||
The informal structure is made up of the things people actually do on a day to day basis in an organization | |||
The informal structure operates in contrast to what the official rules say organizational members should do | |||
The informal communications system in an org is also known as the grape vine | |||
The grape vine is made up of the communications that occur outside of the formal channels of communication | |||
The grape vine can either support or hinder the operation of the formal or informal org structures | |||
PYRAMIDAL STRUCTURES ARE THE MOST COMMON & TYPICALLY DEPICT A HIERARCHY OF AUTHORITY | |||
Org depts are typically organized into the traditional orgl pyramid | |||
There are THREE basic types of pyramidal structures which organize the departments | |||
In the functional design the departments are organized based on what they do | |||
In the geographic design the departments are organized based on where they are located | |||
In the matrix design the departments are organized on functional & managerial lines |
Links |
|
Links |
|||
- Project: Draw Your Org Using Mintzberg's Org Components |
|
||||
THERE ARE FIVE BASIC COMPONENTS OF ANY ORG STRUCTURE INCLUDING THE:
A. STRATEGIC APEX B. MIDDLE LINE C. OPERATING CORE D. TECHNOSTRUCTURE E. SUPPORT STAFF |
|
||||
|
|
||||
The strategic apex includes mgrs which includes the top mgrs, middle line mgrs, & first line supervisors |
|
||||
The middle line includes the higher level workers who finish, do marketing & distribution of the products or services |
|
||||
The operating core includes the lowest level of workers in org who make products or provide services |
|
||||
The technostructure includes the analysts who help the org adapt to env & internal goals/structure |
|
||||
The support staff includes the R & D, cafeteria, legal branch, payroll, public relations, mailroom workers |
|
||||
The concept of authority coupling denotes that the apex, middle line & op core are connected through a single line of formal authority |
|
||||
The technostructure & support staff affect the op core indirectly | |||||
The technostructure & support staff are not directly in the single line of formal authority | |||||
The staff, in common usage, refers to Mintzberg's technostructure or supporting staff |
|
||||
There are TWO Functions of the Staff:
1. provide advice, guidance, etc. 2. perform special services for the line |
|||||
The operating core may use any of THREE processes including pooling, sequencing, or reciprocating |
|
||||
The pooled process is the process of the operating core that is based on segmentation of the production process into all one process | |||||
The sequential process is the process of the operating core that is based on segmentation of the production process into a production line | |||||
Reciprocal coupling is the process of the operating core that is based on mutual feedback btwn parts of the core or other orgs |
Links |
|
Links |
||||
- Project: Draw your complex org |
|
|||||
For Hall, there are FOUR Features of Org Structure |
|
|||||
A. Complexity |
|
|||||
B. Formalization | ||||||
C. Centralization | ||||||
D. Communications |
|
|||||
Each of these is a variable: has high, medium, low levels |
|
|||||
A. ORG COMPLEXITY IS THE RESULT OF IT CONSISTING OF MANY PARTS IN COMPLICATED RELATIONSHIPS W/ EACH OTHER |
|
|||||
Individual parts of an org can vary in their complexity along several
dimensions including:
|
|
|||||
1. THE DIVISION OF LABOR IS THE WORKPLACE RELATIONSHIP WHERE DIFFERENT WORKERS CARRY OUT DIFFERENT STEPS IN PRODUCING A PRODUCT | ||||||
The DOL in an org is impacted by the level of horizontal differentiation, i.e. the more different tasks or sections in an org the more DOL & horz diff there is | ||||||
Increased horizontal differentiation increases complexity that is, increasing the subdivision of tasks performed by the org, makes the org structure broader |
|
|||||
There are TWO methods to subdivide tasks |
|
|||||
a. One of the methods to subdivide tasks is to have specialists such as professionals or craftspersons perform a wide range of complex tasks |
|
|||||
b. One of the methods to subdivide tasks is to have non specialists such as line wrkrs or laborers perform narrow range of simple tasks |
|
|||||
Hage agrees that increased horizontal differentiation increases complexity that is, the greater the number of occupations & longer periods of training required, the more complex the org |
|
|||||
Hage assumes that training differentiates workers from other workers | ||||||
Price views complexity as the degree of knowledge required to produce the output |
|
|||||
2. THE MORE JOB TITLES THERE ARE IN AN ORG, THE BROADER THE RANGE OF THE ORG'S IMPACT | ||||||
Scope is the range of understanding, or the ability to understand & generally in an org, the more job titles there are, the greater the scope | ||||||
