Archive for Administrative theory

Understanding Organizational Design

We are talking organization design in our blogs. Organizations are social units with specific purposes. The basic elements of organizations have remained the same over the years. Several disciplines provide the knowledge and the means to understand organizations. However, it is appropriate to look at organizations integrally in multi-disciplinary perspective. Three viewpoints have emerged, over the years in successive stages, each seeking to provide a window on the others. They are the classical approach, three streams stand out: bureaucracy, administrative theory and principles of scientific management. It is important to note that with the passage of time, the viewpoints have been changed or modified, but not replaced as such. Each major contribution brought new knowledge, awareness, tools and techniques to understand the organizations better.

Thus, today we are richer than ever before tin terms of our knowledge about approaches to understand organizations. We take example of portable car DVD players. Today there are so many companies who are manufacturing car DVD players like philips pet1002 , samsung DVD-L100 , JVC kd-avx33.  One person can have all knowledge of such products at one desk.  All the same, more knowledge meant reckoning with more complex variables to comprehend the complexities of human organizations. There is, as yet, no general, unified, universal theory as such. Organizations being diverse and complex in more senses than one, it is difficult, if not meaningless to be too general or too specific about them.

 

Organization structures based on classical bureaucratic principles are hierarchical. But modern organization theories attempted to modify them in the light of experience, changes in technology and knowledge about human behaviour. The centralized structures gave way to some sort of decentralization and thus transformed, partially at least, vertical (tall) organizations into horizontal (flat) ones, reflecting a shift in emphasis from command to consensus based self control. The relative conditions of instability and uncertainty transformed the classical mechanistic forms of management systems into organic ones.

Advertisements

Leave a Comment

Product Versus Functional Forms-2

Lawrence and Lorsch highlighted important factors about specialization and coordination. According to them classical theorists saw specialization in terms of grouping of similar activities, skills or equipment. But this concept overlooks social and psychological consequences.

 

There is an important relationship between a units’s or individual’s assigned activities and the unit members’ patterns of thought and behavior. Functional specialists tend to develop patterns of behavior and thought that are in tune with the demands of their jobs and training. As such these specialists (e.g. industrial engineers and production supervisors) have different ideas and orientation about what is important in getting the job done. For example a cheap medical insurance quotes and term life insurance quotes both are different things. A health care insurance is related to medical insurance only while term life insurance is for life. This is referred to as ‘differentiation’ which means differences in thought patterns and behavior that develop among different specialists in relation to their respective tasks. Differentiation is necessary for functional specialists to perform their jobs effectively. 

 

Differentiation is closely related to achievement of coordination which may also be referred to as ‘integration’. Therefore, alternatively both differentiation and integration coexist. This is possible through effective communication channels. The appropriate mix of differentiation and integration in an organization is considered to be dependent on the nature of external factors such as markets, technology facing an organization as well as the goals of the organization. Since organizational pattern affects individual members, management and show concern to the kind of stress and cross functional conflicts that a certain pattern may produce. 

Leave a Comment

PRODUCT VERSUS FUNCTIONAL FORMS-1

One of the issues in determining the form of an organization relates to the question of whether to group activities primarily by product or by function. Should all specialists in a given function be grouped under a common boss even if they deal in different products or should the various functional specialists working on a single product be grouped together under the same boss?

 

As with the problem of centralization versus decentralization, here too most managers find it difficult to say which choice will be the best one. We can understand this with example of gift shop. In gift shop there are birthday gifts, childrens gifts, get well gifts, holiday gifts. Each gift is having it’s own category but all fall under one heading gift.

 

Lawrence and Lorsch studies from a behavior point of view the criteria used in the past to make the choice to see whether a pattern emerges to provide meaningful clues to resolve the dilemma. Reviewing the literature they found that managers seem to make the choice based on three criteria:

 

1.      Maximum use of special technical knowledge.

2.      Most efficient utilization of machinery and equipment.

3.      The degree and nature of control and coordination required.

 

The major problem with each of these criterion concerns the trade-off involved in these decisions which may lead to unanticipated results and reduced effectiveness.

Leave a Comment

VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE

The classical bureaucratic model of organization though pervasive, has been considered inappropriate to the changing requirements of modern times. A bureaucratic organization was considered to be too inflexible and hierarchical to adapt to the changes occurring in organizations and technology.

