Achieving high performance results is what all companies, without exception, strive for. However, without a clearly established organizational structure, the enterprise risks failure.
In this article we will analyze what the organizational structure of enterprise management is and how to choose it correctly.
Features of choosing the organizational structure of an enterprise
The organizational structure is the basis for performing enterprise management functions. Thus, it is understood as composition, subordination, interaction and distribution of work between individual employees and entire departments.
In simple terms, the organizational structure of an enterprise is a set of divisions, as well as managers headed by the general director. Its choice depends on many factors:
- age of the organization (the younger the company, the simpler its organizational structure);
- organizational and legal form (JSC, LLC, individual entrepreneur, ...);
- field of activity;
- scale of the company (number of employees, departments, etc.);
- technologies involved in the company's work;
- connections within and outside the company.
Of course, when considering the organizational structure of management, it is necessary to take into account such characteristics of the company as levels of interaction. For example, how departments of a company interact with each other, employees with employees, and even the organization itself with the external environment.
Types of organizational structures for enterprise management
Let's take a closer look at the types of organizational structures. There are several classifications, and we will consider the most popular and at the same time the most complete of them.
Linear
Linear structure is the simplest of all existing types of enterprise management structures. At the head is the director, then the heads of departments, then ordinary workers. Those. everyone in the organization is vertically connected. Typically, such organizational structures can be found in small organizations that do not have so-called functional divisions.
This type is characterized by simplicity, and tasks in the organization are usually completed quickly and professionally. If for some reason the task is not completed, then the manager always knows that he needs to ask the head of the department about the completion of the task, and the head of the department, in turn, knows who in the department to ask about the progress of the work.
The disadvantage is the increased demands on management personnel, as well as the burden that falls on their shoulders. This type of management is only applicable to small businesses, otherwise managers will not be able to work effectively.
Line-staff
If a small company that used a linear management structure develops, then its organizational structure changes and turns into a linear-staff structure. Vertical connections remain in place, however, the manager has a so-called “headquarters” - a group of people who act as advisors.
The headquarters does not have the authority to give orders to the performers, however, it has a strong influence on the leader. Based on the decisions of the headquarters, management decisions are also formed.
Functional
When the workload on employees increases and the organization continues to grow further, the organizational structure moves from a line-staff to a functional one, which means the distribution of work not by departments, but by functions performed. If everything was simple before, now managers can safely call themselves directors of finance, marketing and production.
It is with a functional structure that one can see the division of the organization into separate parts, each of which has its own functions and tasks. A stable external environment is an essential element of supporting the development of a company that has chosen a functional structure.
Such companies have one serious drawback: the functions of management personnel are very blurred. If in a linear organizational structure everything is clear (sometimes even too clear), then with a functional organizational structure everything is a little blurry.
For example, if problems arise with sales, the director has no idea who exactly to blame. Thus, the functions of management sometimes overlap and when a problem occurs, it is difficult to determine whose fault it was.
The advantages are that the company can be multidisciplinary and cope well with this. Moreover, due to functional separation, a firm can have multiple goals.
Linear-functional
This organizational structure is only applicable to large organizations. Thus, it combines the advantages of both organizational structures, however, it has fewer disadvantages.
With this type of control, all main connections are linear, and additional ones are functional.
Divisional
Like the previous one, it is suitable only for large companies. Functions in the organization are distributed not according to the areas of responsibility of subordinates, but according to types of product, or according to the regional affiliation of the division.
A division has its own divisions, and the division itself resembles a linear or linear-functional organizational structure. For example, a division may have a procurement department, a marketing department, and a production department.
The disadvantage of this organizational structure of the enterprise is the complexity of connections between departments, as well as the high costs of maintaining managers.
Matrix
Applicable to those enterprises that operate in the market where products must be constantly improved and updated. For this purpose, the company creates working groups, which are also called matrix ones. It follows from this that double subordination arises in the company, as well as constant collaboration of employees from different departments.
The advantage of this organizational structure of the enterprise is the ease of introducing new products into production, as well as the company’s flexibility to the external environment. The disadvantage is double subordination, due to which conflicts often arise in work groups.
conclusions
So, the organizational structure of an enterprise is a company’s management system and its choice determines the ease of performing tasks, the company’s flexibility to the external environment, as well as the load that falls on the shoulders of managers.
If the company is small, then at the stage of formation, as a rule, a linear organizational structure naturally arises in it, and as the enterprise develops, its structure acquires an increasingly complex form, becoming matrix or divisional.
Video - an example of a company's organizational structure:
Topic 7 Organizational structure
This topic will allow novice managers to expand their knowledge on the following issues:
The concept of the structure of any system;
The concept of organizational structure;
Dialectical unity of function and structure;
Structure of the managed system (production structure);
Structure of the control system (control structure);
Structure of the enterprise (organization);
Structural units of the organizational and production structure;
Structural units of the organizational management structure;
Typology of management structures;
Factors influencing the development of organizational management structure;
Principles of forming an organizational management structure;
Design of organizational management structure;
Organizational structure is the form of existence of a process (implementation of functions).
The structure of an organization includes all the means by which various activities are distributed among the components of the organization, and the actions of these components are coordinated. Indeed, without such a structure, the people involved would simply be a crowd of individuals, or at best a loose aggregation of groups, rather than an organization. In order to exist as an organization, it - be it a tennis club or a charity, a business or a multinational corporation - must be structured.
7.1. Organizational structure concept
Before explaining why structure is called organizational, let's consider the concept of structure of any system.
Rice. 7.1.1.
Structuring objects can be:
organization (enterprise, firm) as a socio-economic system and at the same time a management system;
production system;
control system;
each element of the production and control system:
Management personnel;
Control functions;
Fixed assets;
Production workers, etc.
Why is the structure of an enterprise (firm) called organizational? The answer is simple.
Organizational structure - This is the structure of the organization.
In this case, the term “organizational” means that the object of structuring is the organization and we are talking about its construction (or structure), i.e. The carrier of the structure is the organization. By analogy we read: organizational culture (culture of the organization), organizational goals (goals of the organization), organizational processes (processes occurring in the organization).
At any enterprise there are three organizational structures (Fig. 7.1.1), the carriers of which are:
Enterprise as a management system;
Control system;
Managed system.
The organizational structure of these systems is the main content of this topic, which reveals the construction of organizations as the main means of production management.
When considering an enterprise (company or other form of object) as a management system, you should pay attention to an important clarifying point, namely that the term “organizational” belongs to both the structure of the enterprise as a whole and the structures of its two parts: the managed and control systems. It will look like this (Fig. 7.1.2.):
Rice. 7.1.2.
7.2. Functional principle of enterprise structuring
Even in the smallest and least formal organization there are decisions to be made about the division of work. For example, what jobs should be done in the family to help run the household? Who should be responsible for each of these jobs? Who will go to the store and who will cook? Who will maintain order in the house and keep the home in good condition? Who will be responsible for what aspects of the child’s life support?
Each family creates its own order of work distribution. In general, each family member should know who is responsible for most of the responsibilities that are performed regularly or periodically. If a new or unusual task needs to be completed, family members may need to discuss who will do what. No doubt there are families where there is disagreement about who does what. If this is the case, then such families must probably spend a lot of time and energy on daily discussions and bickering about this issue. Such a family could hardly be called an “organization.” And such an organization would undoubtedly not ensure good results.
The family or household is the lowest level of the economy, and our example with the distribution of work (functions) in the family is appropriate, given that many commercial organizations in foreign economies grew out of family enterprises.
The term "organization" implies that its members have agreed among themselves on rules and responsibilities. If many people in an organization must work together to achieve common goals, then someone must think about what activities need to be carried out and which ones should be carried out by certain people and certain groups. It is necessary to divide the work in the organization in such a way that it is performed with the greatest impact.
Features of the organizational structure are determined by the nature, diversity, technical level of production processes, the depth of the division of labor, the degree of its specialization, the scale and ramification of activities, the specifics of products and services. The basis of the organizational structure is a set of separate, but closely related activities aimed at achieving the goals of the organization. Among them are main, auxiliary and service production, finance, marketing, personnel, accounting, labor and wages, logistics, etc.
Structuring tasks. We can imagine the following sequence of solving problems related to enterprise structuring:
Accounting for types of products (product range) and services provided;
Formation of partial production processes, identification of their set, taking into account the discovered varieties of manufacturing (production) technology;
Making decisions on external cooperation in production (division of labor between enterprises);
Making decisions on specialization and internal cooperation of production;
Accounting for all types of maintenance of the main production (transport, repair, tools, warehouse, etc.);
Accounting for all types of non-productive activities (dispensary, kindergarten, store, recreation center, etc.);
Accounting for other types (areas) of activity that form specific management functions;
Creation of divisions (production and non-production) based on specialization by type of activity (work);
Creation of governing bodies by assigning them specific functions.
Building an enterprise. In accordance with the functional principle, each enterprise can be represented as composed of separate large blocks of divisions:
Block of production units;
Block of management departments;
Block of social sector departments.
The block production divisions include:
basic related to the creation of specialized products or provision of services;
auxiliary, ensuring the normal operation of the main ones (tools, repairs, etc.);
serving main and auxiliary processes (energy department, warehouses, transport department, etc.);
uhexperimental, where prototypes of products are manufactured.
The block of management divisions consists of:
pre-production(research, design, etc.);
informational(technical information department, library, archive, etc.);
engineering(departments for operation, repair and maintenance of equipment, energy services, safety department or bureau, instrument department, etc.);
service dealing with sales and warranty issues;
technological, engaged in the development and implementation of production technology;
economic(economic planning department, labor and wages department, accounting, financial department);
administrative and economic(HR department, economic department, supply department, etc.);
operational involved in production dispatching.
The block of social sector units includes: a clinic, a club, a dispensary, a kindergarten, a recreation center, etc.