Increased scope in an org results in increased complexity | ||||||
The scope is the amount of activities carried out by the org or amount of customers who require a variety of services which require differentiated services or work |
|
|||||
Generally, increased scope in an org may be defined as more job titles because even having more people under the same job title provides more of the human power of understanding on one area, & more job titles increases the number of people in various areas of understanding | ||||||
3. MULTIPLE DIVISIONS GENERALLY REFERS TO VERTICAL DIFFERENTIATION, THOUGH OFTEN DIVISION CAN REPRESENT INCREASED HORZ DIFFERENTIATION | ||||||
Increased vertical differentiation results in increased complexity | ||||||
Vertical differentiation is the number of supervisors or supervisory levels |
|
|||||
Vertical differentiation affects the height of the orgl hierarchy | ||||||
In a vertically differentiated system, authority & responsibility are distributed to each level or the org | ||||||
The taller the hierarchy, the more difficult the communications | ||||||
4. HIERARCHICAL LEVELS REFERS TO THE VERTICAL DIFFERENTIATION OF MULTIPLE DIVISIONS BY AUTHORITY LEVEL | ||||||
Thus, there may be increased vertical differentiation w or w/o increased hierarchy | ||||||
There may be more divisions, but they may all have the same authority, or there may be more divisions each w/ a different level of authority | ||||||
Increased complexity results in increased internal labor markets | ||||||
In these complex orgs, there are more likely to be internal labor markets | ||||||
|
Orgs w/ Dual Career Ladders are more complex
Supervisors & wkrs Each has separate career ladder |
|||||
5. PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITY & DIFFERENTIATION IS DESIGNED TO DEAL W/ SPECIALIZATION OF THE DIV OF LAB & INCREASES PROBLEMS OF CONTROL, COORDINATION, & COMMUNICATION | ||||||
Complexity in either horizontal or vertical differentiation increases problems w/ control, coordination, communication | ||||||
6. PROFESSIONAL TRAINING MUST INCREASE AS THE AMOUNT OF SPATIAL DISPERSION INCREASES TO MAINTAIN THE COORDINATION OF ACTIVITY | ||||||
Increased spatial dispersion results in increased complexity | ||||||
Spatial dispersion is the physical distance among org components, customers, env, etc. | ||||||
Horizontal or vertical components may be spatially dispersed | ||||||
Orgs can have a variety of dispersion qualities | ||||||
Examples of spatial dispersion include:
- the centralization manufacturing & the dispersion of sales |
||||||
- the dispersion of manufacturing in such industries as autos who generally have separate engine plants, tranny plants, assembly plants, etc. | ||||||
- the dispersion of dispersed internet firms | ||||||
The range of the variance of complexity runs from orgs w/ a low division of labor, flat hierarchy, centralized (undispersed) to massive orgs designed to perform simple & unchanging tasks | ||||||
An example of a low level of the variance of complexity in an org is seen in Alumax which has one large manufacturing plant | ||||||
An example of a low level of the variance of complexity in an org is seen in Standard Oil which has a hi div of lab, a tall hierarchy, & is decentralized (dispersed) | ||||||
7. INCREASED TASK OR ENVL COMPLEXITY RESULTS IN INCREASED ORGL COMPLEXITY |
|
|||||
Task complexity increases as the division of labor increases, as the hierarchy increases, or as the org becomes more decentralized when either the task becomes more complex or their env becomes more complex | ||||||
8. ORGL COMPLEXITY AFFECTS THE ORG'S MEMBERS' IDEOLOGY | ||||||
Lawrence & Lorsch (1967) found that org complexity affects FOUR
aspects of members' ideology, including:
- their orientations toward goals - the differing emphases on interpersonal skills - varied time perspectives - the type & extent of formalization of structure |
||||||
9. ORGL COMPLEXITY AFFECTS THE ORG'S MEMBERS' BEHAVIOR | ||||||
L & L also found that org complexity affects FOUR aspects of members'
behavior,
including:
- becoming more interested in personal / org goals as opposed to or goals - the loss or gain of some departments of interpersonal skills - the variation of time perspectives among depts - the dev of differentiated levels of formalization in various depts; e.g. less diff @ the top of the org |
||||||
10. INCREASED COMPLEXITY CREATES THE NEED FOR INTEGRATION | ||||||
L & L found that the quality of collaboration that exists among departments that are required to achieve unity because of demands of env is affected by the complexity of the org | ||||||
The Contingency Approach holds that effectiveness is not achieved by following one org model | ||||||
