the structural frame getting organized

1S. M. M. Raza NaqviM.A.J.U.

The Structural Frame

Getting Organized


Structural Assumptions

Organizations exist to achieve established goals and objectives.

Specialization and division of labor increase efficiency and performance.

Appropriate forms of coordination and control are essential.

Organizations work best when rationality prevails.

Structure must align with circumstances. Problems arise from structural deficiencies.


Origins of the Structural Perspective

Frederick Taylor—“scientific management” Efficiency, time and motion studies, etc.

Max Weber—bureaucracy Fixed division of labor Hierarchy of offices Performance rules Separate personal and official property and rights Personnel selected for technical qualifications Employment as primary occupation


Basic Structural Tensions

Differentiation: dividing work, division of labor Integration: coordinating efforts of different

roles and units

Criteria for differentiation: function, product, customer, place, process

Sub-optimization: units focus on local concerns, lose sight of big picture


Vertical Coordination

Authority (the boss makes the decision) Rules and policies Planning and control systems

Performance control (focus on results) vs. action planning (focus on process)


Lateral Coordination

Meetings Task forces Coordinating roles Matrix structures Etc


McDonald’s and Harvard: A Structural Odd Couple

McDonald’s: clearer goals, more centralized, tighter performance controls

Harvard: diffuse goals, highly decentralized, high autonomy for professors

Why have two successful organizations developed such

different structures?


Structural Imperatives

Important issues in developing structure Size Core process Environment Strategy and goals Information technology People: nature of workforce


Summary of the Structural Frame

Structural frame—examine social context of work

Differentiation and integration Structure depends on situation

Simpler, more stable environments simpler, more hierarchical and centralized structures

Changing, turbulent environments more complex, flexible structures


Structure and Restructuring


A Few Structural Dilemmas

Differentiation vs. integration Gaps vs. overlaps Underuse vs. overload Clarity vs. Creativity Excessive autonomy vs. excessive

interdependence Too loose vs. too tight Goalless vs. goal bound Irresponsible vs. unresponsive


Structural Configuration

Mintzberg’s fives

Strategic apex serves the needs of those people

who control the organization; Middle management

the managers who connect the strategic apex with the operating core;

Operating core the people directly related to the

production of services or products; Techno structure

the analysts who design, plan, change or train the operating core;

Support staff the specialists who provide

support to the organization outside of the operating core's activities;


Mintzberg used the components, flows, work constellations and coordination mechanisms to define five configurations

Simple structure Machine

bureaucracy Professional

bureaucracy Divisionalized

form Adhocracy


Simple Structure

Entrepreneurial setting: relies on direct supervision from the strategic apex, the CEO.


Machine bureaucracy

Large organizations: relies on standardization of work processes by the techno-structure.


Professional bureaucracy

The professional services firm: relies on the professionals' standardization of skills and knowledge in the operating core.


Divisionalized form

Multi-divisional organization: relies on standardization of outputs; middle-line managers run independent divisions.


Adhocracy

Project organizations: highly organic structure with little formalization; relies on mutual adjustment as the key coordinating mechanism within and between these project teams.


In later work Mintzberg added two more configurations:

6. Missionary FormCoordination occurs based on commonly held

ideologies or beliefs: standardization of norms.

7. Political FormNo coordination form is dominant: control is based on forming alliances.


Helgesen’s Web of Inclusion (1995)

Emphasis on lateral relationships rather than hierarchy

Leadership at the center rather than at the top

Web builds from the center out through a network of interconnections


Generic Issues in Restructuring

Each component exerts distinct pressures.

Strategic apex pushes for more alignment, centralization. (Superintendent)

Middle managers try to protect autonomy and room to run their own units. (Principals/Dept Heads)

Techno-structure pushes for standardization, believes in measurement and monitoring. (District Staff)

Support staff prefers less hierarchy, more collaboration. (Secretaries/Custodians, etc.)


Why Restructure?

The environment shifts. Technology changes. Organizations grow. Leadership changes. Troubled firms

Impulsive firms Stagnant bureaucracies Headless giants


Organizing Groups and Teams


Group Tasks and Linkages

Situational variables influencing group structures

What are we trying to accomplish? What needs to be done? Who should do what? How should we make decisions? Who is in charge? How do we coordinate efforts?

Continued next slide


Group Tasks and Linkages (II)

Situational variables, cont. What do individuals care about most? What are special skill and talents? What is the relationship? How will we determine success?


Group and Team Structures

Basic structural configurations One boss Dual authority Simple hierarchy Circle All channel

Figure 5-1: One Boss




Figure 5- 2: Dual Authority


Determinants of Successful Teams

Determining an appropriate structure

Nature and degree of task interaction

Geographic distribution of members

Where is autonomy needed, given the team’s goals and objectives?

Should structure be conglomerate, mechanistic, or organic?


Structure and Performance

Six characteristics of effective teams 1. Purpose shaped in light of demand or

opportunity

2. Specific, measurable goals

3. Manageable size

4. Right mix of expertise

5. Common commitment

6. Collectively accountable


Conclusion

Every group evolves a structure—but not always one that fits the task and circumstances.

Hierarchy, top-down structures tend to work for simple, stable tasks.

When the task or environment is more complex, the structure needs to adapt.

Sports images provide a metaphor for structural options.

Vary the structure in response to change. Few groups have flawless members; the right

structure can make optimal use of available resources.

the structural frame getting organized

Documents