Functional structuring provides the enterprise with fairly high competitive advantages. This is achieved due to the deep specialization of work, clarity, harmony, reliability of communications, and the absence of duplication of functions. All this ensures the rapid concentration of resources in the right place and at the right time, allowing management decisions to be quickly brought to the attention of executors and implemented.
However, in the absence of horizontal connections, the functional structure based on deep specialization of internal processes turns out to be inflexible. It quickly ossifies, gives rise to bureaucracy, departmentalism, fetters the implementation of scientific and technological progress, and leads to a slowdown in the technical, economic and social development of the organization in comparison with existing capabilities.
In market economic conditions, the growth of firms continues, the boundaries of which no longer coincide with the boundaries of the enterprises themselves. Firms began to unite dozens of enterprises that received significant independence in the implementation of many of their functions, primarily in the field of current management. Now the divisions of the company, which are primarily enterprises, can be scattered throughout the country and in a number of other countries.
The structure of a large company can no longer be built on a functional principle, although the latter still remains valid for its member enterprises. The main principles for it have become different: territorial, market, product, innovative, in which enterprises, while maintaining a functional structure within themselves, acquire a “specialization” within the company in one of the listed areas. We will touch upon these principles further when considering types of organizational structures.
Other principles of structuring. These include:
quantitative;
temporal;
technological;
professional;
for major strategic goals.
Quantitative principle of structuring. Its essence is that divisions in an organization are created based on the number of workers required to perform a particular task. Army units are built on this principle, and it is also applicable in organizations associated with simple activities (loading and unloading, agricultural, etc. work).
Temporal structuring principle. It is used at lower levels and manifests itself in the fact that divisions, based on economic or technical reasons, combine people employed at the same time. As an example, we can cite teams working on a rotational basis, when, having worked for the required period at the place of deployment, they return to their place of permanent residence, being completely replaced by new ones. This is how the oil and gas fields of Western Siberia, the crews of fishing vessels, etc. function.
Technological principle of structuring. It is used at the lowest level in production organizations, when the basis of the unit is any completed technology (turning, milling, etc. processing of a part).
Professional structuring principle. It is essentially close to the technological principle, but people here are united not by production technology, but by a common profession. In accordance with this principle, for example, departments are created in higher educational institutions.
The principle of structuring according to major strategic goals. It can be used for multidisciplinary organizations, especially those operating in the innovation sector, and assumes that leading units are created in accordance with strategic goals.
7.3. Structure of the managed (production) system
The structuring of an enterprise begins with the production system and, when constructing this block, provides for the following fundamental issues that require solutions:
hierarchy of production, which determines the gradation (levels) of structuring;
structural units of the production system (enterprise, building, workshop, production site, workplace);
options for the staged structure of the production system (two, three and four-stage structure);
principles of constructing production sites and workshops;
building, along with the main ones (producing products externally), auxiliary and service units;
construction of social sphere units.
The structure of the production system is called differently (Figure 7.3.1).
Rice. 7.3.1.
All the names shown reflect the essence of the concept, but the term “organizational-production” should be considered the most complete and representative, since this name of the structure indicates that it is the structure of an organization, reflecting the structure of its production.
Organizational and production structure- this is the composition and size of production units (shops, sections, services, etc.), their ratio, forms of construction and interrelations.
It must be borne in mind that the organizational and production structure includes only production units (main, auxiliary, service). Divisions of the social sphere are non-productive (although they provide services to the employees of the enterprise) and are included in the overall structure of the enterprise. By fixing the boundaries of the organizational and production structure, the role of production in the life of an enterprise in the production of competitive products is enhanced.
The organizational and production structure is the form of existence of the production process (implementation of production functions). Without such a structure, it would be impossible for the production process to flow in time and space, to pass through the stages determined by cooperation (procurement, processing, assembly, testing or others in various sectors of the national economy).
Factors determining the organizational and production structure. Structuring the production system is the basis for building an organization, so managers pay special attention to the structure of production, working through various options for the model of organizational and production structure. The efficiency of the enterprise and its competitiveness depend on the choice of a more economical option for the latter.
The structure of the production system is influenced by both the external and internal environment, the development of productive forces and production relations, the socio-economic and political state of society. The main factors influencing the formation of the organizational and production structure include the following:
production facility (its types, dimensions, weight, design, consumer properties, requirements for production and operation);
subject of labor (raw materials, material, workpiece, semi-finished product, unit, unit, substance, etc.);
means of labor (equipment, machines, mechanisms, devices);
the work itself – human resource (requirements for the qualifications of performers of the labor process, the state of the labor market, etc.);
buildings and constructions (need for them, type of buildings, layout, zoning, etc.);
communications (condition and length of transport lines, their types, access roads);
warehouses (need for them, equipment and location on the territory of the enterprise);
production cooperation (external and internal, the number of organizations involved in the production of products, their geography, the number of internal divisions related to the manufacture of the same product);
location of the enterprise (in a residential area, significantly removed from the latter, distance from transport hubs);
production technology (environmentally friendly, polluting, innovative);
type of production (single, serial, mass);
nature of the production process (with a full or incomplete technological cycle, manual, mechanized, automated);
form of specialization of production units (technological, subject, mixed);
production development and re-equipment strategy (new types of products, new equipment and technology);
scale and territory of the enterprise (size in terms of output or number of employees, one or more territories within the country and abroad).
The listed factors indicate the variety of complex problems that require solutions when designing an organizational and production structure. The structuring of an enterprise is always multivariate, it involves a set of alternative structures and the choice of the best (optimal) option. The optimality criterion when choosing an alternative organizational and production structure can be:
minimum resource costs (material, labor, energy, financial);
degree of environmental safety;
competitiveness;
image of the enterprise (company).
Stepwise structure of the production system. The first is due to the hierarchy of production, which has options, that is, a different number of steps (levels) within a particular enterprise. The production system of an individual enterprise can have up to four stages, which serve as the basis for designing the organizational, production and management structure.
Depending on the number of steps in the production hierarchy, the organizational and production structure can be as in Fig. 7.3.2.
Rice. 7.3.2.
With a four-stage production structure, in addition to workshops and production areas, an additional stage is introduced - building (production). The building usually combines several interconnected (or similar) workshops, located, as a rule, in the same building.
Types of organizational and production structures. Such structures can be classified according to various criteria (Table 7.3.1.).
Table 7.3.1
|
Classification sign |
Type of organizational and production structure |
|
Structural unit |
Corps, workshop, district |
|
Unit specialization form |
Technological, subject, mixed (combined) |
|
Concentration of divisions on the production of one type of product |
Grocery |
|
Customer orientation of divisions |
Market |
|
Orientation of all divisions to the region |
Territorial |
The last three types of organizational and production structures are collectively called – divisional (from Latin divisio - division). The peculiarity of a production structure built on the basis of the divisional principle is the significant autonomy of its constituent units, each of which may have the right of a legal entity. Close financial, production, information and other connections are created between such divisions. According to the divisional principle, companies are most often built, which include several independent enterprises.
At product structure The enterprises (divisions) included in it are almost completely focused on the production of one type of product for all territories and all types of consumers. This approach allows us to specialize production as much as possible, and therefore significantly increase its efficiency and quality.
At market structure Enterprises (divisions) of the company are focused on producing products for a specific group of customers. For example, publishing houses produce literature for adults, youth literature, and textbooks for higher and secondary schools. Each of these divisions focuses on his buyer and operates as a virtually independent company. Consequently, each of them has its own 1) editorial department; 2) marketing and finance department; 3) production department.
Commercial banks actively use a consumer-oriented organizational structure. The main groups using their services:
Individual clients (private individuals);
Firms, organizations;
Correspondent banks (other banks);
International financial organizations.
In the territorial structure, each of the enterprises (divisions) included in the company produces the entire range of specialized types of products or services in its region. An example of this type of structure is a network of consumer service factories, post offices, etc.
Construction of auxiliary and service units. The leading principle of structuring auxiliary and service production is still functional, corresponding to the areas of activity of the enterprise. The named types of production represent a production infrastructure consisting of workshops and areas for the manufacture and repair of tools and equipment, equipment repair, production of spare parts, production of means of mechanization of production processes and the production of all types of energy, as well as departments engaged in the routine maintenance of the main production.
The internal divisions of auxiliary workshops, like the main ones, can be built according to technological, subject or combined principles.
Technological principle means that the division performs several operations (technologies) across a wide range of products.
Divisions built according to the subject principle produce a finished product (unit, unit).
Combined principle structuring means that the workshop can have “technological” and “subject” divisions.
The construction of production infrastructure units also depends on the form of organization of servicing the main production (centralized, decentralized, mixed).
With a centralized form of service, the enterprise creates specialized workshops for the repair of all types of equipment and accessories. With this type of service, departments for repairing equipment and accessories are not created in the main workshops.
In a decentralized form of service, divisions are created in all workshops of the main and auxiliary production to carry out all types of repairs of equipment and equipment. This service option is ineffective and not widespread.
With a mixed form of service, shop auxiliary units perform small, medium repairs and maintenance of equipment and equipment, and major repairs of equipment are carried out by specialized workshops.
7.4. Control system structure
Structuring the management system (building a management apparatus) is the next step in building an enterprise, when the production system has already been built, production and non-production divisions have been formed. We are now talking about building management units. In this case, you will need to answer the following questions:
1) how many management units will be required;
2) what profile they will have;
3) how to build units;
4) what will be the hierarchy of the control system.
The number of management units is determined by management objects, about which we already know a lot, although it does not hurt to remind once again that they are:
production (and non-production) departments (people, teams);
areas (types) of activity;
things (objects and means of labor).
By structuring a production system, the problems of building its divisions can be solved, taking into account the production hierarchy, assigning certain works (processes) to them in accordance with the established specialization of the divisions and the assigned product range, as well as determining the need for equipment and technology to carry out partial production processes. The listed tasks are usually solved by specialized design institutes or firms.