According to the contingency approach, there is no one best way to org for achieving highly varied goals w/in highly varied env | ||||||
Under some conditions, one particular form is best, under other conditions, another form is best | ||||||
Increased complexity results in increased administrative intensity | ||||||
Admin Intensity is the pressure in orgs to add personnel to handle increased control & coordination resulting from complex org or env | ||||||
Thus there is an org trade off btwn the level of complexity needed to achieve the econ of scale & the level of admin intensity needed to control a complex org | ||||||
11. INCREASED VERTICAL & HORZ DIFFERENTIATION RESULTS IN INCREASED ORG CHANGE | ||||||
This is because hi levels of info flow through such an org
Different viewpoints are bound to develop which leads to changes |
||||||
12. THERE ARE INTERNAL & EXTERNAL SOURCES OF PRESSURE FOR ORGS TO BECOME MORE COMPLEX | ||||||
Internal & external sources of pressure lead to more differentiated vertical & horizontal structures | ||||||
A higher level of env complexity results in increased org complexity | ||||||
Env complexity is the result of FOUR factors, ie envs are made up of:
- customers - govt; govt regs - technology - competition |
||||||
The speed of change in the env also creates need for org complexity | ||||||
13. INCREASED COMPLEXITY RESULTS IN MORE JOINT PROGRAMS | ||||||
Joint programs are "partnerships" w/ other orgs; networks | ||||||
When facing env complexity an org can develop it's own complex structure to deal w/ it or it may develop joint programs | ||||||
The more complex an org is, the more likely it is to become yet more complex & develop more new/joint programs & interorganizational relations | ||||||
Org networks will continue to develop & society wide, interorganizational relations will continue to develop | ||||||
The web of orgs will become more intricate & thus society will become more org "dense" | ||||||
Individuals & society will be more dependent upon fewer & more complex orgs | ||||||
Thus decision about orgs' future will become decisions about society itself | ||||||
14. INCREASED COMPLEXITY RESULTS IN INCREASED CORPORATE CRIME | ||||||
Vaughan holds that corporate crime is likely to increase as the org becomes more complex because top mgrs find it more difficult to control the more complex org |
Links |
|
Links |
|||
- Project: Raising or lowering formalization & bureaucratization in your org |
|
||||
|
For Hall, there are FOUR Features of Org Structure |
|
|||
A. Complexity |
|
||||
B. Formalization |
|
||||
C. Centralization | |||||
D. Communications |
|
||||
Each of these is a variable w/ high, medium, & low levels |
|
||||
B. FORMALIZATION IN ORGS MEANS TO STRUCTURE IT TO ADHERE TO STRICT RULES OR CUSTOMS; TO BECOME MORE AUTHORITATIVE, OFFICIAL |
|
||||
To form means to fashion, mold, shape, develop, make up, or compose | |||||
Formalization is the process or structure of organizing according to strict forms, rules, or usages | |||||
Formalization makes the organization more authoritative or official & some feel this is stifling or stiffly conventional | |||||
Formalization is the level of organizational control over members |
|
||||
Because orgl formalization creates control over people, it has an ethical & political implications | |||||
FORMALIZATION INCLUDES JOB CODIFICATION | |||||
Formalization can be accomplished by written or unwritten norms & standards, standardized, written rules, regs, procedures, etc. | |||||
With low formalization, orgl actors are capable of exercising their own judgment & self control |
|
||||
With high formalization orgl actors are viewed as incapable of making their own decisions & require a large number of rules to guide behavior |
|
||||
Maximal formalization exists when there are very detailed procedures |
|
||||
High formalization of personnel procedures results in high qualified or professional members & low need for other types of formalization & centralization | |||||
Minimal formalization exists when there are no procedures & actions based on intuition, inspiration, taste, professional opinion |
|
||||
FORMALIZATION MAY BE ACHIEVED THROUGH PROFESSIONALIZATION |
|
||||
Formalization can serve the same function in the organization as professionalization | |||||
Selecting highly quality members, i.e. professionals, assures that members will act according to org's demands hence less of a need for rules, regs: formalization |
|
||||
Professionals have gone through extensive training & have internalized rules, regs, norms, etc. |
|
||||
Formalization & professionalization can be designed to do the same thing organize & regularize the behavior of members | |||||
Formalization sets rules & procedures & the means of ensuring they are followed | |||||
Professionalization is a non organizational means of doing the same thing | |||||