 

Parkinson’s laws and Peter Principle highlight the negative aspects of bureaucratic organizations. Whatever be the criticism against bureaucracies, it is realized that to some extent they have become essential. Therefore, writers and organizations began to explore ways to modify the bureaucratic organization structures. In essence these new structures reflect modifications to the classical principles of delegation of authority and standard of control.

 

Delegation extends the scope of the principle to the point of an abiding organization-wide philosophy of management. A tall organization structure means a series of narrow spans of control, and a flat one incorporates wide spans and limited layers of control at horizontal levels. Both the structures have their advantages and disadvantages. They should be viewed on relevant concepts and not as ideal absolutes.

 

A tall structure calls for control and close supervision over the subordinates. But close supervision may not necessarily produce better control. Similarly in a flat organization with wide spans, it may not be possible to keep close control over subordinates but it provides for decentralization, individual initiative and self-control. Tall structures are less favorably viewed it is held that self-control is better than imposed control. The choice in this regard however rests ultimately on management assumptions about individuals and groups in organizations.

Leave a Comment

Centralization and Decentralization-2

Centralization is the process by which the activities of an organization, particularly those regarding decision-making, become concentrated within a particular location and/or group. In political science, this refers to the concentration of a government’s power – both geographically and politically, into a centralized government.

 

Decentralization is the process of dispersing decision-making governance closer to the people or citizen. It includes the dispersal of administration or governance in sectors or areas like engineering, management science, political science, political economy, sociology and economics. Decentralization is also possible in the dispersal of population and employment. Law, science and technological advancements lead to highly decentralized human endeavors. 

 

Alfred P. Slogan played and instrumental role in developing a model of central control of decentralized operations for General motors based on the following twin premises:

 

  1. The responsibility attached to the chief executive of each operation shall in no way be limited. Each such organization headed by its chief executive shall be complete in every necessary function and enabled to exercise its full initiative and logical development (Decentralization of operations)
  2. Certain central organization functions are absolutely essential to the logical development and proper coordination of the Corporation’s activities: Centralized staff services to advise the line on specialized phases of the work, and central measurement of results to check the exercise of delegated responsibility.

blinds, roller shades, woven wood shades

Leave a Comment

Centralization and Decentralization-1

Today we are going to discuss on Centralization and decentralization as part of Organizations. Centralization refers to consolidating decision making in one coordinating head. Decentralization refers to delegation of decision making to subordinate units. Both centralization and decentralization are intended to improve organizational effectiveness. Theories are of little avail in suggesting which is the proper thing to do in a given situation. At one point Ford Motor Company suffered because of centralization and General Motors because of decentralization.

 

If one were discerning enough, it is possible to identify two basic types of centralization and decentralization.

  1. Geographic/territorial concentration (centralization) or dispersal (decentralization) of operation. If all operations are under one roof or in one geographic region, Geographic regions could refer to a city (eg. Bombay), State (Maharashtra), country (India) or continent (Asia).
  2. Functional concentration or decentralization. As an example, personnel functions in an organization could be concentrated in one separate department or handled in various functional departments.

However, from a practical point of view, merely by looming at charts it is difficult to determine to what extent authority is concentrated or dispersed. There is need therefore to analytically study how the chain of command operates in an organization.

Leave a Comment

TYPOLOGY OF ORGANIZATION STRUCTURES

Today we discuss on Typology of Organization Structure. This will help to understand the basis for evolving different types of organizational structures and examine the relative merits and demerits of different types of organizational structures.

 

INTRODUCTION OF TYPOLOGY OF ORGANIZATION STRUCTURES

We are going to discuss briefly on the typology of organization structures. Organization structures based on classical bureaucratic principles are hierarchical. But modern organization theories attempted to modify them in the light of experience, changes in technology and knowledge about human behavior. The centralized structures gave way to some sort of decentralization and thus transformed, partially at least, vertical (tall) organizations into horizontal (flat) ones, reflecting a shift in emphasis from command to consensus based self control. The relative conditions of instability and uncertainty transformed the classical mechanistic forms of management systems into organic ones. The advent of specialization and requirements of coordination had thrown up new issues and strategic choices concerning product versus function and matrix organization. The salient features of different organization structures referred to above are briefly outlined here to provide and overview than comprehensive understanding of the underlying principles. We will discuss more in next post.

Leave a Comment

Older Posts »