A designed production system with numerous cells (like the honeycombs of a beehive) will only begin to function (produce products, perform services) and bring profit to the enterprise (like bees honey) when the formed management bodies (management units) provide the production cells with everything necessary (skilled workers, technology , objects of labor, energy, etc.).
People and things as objects of management are the main components of production units, the main content of the latter and act as a functioning (producing or servicing) cell of the production system. Therefore, when deciding on the number of management units (units), it is necessary to take into account the number of various production units that need to be managed.
Another important guideline when determining the number of management units is the number of areas (types) of production and economic activity or areas of activity of the organization. As a result, two criteria can be used to resolve this issue (Fig. 7.4.1):
Rice. 7.4.1.
The areas of activity of the enterprise also determine the profile (specialization) of management units (divisions). Thus, to resolve personnel issues, a personnel department is created, to resolve production supply issues, a material and technical supply department is created, etc. To manage each area of activity, its own body (service) is created.
The structuring of the control system is based on the functional principle. This means that each management unit (supply department, human resources department, labor and wages department, etc.) is endowed with a complex specific function for managing a certain type of activity. A management unit is built along a logical chain: type of activity – specific function → management body. This principle was discussed in the previous topic.
The control system copies the hierarchy of the production system, i.e. it has as many steps (levels) as the last one. And at each hierarchical level of the production system a management body is built (created).
Thus, the structure of the systems under consideration occurs through vertical and horizontal structuring. Let's consider the diagram of the vertical structure (Fig. 7.4.2.):
Rice. 7.4.2.
The horizontal structure of the control system will look like this (Fig. 7.4.3.):
Rice. 7.4.3
At each stage of the production hierarchy, management units (units, individual performers) are built: , ▲, . The director's office consists of departments and services, the shop manager's office consists of bureaus and groups, and the foreman's office consists of individual performers. The number of management staff at the hierarchy levels depends on the size of the enterprise. It can be as big or as small as you like.
The concept of the structure of the control system. It is called the organizational management structure (OMS).
The organizational structure of management is a set of management units and levels of management, their subordination and interrelation.
The specific expression of the organizational structure of management is found in the following:
structure diagram;
staffing and composition of employees by unit, department, service, sector;
system of subordination and relationship between units and individual employees vertically (managerial hierarchy);
organizational regulation documents, regulations on departments, job descriptions of employees, etc.
The organizational structure of management acts as a form of existence of the management process or a form of implementation of management functions. The functions and structure of management are two inextricably interconnected and interdependent sides of a single whole - the organization of the management system and act respectively as the content and form of the system (Fig. 7.4.4.).
Rice. 7.4.4.
Structural units of the organizational management structure. These include:
A link (control body) is a separate cell with strictly defined control functions.
Management links are divided into linear and functional.
Linear units (linear bodies) are administratively separate parts of production that carry out comprehensive management of direct production. These include:
Industrial associations;
Enterprises;
Plots.
Functional links(functional bodies) are administratively separate parts of the management apparatus that implement one or more production management functions. These include:
Committees;
Management;
Sectors;
Linear units are directly responsible for the production of products established by the plan or services provided.
Functional units provide linear assistance in managing production and economic activities.
Stage (level) of control – This is a set of management links at a certain level of the management hierarchy.
Types of management structures. These include:
1) linear;
2) functional;
3) linear-functional;
4) matrix;
5) flexible structures.
Linear management structure. It is characterized by the fact that at the head of the production unit there is a sole manager, who exercises sole management of the employees subordinate to him and concentrates in his hands All management functions. The manager himself, in turn, is subordinate to his superior. On this basis, a hierarchy of managers of this management system is created: foreman shop manager director of the enterprise (Fig. 7.4.5.).
Rice. 7.4.5.
The linear management structure has its advantages and disadvantages.
Advantages:
1) unity and clarity of management;
2) consistency of actions of performers;
3) efficiency in decision making;
4) personal responsibility of the manager for the final results of the activities of his unit.
Flaws:
1) high demands on the manager, who must be comprehensively prepared to provide effective leadership in all management functions,
2) lack of links for planning and preparing decisions;
3) information overload, many contacts with subordinates, superiors and related structures;
4) concentration of power of managers.
In linear structures, each subordinate has one boss, and each boss has several subordinates. This structure is justified in conditions of simple production in the absence of extensive cooperative connections between enterprises
Functional management structure. Thing is:
1) there is a specialization in the performance of individual management functions,
2) for their implementation, special divisions of the management apparatus are allocated (or individual functional executors),
3) implementation of the instructions of the functional body within its competence is mandatory for production units.
The functional organization of management exists along with the linear one, that is, double subordination is created for performers (Fig. 7.4.6.).
Figure 7.4.6.
The functional management structure, like the linear one, has its advantages and disadvantages.
Advantages:
1) high competence of specialists responsible for the implementation of specific functions,
2) exemption of line managers from resolving some special issues,
3) elimination of duplication and parallelism in the performance of management functions,
4) reducing the need for general specialists.
Flaws:
1) excessive interest in achieving the goals and objectives of “their” departments;
2) difficulties in maintaining constant relationships between various functional services;
3) manifestation of tendencies of excessive centralization;
4) the duration of decision-making procedures;
5) a relatively frozen organizational form that has difficulty responding to changes.
The disadvantages of both linear and functional management structures are largely eliminated by the linear-functional structure.
Linear-functional management structure. With this structure:
1) purpose of functional services - preparation of data for line managers in order to competently solve emerging production or management problems;
2) recommendations of functional bodies become mandatory for execution by the relevant production units only after their approval by the line manager, under whose subordination are both production units and functional bodies;
3) functional bodies do not have the right to independently give orders to production units (Fig. 7.4.7.).
Rice. 7.4.7.
The linear-functional structure also has its advantages and disadvantages.
Advantages:
1) more in-depth preparation of decisions and plans related to the specialization of workers;
2) freeing top-level line managers from in-depth analysis of problems.
Flaws:
1) lack of close relationships and horizontal interaction between production units;
2) the responsibility of the functional bodies is not clear enough, since those preparing the decision, as a rule, do not participate in its implementation.
Matrix management structure. It exists within the main linear-functional structure and is used to solve targeted programs to create new types of products in a short time. Program (project) management is carried out by specially appointed managers who are responsible for coordinating all communications within the program and timely achievement of its goals.
The project manager is vested with authority, he is allocated all the necessary resources, and he recruits temporary staff from functional units of the required profile (designers, technologists, economists, etc.). At the same time, specialists selected for design work report to the line manager and at the same time to the project manager (Fig. 7.4.8)
Rice. 7.4.8.
R l – line manager; RP – project manager; FZ - functional units; GFR is a group of functional workers, operatively subordinate to the project manager, with methodological guidance from the functional service.
All organizational structures that interfere with the functioning and interaction between individual elements are divided into mechanistic and organic. Mechanistic ones are characterized by unambiguous internal relationships and strict regulation of almost all aspects of activity, which allows them to function like any technical device, for example, a watch. Such structures are based on the model of “rational bureaucracy”, which was created by an outstanding Western sociologist of the first half of the 20th century. Max Weber.
Organic structures are characterized by blurred boundaries, significant independence of individual links, weak hierarchy, and the predominance of informal relationships. All this gives organizational structures greater flexibility and creates additional incentives for work for members of the organization compared to mechanistic structures. Organic structures predominate in areas of activity related to innovation processes, scientific research, development and implementation of their results.
Organic include bends e management structures. Their essence lies in the ability to easily change and rebuild in accordance with new goals, objectives, and resources. Flexible structures (by project, by product, etc.) are temporary in nature; after solving a particular problem, they are disbanded.
Factors influencing management structure. The organizational management structure is influenced by numerous factors that must be taken into account when developing it. Let's consider internal and external factors.
Internal factors. These include:
1) a group of technical factors (nomenclature or range of products, scale and complexity of production, level of mechanization and automation of production and its management, etc.);
2) a group of organizational factors:
Type of production;
Organizational and production structure;
The nature of specialization and cooperation of production;
Degree of centralization of management functions;
Organizational and legal form of the enterprise, etc.;
3) group of economic factors:
Self-supporting relations (degree of economic and managerial independence);
System of planning and evaluation of individual and collective work activities;
System of material incentives for employees, etc.;
4) a group of socio-psychological factors:
General social characteristics of the team and its structure;
Social relations in a team;
Interpersonal connections;
Conflict situations, etc.
External factors. These include:
1) territorial location of an enterprise (firm) - in one or several territories within the country and abroad;
2) the volume and nature of external cooperation;
3) location of the enterprise (distance from residential areas, transport hubs);
4) climatic conditions, etc.
7.5. Design of organizational management structure
There is no management structure that will always remain acceptable. Weaknesses in structure reduce an organization's performance. They can be detected by such signs as:
Weak motivation and poor morale;
Late and ill-considered decisions;
Conflicts and lack of coordination;
Increased costs;
Inappropriate response to changing circumstances.
The decision to design an organizational management structure is made when the current structure is ineffective. In the design process, the task is to create a management structure that would most fully reflect the goals and objectives of the organization, i.e. so that the newly created structure allows the organization to productively and efficiently distribute and direct the efforts of its employees and thus achieve high performance.
Requirements for management structure. Let's name the main ones:
1. Optimality. The structure is considered optimal if rational connections are established between the links and levels of control at all levels with the least number of control levels.
2. Efficiency. The essence of this requirement is that during the time from making a decision to its use in the managed system, irreversible negative changes do not occur that make the implementation of the decisions made unnecessary.
3. Reliability. The organizational structure of management must guarantee the reliability of information transfer, prevent distortions of managers, commands and other transmitted data, and ensure uninterrupted communication in the management system.
4. Cost-effective. The task is to ensure that the desired effect of management is achieved with minimal costs for the management apparatus.
5. Flexibility. The ability to change in accordance with changes in the external environment.
6. Sustainability. Constancy of the basic properties of the control structure under various external influences, integrity of the functioning of the control system and its elements.