Formalization decreased initiative & professionalization increased initiative | |||||
Increased routine work results in increased increased formalization | |||||
Orgs w/ routine work more likely to have greater formalization | |||||
NEW FORMALIZATION OFTEN INCLUDES NEW TECHNOLOGY & VICE VERSA | |||||
Formalization is correlated w/ new programs | |||||
Formalization may be a tradition for the org that develops when an important early top executive establish a belief system | |||||
Orgs thus develop characteristic that are embedded in both the formalization & informal systems of the org | |||||
Formalization is one defining characteristic of an org | |||||
THERE ARE THREE BROAD REACTIONS TO FORMALIZATION INCLUDING THE
BUREAUCRAT BUREAUPATHIC THE BUREAUTIC |
|||||
THE BUREAUCRAT IS NEARLY OBSESSED W/ RULE MAKING & FOLLOWING | |||||
Formalization is highly correlated w/ the bureaucratic personality | |||||
Formalization may create bureaucratic personality in organization members | |||||
Robert Merton developed the concept of the bureaucratic personality which develops where impersonal rules limit a person's functions | |||||
The vicious circle of bureaucracy is such that:
Workers follow rules for sake of rules since this is how they are evaluated Rules become more important than the goals they were designed to accomplish The org become rigid Rules become a form of security for members Eventually there is no drive for autonomy since that would be threatening |
|||||
But actions & decisions based on past training & experience may be inappropriate under different conditions | |||||
In a similar vein William Whyte, 1956, developed the concept of the "organization man" (sic), who is one who follows the rules, exactly & completely | |||||
|
THE BUREAUPATHIC IS ONE WHO NEEDS TO SUBORDINATE OTHERS | ||||
In many workplaces there are people who use their position, or any advantage they can muster, to oppress, subordinate or simply put down others | |||||
Bureaupathics are the adult, orgl version of the school yard bully | |||||
|
A BUREAUTIC IS ONE WHO STRIKES OUT AT THE SYSTEM |
|
|||
Bureautics may personalize every encounter, refusing to recognize the legitimacy of rules | |||||
Bureautics may view every rule as designed to frustrate them | |||||
Other bureautics may be true rebels seeking to reconstruct the org | |||||
|
BUREAUCRATS, BUREAUPATHICS, & BUREAUTICS ARE ALL, IN MANY SENSES, CONTRARY TO PROFESSIONALIZATION |
|
|||
|
Miller holds that professionals are likely to feel alienated in orgs because org rules ( formalization ) are viewed as a duplication of norms of the profession.... & are seen as less valid than prof training/ethics |
|
|||
Formalization that results in bureaucratization is, clearly, contrary to professionalization |
|
||||
For Hall, bureaucratization is broader than formalization |
|
||||
Bureaucratization is inversely related to professionalization | |||||
There is an inverse relationship btwn hierarchy & professional attitude | |||||
The presence of a rigid hierarchy may not adversely affect professionals if the hierarchy is recognized as legitimate | |||||
Blau: hierarchy can increase communications btwn professionals & top management | |||||
ORGANIZATIONS STRUGGLE TO BALANCE BUREAUCRATIZATION & PROFESSIONALIZATION | |||||
With too little freedom, the members feel oppressed, alienated, bureaucratic & engage in rule following for its own sake | |||||
With too much freedom, behavior becomes erratic & organizationally irrelevant | |||||
The best choice is to emphasize the kinds of guidelines for behavior that members bring to the org & train where needed | |||||
But people often feel that professional behavior is irrelevant | |||||
Conflict btwn professionalization & the org is widespread-- but not inevitable | |||||
A professional legal dept in bank is less formal than other divisions | |||||
Thus formalization in org varies across division |
Links |
|
Links |
|||
- Project: Changing the Centralization/Bureaucratization of Your Organization |
|
||||
- Project: Transforming Organizations |
|
||||
- Project: Your Centralized Org |
|
||||
|
For Hall, there are FOUR Features of Org Structure |
|
|||
|
A. Complexity | ||||
|
B. Formalization | ||||
|
C. Centralization |
|
|||
|
D. Communications |
|
|||
|
Each of these is a variable: has high, medium, low levels |
|
|||
|
C. CENTRALIZATION IS THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWER W/IN THE ORG |
|
|||
The level of centralization determines whether decisions are made at the top of the org or not | |||||
Centralization is the concentration of the power of direction, to bring under one control, to concentrate at a single point, to bring under one system & one control | |||||
|
See Also: Democratic Orgs | ||||
|
For Hage, centralization is the level & variety of participation in strategic decision making |