In the process of designing organizational structures, three stages are distinguished:
Analytical (study of existing practices and requirements for building an organizational structure);
Design (design of management structure);
Organizational (organization of implementation of the designed organizational structure).
Design principles. The perfection of the organizational management structure largely depends on the extent to which design principles were observed during its construction.
These include:
An appropriate number of management links and a maximum reduction in the time it takes for information to pass from the top manager to the immediate executor;
Clear separation of the components of the organizational structure (the composition of its divisions, information flows, etc.);
Ensuring the ability to quickly respond to changes in the managed system;
Assigning authority to resolve problems to the unit that has the most information on the issue.
The management structure design process consists of three main stages.
The first stage is analysis of the organizational structure. Analysis of the current management structure is intended to establish the extent to which it meets the requirements for the organization. In other words, how rational is the management structure from the point of view of established criteria characterizing its quality.
Evaluation criteria include:
Management principles – the relationship between centralization and decentralization (how many and what decisions are made at the lower level? What are their consequences? What is the scope of control functions at each level of management?);
Management apparatus - regrouping of divisions, changing the relationships between them, distribution of powers and responsibilities, reviewing the professional and qualification composition of managers and specialists, identifying unnecessary links and separating some links into independent divisions, creating links for relations with firms (enterprises), etc. d.;
Management functions - strengthening strategic planning (adjusting the “business plan”), strengthening control over product quality, changing approaches to labor motivation, separating development functions from execution functions, identifying the actual scope of work and operations for the implementation of management functions, etc.;
Economic activity – changing the technological process, technical re-equipment of the enterprise, deepening inter-company cooperation, etc.
As a result of the analysis, bottlenecks in the organization’s activities can be identified. This may be a large level of management, parallelism in work, a lag in the development of the organizational structure of management from ongoing changes in the external environment, incompetence of managers and specialists, etc.
The second stage is the design of organizational structures. Methodological approaches to designing the organizational structure of management can be conditionally divided into four groups:
1) method of analogies – involves the use of experience in designing management structures in similar organizations;
2) expert method – is based on the study of proposals from expert specialists. They can (depending on the assigned tasks) either design options for the management structure themselves, or evaluate (conduct an examination) the structures developed by the designers;
3) structuring goals – involves the development of a system of organizational goals and its subsequent combination with the structure being developed. In this case, the organizational structure of management is built on the basis of a systems approach, which manifests itself in the form of graphic descriptions of this structure with qualitative and quantitative analysis and justification of options for its construction and operation;
4) organizational modeling method– allows you to clearly formulate criteria for assessing the degree of rationality of organizational decisions. Its essence is the development of formal mathematical, graphical or computer descriptions of the distribution of powers and responsibilities in an organization.
We can propose the following sequence of steps when developing an organizational management structure:
Selection of the most effective option for organizational and production structure.
determination of the optimal size and number of divisions of the main production, their specialization.
Determination of the optimal sizes and divisions of auxiliary and service production.
Selecting the type and developing a draft diagram of the organizational management structure.
Determining the required number of steps.
Establishing a list and content of specific management functions.
Design of line personnel of the control apparatus.
Determining the scope of work and the required number of workers for each specific management function.
Distribution of the number of functional personnel by management level.
Formation of structural units and units of the management apparatus in accordance with their specialization and areas of activity of the enterprise (performers, groups, departments, services) and other conditions.
Development of regulations on departments, units, job descriptions, their discussion and approval.
Calculation of economic efficiency indicators of the designed management structure.
Establishing subordination, connections and developing a management structure project diagram.
The third stage is assessing the effectiveness of organizational management structures.
The degree of perfection of organizational structures is manifested in the speed of the production management system and in the high final results of the enterprise’s activities.
Management effectiveness can be assessed based on the level of task implementation, reliability and organization of the management system, speed and optimality of management decisions made. To assess the effectiveness of the management structure, the following coefficients (indicators) can be used:
1) efficiency factor, determined by the formula
TO uh =E r /Z y , (7.5.1)
Where E r – annual effect obtained from the functioning of the management structure, thousand rubles; Z at – management costs, thousand rubles.
2) management efficiency coefficient, determined by the form
, (7.5.2.)
Where Q y – management costs, thousand rubles, L emergency – the share of the number of management personnel in the total number of employees; F m – capital productivity (the cost of fixed and working capital per employee); E of – return on funds (cost of production per unit of fixed assets).
Ultimately, all work on designing a management structure comes down to developing directions for its improvement, which is one of the most important means of increasing the efficiency of management activities.
7.6. Organizational structure of the enterprise
We have consistently examined the structures of the managed (production) system and the control one, which from the point of view of cybernetics are parts of the enterprise as a management system. Now it is necessary to combine both structures (organizational-production and organizational management structure) into a single whole (Fig. 7.6.1.):
Rice. 7.6.1.
Organizational structure of the enterprise – this is a synthesis of the production structure and management structure.
The production system has several structures that are formed at the levels (stages) of production and have their own distinctive features. For example, the organizational and production structure of a workshop consists of production sections, and the organizational and production structure of sections consists of workplaces for performers of the labor process.
The control system, reflecting the structuring of production, is also characterized by a multiplicity of structures that ensure the management of objects at various levels of the hierarchical system. So the workshop (and moreover, each workshop separately) has its own organizational management structure, which is not at all similar to the management structure that the production site has.
Organizational structure diagram. The structure of an organization and its parts (elements) is described by a “diagram language”, which serves as a visual means of reflecting on paper all structural cells (units, divisions), levels of the production (and management) hierarchy and relationships of subordination.
There are two types of such connections:
Linear connection;
Functional connection.
The linear communication channel serves line managers (director, his deputies, shop managers, production foremen, foremen). Direct and feedback communication is carried out through this channel (line). The functional communication channel serves functional managers (heads of services, departments, sectors, etc.) and specialists (technologists, designers, economists, lawyers, etc.).
The construction of an organizational structure diagram is still not strictly regulated and therefore there are various diagram figures in both vertical (more compact) and horizontal (stretched) images. However, the structure diagram should clearly reflect the stages (levels) of production and management with the links (cells) located on them. In most cases, the organizational structure of an enterprise has a three-level structure (Fig. 7.6.2.):
Rice. 7.6.2.
To provide a schematic representation of the organizational structure of an enterprise, you can propose a kind of layout consisting of lines on which links, divisions, and cells are located:
Developing a diagram of the organizational structure of an enterprise is a creative process that has certain technical difficulties if we are talking about a large enterprise with hundreds of divisions and links that must be placed on the diagram in compliance with the designated rules. Most often, in this case, the diagram shows the management structure at the highest level (director, his deputies, chief specialist services, departments, bureaus) and indicates the line of workshops without developing their structure, the diagram of which is drawn up in each workshop.
For a small enterprise, developing an organizational chart is not technically difficult. Such a diagram usually shows all, without exception, divisions, units, cells that exist in the enterprise, in compliance with the rules for their presentation on the organizational structure diagram (structural lines, steps, linear and functional connections). The diagram of the organizational structure of an enterprise not only provides a clear picture of its structure, but also serves as the most important object of study, analysis and rationalization of the current structure.
Forms of management Modern trends and tools for building Organizational organizational structures; b) carried out by temporarily acting structures... are recorded in the protocol. CONCEPT AND STRUCTURE FORENSIC METHODS Methodology...
For functional management structure characterized by the creation of structural units, each of which has its own clearly defined, specific task and responsibilities (Fig. 2.5). In this structure, each management body, as well as the executive, is specialized in performing certain types of management activities (functions). A staff of specialists is created who are responsible only for a certain area of work.
Rice. 2.5. Functional structure of organization management
The functional management structure is based on the principle of complete management: compliance with the instructions of the functional body within its competence is mandatory for departments.
Advantages of a functional management structure:
High competence of specialists responsible for performing specific functions;
Specialization of departments in performing a certain type of management activity, eliminating duplication, performing management tasks for individual services.
Disadvantages of this type of organizational structure:
Violation of the principle of full management, the principle of unity of command;
Lengthy procedure for making management decisions;
Difficulties in maintaining constant relationships between various functional services;
Reducing the responsibility of performers for work, since each performer receives instructions from several managers;
Inconsistency and duplication of instructions and orders received by performers;
Each functional manager and functional unit considers their tasks to be paramount, poorly coordinating them with the overall goals set for the organization.
So, for example, in OJSC AVTOVAZ, the functional management structure is used in the generalized structure, auxiliary production, and machine tool building. An example of a functional organizational structure is presented in Fig. 2.6.
Rice. 2.6. Example of a functional organizational structure
To a certain extent, the so-called linear-staff and linear-functional management structures, which provide for the functional division of managerial labor in departments of different levels with a combination of linear and functional management principles, help eliminate the shortcomings of linear and functional organizational structures. In this case, functional units can carry out their decisions through line managers (in a linear-staff structure) or, within the limits of delegated special powers, communicate them to specialized services or individual performers at a lower level (in a linear-functional management structure).
At the core line-staff management structure There is a linear structure, but under line managers special units (headquarters services) are created that specialize in performing certain management functions (Fig. 2.7). These services do not have the right to make decisions, but only provide, through their specialists, a more qualified performance by the line manager of his duties. The activities of functional specialists in these conditions come down to searching for the most rational options for solving problems. The final decision-making and transfer of it to subordinates for execution is carried out by the line manager. In conditions of this type of management structure, the principle of unity of command is preserved. An important task of line managers in this case becomes coordinating the actions of functional services (units) and directing them towards the general interests of the organization.
Rice. 2.7. Line-staff structure of organization management
Unlike the line-staff linear-functional structure, the most common structure of the hierarchical type, still widely used throughout the world, is based on functional units that can themselves give orders to lower levels, but not on all, but on a limited range of issues determined by their functional specialization.