|
|||
|
For Van de Ven & Ferry (1980), centralization is the locus of decision making |
|
|||
|
The Table on Bureaucracy & Centralization shows that it is possible to design an org w/ low bureaucratization & low centralization |
|
|||
|
The level of centralization can vary w/in one org, w/ different sections of the org having different levels of centralization |
|
|||
STREET LEVEL BUREAUCRATS ARE LOWER LEVEL EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE HI AUTHORITY & DISCRETION 'IN THE STREET' | |||||
|
Lipsky (1982) researched, & coined the term street level bureaucracies where the orgs allow members wide discretion |
|
|||
Street level bureaucrats (SLB) may include:
- teachers - lawyers - social workers - prison guard - police officers - mental health clinics - judges - parole officers |
|||||
|
Other street level bureaucracies include many high reliability organizations
(HROs) personnel such as:
- urban firefighters - wildland firefighters - military personnel - powerline workers - EMS personnel - medical personnel - airline pilots - powerline workers |
|
|||
|
In many ways, street level bureaucrats & HRO personnel are semi-professionals |
|
|||
|
For street level bureaucrats, the org is highly bureaucratized at the middle & top, w/ wide discretion at the bottom |
|
|||
See Also: Lower Level Employees | |||||
EVALUATION MAY VARY ALONG PROFESSIONALIZATION, BUREAUCRATIC OR CENTRALIZATION LINES W/IN THE ORG | |||||
|
Evaluation may vary along professionalization, bureaucratic or centralization lines w/in the org |
|
|||
|
Increased size creates conflicting pressure for centralization in order to standardize evaluations | ||||
|
As size increases, the importance of decisions increases creating pressure for personal involvement, reducing the level of delegation | ||||
|
The volume of decisions also increases pressure for expert advice, increasing the level of delegation | ||||
ROUTINE TECHNOLOGY IS AMENABLE TO CENTRALIZATION WHILE NON ROUTINE TECH CANNOT BE CENTRALIZED | |||||
In examining centralization & technology, work assignments that are delegated w/ controls usually occur when the technology is routine | |||||
Work delegated with little or no controls is usually considered to be non routine in it's technology | |||||
If technology varies across the org, then org must be structured accordingly | |||||
Participative management is found to be more successful w/ hi tech | |||||
In routine situations, rules can successfully govern & thus little delegation through participation is needed | |||||
Lincoln & Zeitz (1980) found that professionals desire high levels of participation in decision making | |||||
Lincoln & Zeitz (1980) found a high level of professionalization of an org results in all workers experiencing an increase in influence | |||||
An examination of centralization & the org's relationships w/ actors in it's env shows that the level of competition has a strong impact on the level of centralization | |||||
Negandhi & Reiman (1972) found that in an expanding economy, or market competition creates decentralization | |||||
Pfeffer & Leblebici (1973) found that in a contracting economy, or market competition creates centralization | |||||
Less market competition results in more changes in product, processes, etc. | |||||
Increased in turbulence in the env results in decentralization | |||||
Centralization is more appropriate for turbulent, unstable env | |||||
LOOSE COUPLING REFERS TO ORGS THAT ARE MORE LIKE NETWORKS THAN BUREAUCRACIES | |||||
A decentralized org is a loosely coupled org: the components are not highly integrated | |||||
Weick (1976) & Aldrich (1979) define loose coupling as org units with low levels of interdependence | |||||
These types of orgs are more flexible & responsive to env | |||||
Loose coupling is not same as decentralization | |||||
Degree of coupling refers to levels of interdependence among units | |||||
Centralization refers to distribution of power | |||||
Many loosely coupled orgs are are decentralized | |||||
ORGL POLITICIZATION OCCURS AS ORGS TAKE ON POLITICAL GOALS | |||||
In examining the interaction of centralization & macro politics, we see that the nature & structure of orgs w/in a society affect the social order because, among other things, orgs are used for political purposes | |||||
Orgs are used for political purposes by the: | |||||
- Bolsheviks who use org weapons (Selznick, 1960) | |||||
- leaders of China's Cultural Revolution: orgs used for political indoctrination | |||||
- workers who developed Yugoslavia: self management into a system where workers elect wkrs council that elect management | |||||
- Israeli kibbutz: system which developed small orgs which a socialist econ system & the total rotation of work | |||||
But ideological/political goals are not always met even in orgs which explicitly pursue these goals | |||||
In any society, orgs are integral part of that system: capitalist, communist, socialist, etc., & are used for the ends of that system | |||||
Tannenbaum et al (1974, 1976) studied centralization in 10
nations
- Austria - Rumania - Italy - Bulgaria - Israel - Hungary - Yugoslavia - West Germany - US - Ireland |
|||||
Tannenbaum found SEVEN results
- Israel & US: most successful plants - Is: decentralization: hierarchy eliminated - US: hierarchy: limited potential for workers; greater participation in US - US: no attempt to reduce inequality - HRM is manipulation: diverts attention from exploitation & injustice - Workers do not feel as alienated but are powerless - HRM creates discrepancy btwn subjective & objective experience of alienation |
|||||
Marxist view of participative mgt is that in Israel & Yugoslavia participative management is seen as an attempt to alter traditional power relations w/in the org as well as in society | |||||
The Marxists also see the US participative management as an attempt to hide traditional power relations w/in the org as well as in society | |||||
Question: which worker is more likely to press for change?
The worker who has participation, but feels no exploitation Or the worker who feels exploitation, but has never participated? |
|||||
CENTRALIZATION DOES CONCENTRATE ORGL POWER BUT ORGS CAN STILL BE STRUCTURED TO ACHIEVE JUDICIOUS USE OF POWER | |||||
In examining organizational centralization of power as applied to govt, Gibb (1981) sees org structure as a legitimate centralization of power & thus as a form of private govt | |||||
Hall finds that equality in orgs is extremely unlikely because the nature of orgs requires hierarchy once beyond very small size, simple tech & low level of complexity | |||||
The idea of the democratic org is out of reach for most org theorists | |||||
Recall: Lincoln & Zeitz (1980) found a high level of professionalization of an org results in all workers experiencing an increase in influence | |||||
The internal politics of an organization roughly reflects the larger political system of that society | |||||
Labor management negotiations & battles over prerogatives of management & workers reflect wider political schisms | |||||
Power can be delegated to lower level workers or power can be taken by lower level workers | |||||
The distribution of power atone time will have a crucial impact on the distribution of power in the future | |||||
In comparing the centralization of orgs & the centralization of
society
A society w/ a majority of highly centralized orgs probably is one where workers have little participation The same would probably be true of participation in society |
|||||
The level of centralization w/in orgs indicates what leaders assume about members: whether they need tight control or not |
|
||||||
Level of Centralization \/ |
|
|
||||
Decisions made @ top:
Headquarters |
- Workers governed by policies; - All decisions referred up the line |
w/in policy framework - Unique problems referred to top |
||||
Decisions made @ bottom:
Operational worker / Professional |
w/o policy restrictions; - Other decisions made @ low level w/in political framework |
w/in political framework; - Workers have discretion over unique problems |
||||
The Table on Bureaucracy & Centralization shows that it is possible to design an org w/ low bureaucratization & low centralization |
Links |
|
Links |
|||
ORGANIZED ANARCHIES ARE ORGANIC IN THAT THEY ARE FLEXIBLE, ADAPTIVE, NONHIERARCHICAL, & DECENTRALIZED | |||||
Cohen, March & Olsen developed the concepts of the org as an organized anarchy & the garbage can model of decision making | |||||
The garbage can model of decision making is used, whereby decisions are almost randomly made by matching solutions & problem, because the org is viewed as experiencing extremely high uncertainty |
|
||||
Organized anarchies are viewed as extremely organic orgs in an env of highly uncertain conditions |
|
||||
Organic orgs have
- a loose, flexible mgt that recognizes the unstable nature of the external env - systems marked by free flowing adaptive processes - an unclear hierarchy of authority - a decentralized decision making process |
|
||||
Org anarchies do not rely on the normal vertical hierarchy of authority & bureaucratic decision rules |
|
||||
THE WEAKNESSES OF ORG ANARCHIES ARE THAT THEY HAVE PROBLEMATIC PREFERENCES, TECH PROBLEMS, & HAVE HIGH TURNOVER RATES | |||||
Orgs morph into organized anarchies when they have problematic preferences, unclear, poorly understood tech, & turnover |
|
||||
1. Org anarchies have problematic preferences when goals, problems, & solutions are ill defined & ambiguity characterizes each step of a decision process |
|
||||
Note that preferences may be clear to one actor or grp while being unclear to another, depending on their power, position, knowledge, experience, etc. |