In addition to the linear principles of management, the basis of linear-functional structures is formed by the specialization of management activities by functional subsystems of the organization (marketing, research and development, production, finance and economics, personnel, etc.).
Organizations designed according to a linear-functional principle, while maintaining the rigidity and simplicity of linear structures, acquired highly productive, specialized management potential. Freeing line departments from solving general organizational management tasks made it possible to sharply increase the scale of their activities and thereby realize the resulting positive effect. The implementation of management functions on the basis of delineation and specialization of management ensured an increase in the quality of management of the entire organization, an increase in the efficiency of control of linear units and the achievement of general organizational goals.
The transfer of current management to the heads of line departments and the functional division of the management activities of the organization as a whole allow top management to focus on solving strategic problems of enterprise development and ensure the most rational interaction with the external environment. For the first time, the organizational structure acquires some strategic potential, and management acquires the conditions for its implementation.
The undoubted advantage of the organizational structures under consideration is their flexibility. The linear-functional organization provides sufficient opportunities for restructuring linear units as the organization develops, technology changes and the separation of related industries. With the expansion of the enterprise, both the “set” of functional departments and the content of the tasks performed change. Thus, in the recent past, HR departments interacted relatively weakly with the departments of labor organization and wages; nowadays, these departments are increasingly merging into a single personnel management service of the company.
Thus, the main advantages of linear-functional structures include:
Stimulating business and professional specialization under this management structure;
High production response of the organization, since it is built on the narrow specialization of production and the qualifications of specialists;
Reduce duplication of efforts in functional areas;
Improved coordination of activities in functional areas.
Despite the widest distribution of linear-functional management structures, we note at the same time their significant disadvantages:
Erosion of the developed development strategy of the organization: divisions may be interested in realizing their local goals and objectives to a greater extent than the entire organization as a whole, that is, setting their own goals above the goals of the entire organization;
Lack of close relationships and interaction at the horizontal level between departments;
A sharp increase in the workload of the head of the organization and his deputies due to the need to coordinate the actions of different functional services;
An overly developed vertical interaction system;
Loss of flexibility in the relationships between management staff due to the use of formal rules and procedures;
Weak innovative and entrepreneurial response of an organization with such an organizational management structure;
Inadequate response to environmental demands;
Difficulty and slowdown in the transfer of information, which affects the speed and timeliness of management decisions; the chain of commands from the manager to the executor becomes too long, which complicates communication.
The figurative name of the positions of a hierarchical type structure - “fox holes of managers” - implies that the internal interests of individual divisions often run counter to corporate interests and it is very difficult to understand what is being done in each of the individual management divisions, and each head of such a division, as a rule, carefully hides what is happening in his “kitchen.”
One of the disadvantages of linear-functional management structures is the “bottleneck effect”. Its essence is the development of predominantly vertical connections within the framework of a functional approach, which raises the solution of problems arising at various levels of the organization to its main leader. As a result, managers' attempts to concentrate on solving strategic problems are drowned in operational work and routine. And this is not the fault of the manager, but the flaw of the organizational system used.
Considering all the above disadvantages, it is important to find out under what conditions they are smoothed out:
Linear-functional management structures are most effective where the management apparatus performs routine, frequently repeated and rarely changing tasks and functions, that is, in organizations operating in conditions of solving standard management problems;
The advantages of these structures are manifested in the management of organizations with a mass or large-scale type of production, in organizations that produce a relatively limited range of products;
They are most effective under a cost-based economic mechanism, when production is least susceptible to progress in the field of science and technology;
Linear-functional structures are successfully used in organizations operating in a stable external environment.
For the conditions for the effective functioning of an organization with a linear-functional management structure, it is important to have normative and regulatory documents that determine the correspondence between the responsibilities and powers of managers at different levels and divisions; compliance with controllability standards, especially among first managers and their deputies, who form rational information flows, decentralize operational production management, and take into account the specifics of the work of various divisions.
At OJSC AVTOVAZ, the basic type of management structure, according to which most structural divisions are organized, remains linear-functional. An example of a linear-functional management structure is presented in Fig. 2.8.
Rice. 2.8. An example of a linear-functional management structure
Historically and logically, the importance of linear-functional structures in the development of an economic system cannot be overestimated. It is in this case that the enterprise tests its capabilities in establishing mass production, and the “superior-subordinate” relationship is brought to a level adequate to the requirements of the external environment.
The American corporation General Motors was one of the first organizations that managed to overcome the limitations of a linear-functional structure. In the conditions of diversified production, it was decided to significantly expand the independence of large divisions and give them the right to respond to market conditions themselves, turning them into “profit centers.” This bold management decision was proposed and implemented by company president A. Sloan, who called the new structure “coordinated decentralization.” Subsequently, this organizational structure was called divisional.
Divisional (departmental) structures- the most advanced types of organizational structures of a hierarchical type, sometimes they are even considered something between bureaucratic (mechanistic) and adaptive structures. In some cases, these structures can be found in the literature under the name “fractional structures”.
Divisional structures arose as a reaction to the shortcomings of linear-functional structures. The need for their reorganization was caused by a sharp increase in the size of organizations, the complication of technological processes, diversification and internationalization of activities. In a dynamically changing external environment, it is impossible to manage dissimilar or geographically distant divisions of an organization from a single center.
Divisional structures- these are structures based on the allocation of large autonomous production and economic units (departments, divisions) and the corresponding levels of management with the provision of operational and production independence to the units, with the transfer of responsibility for making a profit to this level.
A department (division) is an organizational commodity-market unit that has the necessary functional units of its own.
The department is given responsibility for the production and marketing of certain products and generating profits, as a result of which the management personnel of the upper echelon of the organization are freed up to solve strategic problems. The operational level of management concentrates on the production of a specific product or on the implementation of activities in a certain territory and is separated from the strategic level, which is responsible for the growth and development of the organization as a whole. As a rule, the top management of the organization has no more than 4-6 centralized functional units. The highest governing body of the organization reserves the right to exercise strict control over corporate-wide issues of development strategy, research and development, finance, investment, etc. Consequently, divisional structures are characterized by a combination of centralized strategic planning in the upper echelons of management and decentralized activities of departments, at the level at which operational management is carried out and which are responsible for generating profit. In connection with the transfer of responsibility for profit to the level of departments (divisions), they began to be considered as “profit centers”, actively using the freedom given to them to increase operational efficiency. In connection with the above, divisional structures of the board are usually understood as a combination of centralized coordination with decentralized management (decentralization while maintaining coordination and control) or, in accordance with the statement of A. Sloan, as “coordinated decentralization.”
The divisional approach ensures a closer connection between production and consumers, significantly accelerating its response to changes occurring in the external environment.
Divisional structures are characterized by full responsibility of department heads for the results of the activities of the units they head. In this regard, the most important place in the management of organizations with a divisional structure is occupied not by the heads of functional departments, but by the managers heading production departments.
The structuring of the organization into departments is carried out according to three principles:
Product - taking into account the characteristics of the products manufactured or services provided;
By targeting a specific consumer;
Regional - depending on the territories served.
There are three types of divisional structures:
Divisional productive structures;
Customer-oriented organizational structures;
Divisional-regional structures.
With a divisional product structure, the authority to manage the production and sales of any product or service is transferred to one manager, who is responsible for this type of product (Fig. 2.9).
Rice. 2.9. Product divisional structure
Heads of functional services (production, procurement, technical, accounting, marketing, etc.) must report to the manager for this product.
Organizations with such a structure are able to quickly respond to changes in competitive conditions, technology and consumer demand. Activities for the production of a certain type of product are under the leadership of one person, which improves coordination of work.
A possible disadvantage of the product structure is an increase in costs due to duplication of the same types of work for different types of products. Each product department has its own functional divisions.
An example of a product divisional structure at JSC AVTOVAZ is the service of the vice president for technical development, which includes: a scientific and technical center (STC), which ensures the creation and production of new and modernized car models; production of technological equipment (PTO), manufacturing machine tool products; production of molds and dies (PPSh), which produces technological equipment (Fig. 2.10).
Rice. 2.10. Example of a product divisional structure
When creating consumer-oriented organizational structures, units are grouped around a certain number of consumers (for example, the army and civilian industries, industrial, technical and cultural products). The goal of such an organizational structure is to serve the needs of specific customers as well as an organization that serves just one group. An example of an organization that uses consumer-oriented management structures is commercial banks. The main groups of service consumers in this case will be: individual clients, organizations, other banks, international financial organizations.
If the organization’s activities are extended to a number of regions in which it is necessary to use different strategies, then it is advisable to form a divisional management structure on a territorial basis, i.e. use divisional-regional structure(Fig. 2.11). All activities of the organization in a particular region must be subordinate to the appropriate manager responsible to the highest governing body of the organization. The divisional-regional structure facilitates the solution of problems associated with local customs, peculiarities of legislation and the socio-economic environment of the region. Territorial division creates conditions for training management personnel of departments (divisions) directly on site.
Rice. 2.11. Divisional-regional structure
An example of a specific regional divisional structure implemented at JSC AVTOVAZ in the supply management system for the domestic market is presented in Fig. 2.12.
Rice. 2.12. An example of the regional divisional structure of JSC AVTOVAZ
As organizations develop and enter international markets, the gradual transformation of national corporations into transnational ones, the achievement of these corporations at the highest level of their development leads to the creation of global corporations, where divisional structures are transformed into international and transnational ones. In this case, the organization stops relying on activities within the country and is restructured structurally in such a way that international operations have a predominant importance in the national market.
We can identify the most common types of international divisional structures, the construction of which is based on a global approach.
Globally oriented product (commodity) a structure based on a divisional structure with divisions based on product characteristics, each of which independently operates on the entire world market, is shown in Fig. 2.13. This structure is used by organizations with highly diversified products and products that differ significantly in their production technology, marketing methods, sales channels, etc. It is applicable in organizations where the differences between the types of products produced are more significant than the differences between geographical regions, in which these products are sold. This type of structure contributes to the international orientation of the organization, however, they are characterized (though, like any other type of divisional structure) by weakening coordination between the individual divisions of the organization and increasing duplication of their activities.
Rice. 2.13. Globally oriented product (commodity) structure
Globally oriented regional structure is also based on a divisional structure using the geographical principle of construction (Fig. 2.14), and the national market is also considered as one of the segments of the regional division. It is most advisable to use this type of structure by organizations in which regional differences are of fundamental importance. Often, globally oriented regional organizational structures are used in industries with technologically slowly changing products (beverages, cosmetics, food, petroleum products). The advantage of such a structure is the close interrelation of geographical regions and coordination of activities within their boundaries, and the disadvantages are the weak coordination of the work of individual units and the high degree of duplication of their activities.
Rice. 2.14. Globally oriented regional structure
Mixed (hybrid) structure It is characterized by the fact that, along with an emphasis on a specific product (geographical region, functions), structural connections of the territorial and functional (product and functional or territorial and product) type are built into it. This type of structure arose due to the fact that each of the above structures can have strengths and weaknesses. There is no single organizational structure that could be considered ideal. The organizational structure of management must correspond to the specific operating conditions of the organization, and for large economic entities they are quite complex and varied and cannot be adequate to any organizational structure in its pure form. The mixed structure is currently very popular among American multinational corporations (especially those with highly diversified activities).
Summarizing the consideration of divisional structures, it should be noted their advantages, disadvantages and conditions for the most effective use. The advantages of these types of structures are:
The use of divisional structures allows an organization to pay as much attention to a specific product, consumer or geographic region as a small specialized organization does, as a result of which it is possible to respond more quickly to changes occurring in the external environment and adapt to changing conditions;
This type of management structure focuses on achieving the final results of the organization’s activities (production of specific types of products, meeting the needs of a specific consumer, saturation of a specific regional market with goods);
Reducing the management complexity faced by senior managers;
Separation of operational management from strategic management, as a result of which the organization's top management concentrates on strategic planning and management;
Transfer of responsibility for profit to the division level, decentralization of operational management decisions;
Improved communications;
Development of breadth of thinking, flexibility of perception and entrepreneurship of heads of departments (divisions).
At the same time, the disadvantages of this type of organizational structure should be emphasized:
Divisional management structures have led to an increase in hierarchy, i.e., vertical management. They demanded the formation of intermediate levels of management to coordinate the work of departments, groups, etc.;
Contrasting the goals of departments with the general goals of the organization’s development, the discrepancy between the interests of the “tops” and “bottoms” in a multi-level hierarchy;
The possibility of conflicts between departments, in particular in the event of a shortage of centrally distributed key resources;
Low coordination of the activities of departments (divisions), headquarters services are disunited, horizontal connections are weakened;
Inefficient use of resources, inability to use them fully due to the assignment of resources to a specific department;
Increased costs for maintaining the management staff due to duplication of the same functions in departments and a corresponding increase in the number of personnel;
Difficulty in exercising control from top to bottom;
Multi-level hierarchy and within the departments (divisions) themselves, the effect of all the shortcomings of linear functional structures;
A possible limitation in the professional development of department specialists, since their teams are not as large as in the case of using linear-functional structures at the organizational level.
It should be noted that the most effective use of divisional management structures is in large-sized organizations, when expanding production and economic operations, in organizations with a wide range of products, in organizations with highly diversified production, in organizations in which production is weakly susceptible to fluctuations in market conditions, with intensive penetration of organizations into foreign markets.
The existence of many varieties of divisional structures is due to the many possible states of an economic object under different input and output production conditions and the presence of business restrictions.
It is extremely rare to encounter a situation in which an organizational structure of the required type is immediately formed. This is possible when organizing a completely new enterprise or with a clearly modeled process of reorganizing the production and organizational structure.
However, we note that reorganization of the structure occurs when management problems create a “critical mass” and must be resolved by any means. This is the impetus for the beginning of the evolutionary development of a new structure through soft change or through hard reorganizations.
The accumulated experience in the theory and practice of reorganizing the management structure shows that the feasibility of moving to a divisional organization is determined by the potential of the enterprise and presupposes the presence of several markets with different specifics. The transition process occurs when the previous structure accumulates a sufficient number of unresolved problems, and another reorganization is inevitable. Divisional structures are also subject to transformation. Thus, improving the organizational structure is a natural, necessary and constant process for all enterprises, where everything is determined by the specific situation, goals, values, experience, and knowledge of managers. Familiarity with theoretical models gives an idea of the organizational structure system in which each company finds the most convenient starting scheme for itself.
As indicated in the work, there is no doubt that the basis for the construction and development of any systems is a linear model with a functional distribution of relationships. However, in management theory there is a dependence - the more structurally complex the management system, the easier it is to organize and regulate management flows. In this regard, distinguishing between schemes for organizing relationships between a set of system elements (schemes such as linear, linear-functional, divisional, functional, etc.), it should be noted that there are new trends in the formation of structures that correspond to the changing principles of the effective functioning of economic systems.
Since linear-functional and divisional organizational structures are most common in the modern economy, including the Russian one, we will conduct a comparative analysis of their main economic parameters. This will make it possible not only to clarify the strengths and weaknesses of these structures, but also to formulate their general assessment and role in the effective development of enterprises (Table 2.4).
Table 2.4 Comparative analysis of economic characteristics of organizational structures
Thus, the widespread use of linear-functional and divisional structures of organizations is quite justified. These structures are quite adaptive, moderately rigid and stable, allow the use of management personnel of diverse quality and create conditions for professional growth.
It is important that such organizations inherently assume the possibility of restructuring both in the event of changes in the external environment and in the event of a change in the management team or goals.
Let us consider the process of evolution from the simplest (linear) structure to a divisional one from the point of view of the influence of external and internal factors and identifying patterns of structural changes.
As we have already determined earlier, one of the features of the divisional structure of product orientation is the duplication of functions against the backdrop of expanded powers of the heads of sales departments. This structure makes it possible to improve the system’s response to local minor market changes by reducing the chain of command and concentrating operational information in decision-making centers. The chain of changes in the organizational structure during the transition from a conventional (functional structure) to a divisional structure can be described by the initial, for example functional, and final divisional structures (Fig. 2.15-2.17).
Rice. 2.15. Functional structure of the enterprise
Rice. 2.16. Divisional structure of the enterprise
Rice. 2.17. Matrix structure model
Sales divisions must undergo reorganization, to which warehouse and transport groups, as well as marketing groups, have been transferred. At the same time, the headquarters marketing department is retained, which in the divisional structure no longer deals with local markets, but with market technologies, company-wide strategy and problems of internal interaction. Issues of economic planning are distributed between divisions and headquarters, the system-analytical and software complex (ACS) remains common. Duplication of functions across departments allows for improved management efficiency and coordination of decisions. However, such a system must have an appropriate level of authority and management resources without unnecessary duplication of functions, which at certain levels can become a negative factor.
In Russian practice, a typical divisional structure is often called an “internal holding” and acts as a transitional step to an external holding. It can be stated that it really eliminates many contradictions, since it breaks up a complex, clumsy organization into separate blocks, in which “local” problems are solved in their own way.
Currently, there are many structures that are essentially a type of divisional structure, in which, for example, the differentiation of divisions is carried out not according to a functional, but according to a design principle, or organizations in which independent business units (having legal status) act as elements of the structure. In this case, it is believed that we are talking about a network, cooperative structure. This does not entirely correspond to the concept of a division, but reflects its more advanced structure. On the other hand, domestic practice of management consulting shows that it was impossible to maintain and even increase production volumes at some enterprises in the first half of the 1990s. allowed the transition to a divisional management structure (delegation of powers and responsibilities to middle managers, transition to internal cost accounting, etc.). Although such a transition for the manager personally is fraught with the transfer of “administrative resources,” which was considered the main factor, into “the wrong hands,” which could pose a threat for the manager to be relegated to the background and become unnecessary.
Further development of the economic system moves the structure into the area of flexible systems, based either on integrated structures in the form of business units, or on adaptation to changes (matrix structures or their analogues). At the same time, the matrix organizational structure involves the formation of a flexible system through the distribution of main functions and dual management. Creating such interaction (dual management) requires careful coordination of the balance of interests with maximum commonality of goals and high corporate culture. The features of such structures will be discussed further.
The most developed type of divisional management structures can be called organizational structures based on strategic business units (strategic economic centers). They are used in organizations if they have a large number of independent departments with a similar profile of activity. In this case, to coordinate their work, special intermediate management bodies are created, located between the departments and senior management. These bodies are headed by deputies of the organization's senior management (usually vice presidents), and they are given the status of strategic business units.
Strategic business units are responsible for developing the organization's strategic positions in one or more areas of business. They are responsible for choosing areas of activity, developing competitive products and marketing strategies. Once the product range is developed, responsibility for implementing the program falls on the divisions of ongoing business activities, i.e., divisions.
The analysis of the varieties of hierarchical organizational structures showed that the transition to more flexible, adaptive management structures, better adapted to dynamic changes and production requirements, was objectively necessary and natural.
(Materials are based on: Fundamentals of Management. Edited by A. I. Afonichkin. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2007)
The organizational structure of any enterprise has its own characteristics. A clear structure shows which areas of work are duplicated and which are left unattended. This helps optimize work, reduce costs, and increase the efficiency of production costs. See what types of organizational structures there are, how they differ, what their strengths and weaknesses are.
The organizational structure of an enterprise is a document that schematically reflects the composition and hierarchy of divisions. It gives an idea of the enterprise itself, allows you to see its work from the inside and trace the relationships between employees, departments, areas and management, their responsibilities, areas of competence, rights and obligations.
Goals of creation:
- Coordination of management, identification of superiors and subordinates, managers and performers.
- Distribution of rights and responsibilities for representatives of all levels of the organization.