|
||||
2. Org anarchies have unclear, poorly understood tech when cause & effect relationships w/in the org are difficult to identify |
|
||||
Org anarchies have unclear, poorly understood tech when an explicit data base that applies to decisions is not available |
|
||||
3. Org anarchies have turnover when orgl positions experience a high turnover rate, or actors are busy & have only limited time to allocate to a problem |
|
||||
Org anarchies have turnover when actors commitment & involvement in any given decision are fluid & limited |
|
||||
Org anarchies are often characterized by:
- rapid change - a collegial env - a non bureaucratic env - dec mking under problematic circumstances |
|
||||
Few orgs act as org anarchies all or most of the time, but many orgs experience significant periods of anarchic operation |
|
Links |
|
Links |
|||
Culture may be defined as the shared content of society & thus organizational culture is the shared content of an org |
|
||||
The content of a society or org is it's shared knowledge, beliefs, values, & norms ( K B V N ) & the physical & abstract manifestations of that content |
|
||||
Org culture is the shared knowledge, beliefs, values, & norms of an org |
|
||||
Org culture is the interaction of the formal & informal structures of an org w/ the goals & objectives of the org leaders | |||||
Org culture is a special type of subculture that is unique to the network that includes & surrounds an org |
|
||||
An org culture includes all of an org's stakeholders or constituencies including customers, suppliers, govt regulators, families, similar orgs, etc. |
|
||||
All orgs have an org culture which is based on the social relationships, as organized by the formal org structure, that emerge among the people who work in or w/ the org |
|
||||
Lauer & Handel, 1983, found that all orgs have an org culture, a negotiated order | |||||
W/in an org, there are frequently org subcultures among the different org constituencies, such as employees in a dept, employees at a particular level of the org such as blue collar workers, middle mgt, & upper mgt |
|
||||
An example of a slice of an org culture is where two workers in an engineering firm may become friends & help each other w/ their work which a third worker may be excluded from this friendship & thus not have help w/ her/his work |
|
||||
Org culture has a impact on how the bureaucracy of the org actually operates, in contrast to how it operates "on paper" |
|
||||
Org culture & the groups w/in an org, each of which who may possess it's own org subculture, often called a workplace culture |
|
||||
Org culture & workplace culture may facilitate or hinder the attainment of stated org goals |
|
||||
The org, w/ it's org culture & workplace culture may even develop their own goals, which may be inferior or superior to the org's stated goals, depending on one's perspective |
|
||||
Org & workplace cultures are sometimes known as the org's "negotiated order" in recognition of their emergence from the ongoing informal negotiations among different members of the org (Fine, 1984, Ouchi, & Wilkins, 1985, Miller, 1991) |
|
||||
Scott, 1992, holds that regardless of the formal structure, people ultimately make the org |
|
||||
The negotiated order is the aggregation of the org's members needs, objectives, & experiences of others in the org |
|
||||
People in orgs push to get what they want, try things out, test the limits of the rules |
|
||||
Anselm Strauss, et al, 1964, found that the nature of the hospital they studied at any given time was the outcome of pressures, actions, & reactions of the people who made up the org |
|
||||
The doctors, attendants, nurses, administrators, patients, & others each has their own objectives, understandings or reality, and ideas about mental illness, which governed his or her behavior & relationships to others | |||||
Compromises, "looking the other way" & "agreements to disagree" were abundant in the hospital & were always subject to change as the situation changed or as new people entered the org | |||||
Strauss held that the hospital on one day is not the same as the hospital at a later time even though the formal structure stayed the same | |||||
Org culture is unique to each org & cannot be understood by examining the org's formal structure (Fine, 1984, Ouchi, & Wilkins, 1985) | |||||
As w/ any culture, new members must be socialized into the org culture & new employees who do not become socialized or accept the org culture experience conflict | |||||
The grapevine is the informal communication structure of the org culture | |||||
The national culture of a nation impacts the org & it's org culture | |||||
NOT IN HS0212 P. 332; HALL 0511 P. 209; ORG BEH 0207, P. 220; INTRO TO BIZ |
|
The End
|