Types of enterprise structures
Informal – often has no description. It is formed spontaneously on the basis of personal preferences, taking into account traditions and unwritten rules during interactions within the team. The connections built in an informal system are often more rigid than in a formal one; it is much more difficult to change or transform these connections.
In the formal hierarchy and relationships within the team are prescribed in the form of legal requirements, taking into account the goals, norms and standards of production, and are also as impersonal as possible.
There is also a division into mechanistic and organic company structures. Mechanistic provides for a rigid hierarchy, the predominance of vertical connections, many horizontal divisions, a directive method of management, a single leadership center that makes almost all management decisions individually. In general, this is a rather complex scheme; communications between participants are regulated and limited, mainly, to orders and instructions.
Organic is distinguished by an extensive communication network between a small number of levels, the absence of a single control center; moreover, management is very flexible and quickly adapts to changing circumstances. A partnership style of communication and consensus decision-making prevail here. A significant number of decisions at the lower level can be made independently. This is what an ideal democratic society looks like.
The vast majority of industrial companies use the following formalized mechanistic organizational structures.
Linear
Here a strict hierarchy and horizontal subordination of the lower to the higher is assumed. The manager alone makes decisions and manages his subordinates. In general, the organization repeats the company’s production hierarchy; division takes into account the specifics of production. It is used mainly by small companies producing simple products.
How to analyze the organizational structure and make sure that it corresponds to the real state of affairs
If the company has already described an organizational structure, you need to make sure that it is not outdated and shows how orders are actually given, decisions are made and responsibilities are distributed in the company. It happens that a business is developing dynamically, while management does not pay attention to formalizing the management system; they may “forget” to include positions, entire services, or even recently acquired business areas in the organizational structure. Only when they begin to form a hierarchy of financial responsibility centers do they suddenly remember that “here we have a branch in Samara!”
Make sure that the organizational structure reflects the functions and tasks of significant job units. If there is no clear distribution of functions by position, then the structure itself may be useless. .
It repeats the linear one, but the boss has an additional headquarters for collecting and analyzing information, developing management decisions, and planning. Representatives of the headquarters do not make decisions, but only provide information and analytical support for the activities of the leader, relieving him of part of the load.
Functional organizational structure of the enterprise
Departments are formed in the company - financial, marketing, production, etc. Each department has its own head. Each department performs its own function in the work of the company. This division makes it possible to obtain functional managers-managers who specialize in their areas. The functional organizational structure of the company is effective in mass production or service, where there is no need for operational management and constant development of new solutions.
|
Advantages |
Flaws |
|
|
Linear construction allows you to tightly manage the company, and functional managers take on the task of creating work standards through instructions, schedules and regulations. Typically, functional managers do not give orders, but work on issues related to the launch of new products.
|
Advantages |
Flaws |
|
|
The company is divided into production departments according to areas depending on the selected criterion. This may be a territorial, product, consumer or other principle. The formed division is distinguished by great independence; within it, functional managers report to the head of the division, who reports to the head office. Production issues are decided by the head of the division, the head office is engaged in strategic planning, development of new products, and research.
|
Advantages |
Flaws |
|
|
In the 70s of the 20th century, companies with organic structures began to appear. These include the following options.
It is created to solve a specific problem by a specially selected group of specialists. After implementation, the group disbands. It is used primarily in the development of innovations, at the intersection of several science-intensive areas. In project groups, closer personal connections are formed, which have a positive impact on the quality of work of all group members.
The founder of this scheme is the Toyota company. The company puts the creation of innovations on stream, therefore, to support such work, targeted programs are created that deal with certain issues. If the issue is limited in time, then a project group is created. Subordination is double - to the program manager and to the head of the functional unit whose employees work under the program. For the target program, a special functional committee is formed, no more than five people. A secretary is appointed to conduct the affairs of the committee. The committee periodically reviews issues that require solutions, creates project groups, and establishes rules for relationships between departments, both vertically and horizontally.
|
Advantages |
Flaws |
|
|
A direct analogy is the working cooperatives of the late 80s. Under this scheme, teams make decisions and coordinate their activities independently. There are developed horizontal communications. For their activities, the teams attract various specialists. If a team is divided into functional units, then it is called cross-functional and resembles a matrix structure. If there is no such division, then it is called a brigade and resembles a design one. The scheme shows maximum efficiency with a high level of specialists and good technical equipment.
What requirements must the organization's structure satisfy?
The structure being developed must take into account the characteristics of the enterprise, the nature of the work, the type of products produced and many other factors. It must be rational, optimal and economical.
Basic development principles:
- Balance between a rigid hierarchy and the ability to remain flexible when making decisions. The structure must have the ability to self-organize, set new goals and remain active.
- The set of operations performed within the company must be stable and cyclical, so as not to develop new procedures each time. Key points of operation must be organized.
- Paths for transmitting management decisions should be as short as possible, and the decisions themselves should be made on the basis of competence, responsibility and availability of information.
- The distribution of responsibilities should be in accordance with the processes being performed.
The forms and methods of implementing the principles of forming organizational structures make it possible to distinguish several types. Thus, according to the level (degree) of differentiation and integration of management functions, two classes of structures are distinguished:
- mechanistic, or bureaucratic, pyramidal, based on a centralist type of integration;
- organic, or adaptive, multidimensional, based on a combination of centralist and free types of integration.
Mechanistic (bureaucratic) pyramidal structures
Sustainability and rationalism were priority parameters for the formation of bureaucratic management structures of organizations already at the beginning of the 20th century. The concept of bureaucracy, formulated then by the German sociologist Max Weber, contains the following characteristics of a rational structure:
- a clear division of labor, which leads to the emergence of highly qualified specialists in each position;
- hierarchy of management levels, in which each lower level is controlled by a higher one and is subordinate to it;
- the presence of an interconnected system of generalized formal rules and standards that ensures the uniformity of employees’ performance of their duties and the coordination of various tasks;
- formal impersonality in the performance of official duties by officials;
- hiring in strict accordance with qualification requirements; protection of employees from arbitrary dismissals.
Pyramidal bureaucratic structures include: linear, functional, linear-functional, line-staff, divisional organizational structures.
Linear organizational management structure
The linear structure implements the principle of unity of command and centralism, provides for the performance by one manager of all management functions, and the subordination of all lower divisions to him with the rights of unity of command (Fig. 11.1).
This is one of the simplest organizational management structures. In linear structures, the hierarchy is clearly visible: at the head of each structural unit is a manager, vested with full powers, exercising sole management of the employees subordinate to him and concentrating in his hands all management functions.
With linear management, each link and each subordinate has one manager, through whom all management commands simultaneously pass through one channel. In this case, management levels are responsible for the results of all activities of managed objects. We are talking about the object-by-object allocation of managers, each of whom performs all types of work, develops and makes decisions related to the management of a given object.
Since in a linear management structure decisions are passed down the chain from top to bottom, and the head of the lowest level of management is subordinate to a manager at a higher level above him, a kind of hierarchy of managers of this particular organization is formed (for example, section manager, department head, store director, site foreman, engineer , shop manager, director of the enterprise). In this case, the principle of unity of command applies, the essence of which is that subordinates carry out the orders of only one leader. In a linear management structure, each subordinate has his own boss, and each boss has several subordinates. This structure operates in small organizations, and in large ones - at the lowest level of management (section, team, etc.).
The linear organizational management structure has its advantages and disadvantages (Table 11.1).
Table 11.1
| Advantages | Flaws |
|---|---|
|
|
In functional structures, functional units are created that are endowed with authority and responsibility for the results of their activities. Linear links differ from functional ones in the integration of facility management functions, a set of powers and responsibilities. The bottom line is that the performance of certain functions on specific issues is assigned to specialists, i.e. Each management body (or executive) is specialized in performing certain types of management activities. In an organization, as a rule, specialists of the same profile are united in specialized structural units (departments), for example, a planning department, accounting department, etc. Thus, the overall task of managing an organization is divided, starting from the middle level, according to functional criteria. Hence the name - functional management structure (Fig. 11.2). Instead of universal managers who must understand and perform all management functions, a staff of specialists appears who have high competence in their field and are responsible for a certain area (for example, planning and forecasting).
The functional structure implements the principle of dividing and consolidating management functions between structural units and provides for the subordination of each lower-level linear unit to several higher-level managers who implement management functions. The advantages and disadvantages of this structure are presented in Table. 11.2.
Table 11.2
| Advantages | Flaws |
|---|---|
|
|
Experts point to a close relationship between the size of the company and the organizational structure of management. Expanding the size of an enterprise and increasing the complexity of internal relationships create conditions and also necessitate the adoption of complex decisions aimed at restructuring the organization of intra-company management; an increase in the size of the company leads to deepening structural differentiation (branches, management levels, organizational units).
In turn, this leads to an increase in administrative and management costs, as well as costs associated with coordination, but does not reduce the advantage of homogeneity of large firms, which are due to the fact that these firms are managed from a single center. However, the structural differentiation characteristic of large firms requires the use of indirect (economic) methods of management and coordination of the activities of various organizational units.
Types of committees
There is no doubt about the advantage of using committees in such work that requires coordination of actions of management units, consultation in decision making, determination of powers and responsibilities, and development of a work schedule.
New types of organizational structures
Currently, such types of structures are developing as network and virtual organizations, organizations with “internal” markets, multidimensional organizations, market-oriented organizations, entrepreneurial organizations, participatory, adhocratic, intellectual, training organizations, circular corporations, etc.
A network structure means that an organization disaggregates its core functions (production, sales, finance, research and development) among separate contract companies, brokered by a small parent organization. The organizational diagram of a hypothetical network organization is presented in Fig. 11.10.
Network organizations differ from other types of organizations in a number of ways. First, network organizations rely more on market mechanisms than on administrative forms of managing resource flows. Second, many newly developed networks involve a more empowered and engaged role for participants. Thirdly, in an increasing number of industries, networks are an association of organizations based on cooperation and mutual ownership of shares by group members - manufacturers, suppliers, trading and financial companies.
Closely related to the network structure is the so-called virtual organization or structure. Unlike traditional mergers and acquisitions, partners in virtual organizations share costs, leverage each other's manufacturing expertise, and access to international markets.
The distinctive features of network virtual organizations of the future can be presented as follows:
- using information technology to establish strong contacts;
- joining forces to realize new opportunities;
- lack of traditional boundaries - with close cooperation between manufacturers, suppliers, and clients, it is difficult to determine where one company begins and another ends;
- the main advantages and disadvantages of such organizations are given in table. 11.7;
- trust - partners share a sense of “common destiny”, understanding that the fate of each of them depends on the other;
- Excellence - Because each partner brings a different “core competency” to the alliance, it is possible to create an organization that is modern in every way.
Table 11.7
| Advantages | Flaws |
|---|---|
|
|
Multidimensional organization. This term was first used in 1974 by W. Goggin when describing the structure of the Dow Corning corporation. Multidimensional organizations represent an alternative to the traditional type of organizational structures. As we know, in traditional organizational structures, the allocation of organizational units occurs, as a rule, according to one of the following criteria:
- functional (finance, production, marketing);
- grocery (for example, factories or production units that produce various goods and services);
- market (say, by regional principle or by type of consumer).
Depending on the specifics of the activity, one or another criterion prevails in building an organizational structure. Over time, under the influence of external changes and changes in the company itself (its size, scale of activity, other internal factors), both the organizational structure of the company and the prevailing principle of separating divisions may change. For example, with entry into regional markets, a traditional linear-functional structure can be transformed into a regional divisional one. At the same time, reorganization is a rather lengthy and complex process.
In a dynamic external environment, the company must be able to instantly respond to changes, so a structure is required that does not need to be rebuilt. Such a structure is a multidimensional organization.
Multidimensional organizations are organizations in which structural units simultaneously perform several functions (as if in several dimensions) (Fig. 11.11), for example:
- provide their production activities with the necessary resources;
- produce a specific type of product or service for a specific consumer or market;
- provide sales (distribution) of their products and serve a specific consumer.
The basis of a multidimensional organization is an autonomous working group (unit), which implements all three functions: supply, production, distribution.
Such a group can be a “profit center”. Sometimes these can be independent companies.
Divisions are easily included in and out of the organizational structure, their viability depends on the ability to produce goods and services that are in demand. Product- or service-oriented units pay internal and external suppliers on a contractual basis. Functional divisions (production, warehouse, personnel, accounting) provide services mainly to other divisions of the company, being suppliers for them. Thus, an internal market arises within the organization. Divisions respond flexibly to changes in the needs of internal and external consumers. Consumers automatically control their suppliers. At the same time, the performance indicators of a unit do not depend on the indicators of another unit, which facilitates monitoring and evaluation of the unit’s activities.
The features of multidimensional organizations are:
- division budgets are developed by the divisions themselves, the company invests funds in them or provides loans;
- in multidimensional organizations there is no double subordination, as in a two-dimensional matrix model, the group leadership is united;
- many units within a multidimensional organization may also be multidimensional. Divisions can also be multidimensional even if the organization as a whole is not multidimensional (for example, a regional division of a large corporation may have a multidimensional structure, while the corporation as a whole is a divisional structure);
- there is no need to carry out any reorganization of the organizational structure as a whole and the relationships of autonomous groups; divisions can simply be created, liquidated or modified;
- each division of the organization can be completely autonomous, engaging in recruitment, sales of finished products, etc.;
- the main indicator of the effectiveness of autonomous groups is the profit received; this simplifies the analysis and control of group activities, reduces bureaucratization, and makes the management system more efficient.
The main advantages and disadvantages of multidimensional organizations are given in Table. 11.8.
Table 11.8
| Advantages | Flaws |
|---|---|
|
|
Circular organization. The basic principle of circular organization is democratic hierarchy. Managers are not commanders, but act more like leaders. In contrast to the hierarchical structure of traditional organizations, a circular organization has such features as the absence of undivided authority of managers, the possibility of participation of each member of the organization in management, and collective decision-making in the management of each member of the organization. These principles are implemented through the features of the structure of a circular organization, the main one of which is that a council is formed around each leader (Fig. 11.12).
Each council, in addition to the head of the division, includes his subordinates, as well as third-party representatives - heads of other structural divisions, external clients and consumers, public representatives. Participation in the council is mandatory for managers, but is voluntary for subordinates.
Virtual organization. The emergence of the concept of a virtual organization is associated with the publication in 1992 of the monograph by W. Davidow and M. Malone “The Virtual Corporation”.
A virtual organization is a network that includes the combination of human, financial, material, organizational, technological and other resources of various enterprises and their integration using computer networks. This makes it possible to create a flexible and dynamic organizational system that is best suited for the rapid creation of a new product and its introduction to the market. A virtual organization does not have a geographical center; the functioning of its divisions is coordinated with the help of modern information technologies and telecommunications.
The development of information technology has made it possible to make the physical presence of managers at their workplaces unnecessary. Virtual associations are grouped according to the design principle, i.e. on a temporary basis.
as the need arises to create a certain product, implement a project, or make a profit. The concept of a virtual organization creates fundamentally new business opportunities and is widely used in the 21st century.
An organization with an “internal market”. The evolution of organizational structures is gradually moving from hierarchical bureaucratic structures to matrix and project structures, and in recent decades to decentralized networks and entrepreneurial units.
The concept of "internal markets" is in stark contrast to the hierarchical structure. On the one hand, it allows you to use the potential of entrepreneurship within the organization, on the other hand, it has inherent disadvantages of market relations.
The main principle of such organizations is broad autonomy of departments (both linear and functional). Divisions are viewed as autonomous “internal enterprises” that buy and sell goods and services and engage in intra- and inter-firm communications.
Let us list the principles of the formation and functioning of organizations with “internal markets”:
1. Transformation of the hierarchy into internal business units. All divisions are transformed into autonomous “internal enterprises”, becoming responsible for the results of their activities.
2. Establishment of economic infrastructure, including common systems of reporting, communication and incentives.
3. Targeted stimulation of synergy.
4. All departments are responsible for results, creative entrepreneurship is encouraged. Each division is treated as a small separate company that independently manages its activities and manages its resources. Units are given freedom to conduct business transactions within and outside the organization.
5. Auxiliary functional units are commercial centers that sell their services both to other divisions of the company and to external customers.
So, considering the trends in the development of organizations and organizational structures, it can be noted that a modern organization is:
- market oriented organization. These are organic, rapidly adaptable divisional or matrix organizations in which all their parts (R&D, production, human resources, marketing, procurement, sales, finance, service) are grouped around a market or markets. These are “market driven” organizations;
- business organization, i.e. an organization more focused on growth and on existing opportunities and achievements than on controlled resources;
- participatory organization - an organization that makes maximum use of employee participation in management;
- an adhocratic organization is an organization that uses a high degree of freedom in the actions of employees, their competence and ability to independently solve emerging problems. This is an organic structure of a matrix, project, network type, with a predominance of informal horizontal connections. Often there is no organizational structure at all, the hierarchical structure is constantly changing, vertical and horizontal connections are predominantly informal;
An analysis of the experience of building organizational structures shows that the formation of management units is under the significant influence of the external and internal environment of the organization. This is the main reason for the impossibility of applying a single model of management structure for all organizations. In addition, this impossibility is due to the specific characteristics of a particular organization. The creation of a modern effective management structure should be based on scientific methods and principles of constructing organizational structures.
The main characteristic features of new intra-company management systems should be: long-term orientation; conducting basic research; diversification of operations; innovation activity; maximum use of staff creative activity. Decentralization, reduction of levels in the management apparatus, promotion of workers and their payment depending on real results will become the main directions of changes in the management apparatus.
The process of modifying organizational management structures is developing in a number of specific directions. The following can be identified as the main ones.
1. Implementation of decentralization of production and sales operations. For this purpose, within the largest companies, semi-autonomous or autonomous departments have already been created or are being created, fully responsible for profits and losses. These departments bear full responsibility for organizing production and sales activities. Each department fully finances its activities and enters into partnerships with any organizations on a commercial basis.
2. Innovative expansion, search for new markets and diversification of operations. This direction is implemented through the creation of innovative firms within large companies, focused on the production and independent promotion of new products and technologies in the markets and operating on the principles of “risk financing”. A widespread practice of large companies is the creation of small enterprises in the most promising areas, aimed at gaining strong positions in the market in the shortest possible time.
3. De-bureaucratization, constant increase in the creative production output of personnel. To achieve this, a variety of measures are taken, including the distribution of shares among staff and the formation of enterprises that are collectively owned by their workers.
In modern conditions, not only fundamentally new forms of organization for our country are required, not only fundamentally different management methods, but also transitional modes of activity, the gradual transformation of one structure into another. In order to comprehensively take into account both the internal characteristics of organizations and dynamically changing external circumstances, as well as emerging progressive trends, it is necessary to use a systematic approach to the formation and reorganization of enterprises.
The systematic approach to the formation of an organizational structure is manifested in the following:
- do not lose sight of any of the management tasks, without the solution of which the implementation of goals will be incomplete;
- identify and interconnect, in relation to these tasks, a system of functions, rights and responsibilities along the vertical management;
- explore and institutionalize all connections and relationships along the management horizontal, i.e. to coordinate the activities of different units and management bodies in the implementation of common current tasks and the implementation of promising cross-functional programs;
- to ensure an organic combination of vertical and horizontal management, bearing in mind finding the optimal ratio of centralization and decentralization in management for given conditions.
All this requires a carefully developed step-by-step procedure for designing structures, detailed analysis and definition of a system of goals, thoughtful identification of organizational units and forms of their coordination, and development of relevant documents.
