Posts Tagged Insurance

Product versus Functional Forms-5

If functional structure is adopted, projects may fall behind; if product/project organization is chosen technology and specialization may not develop optimally. Therefore, the need for a compromise between the two becomes imperative.

 

The possible compromises between product and functional bases include, in ascending order of structural complexity:

 

  1. The use of cross-functional teams to facilitate integration. These teams provide some opportunity for communication and conflict resolution and also a degree of common identification with product goals that characterizes the product organization. At the same time, they retain the differentiation provided by the functional organization.
  2. The appointment of full-time integrators of coordinators around a product. These product managers or project managers encourage the functional specialists to become committed to product goals and help resolve conflicts between them. The specialists will retain their primary identification with their functions.
  3. The “matrix” or grid organization, which combines the product and functional forms by overlaying one on the other. Some managers wear functional hats and are involved in the day-to-day, more routine activities. Naturally, they identify with functional goals and are more involved in the problem-solving activity required to cope with long-range issues and to achieve cross-functional coordination.

Leave a Comment

Product versus Functional Forms-4

The discussion in the preceding section and an overview of literature on function vs product choice, permits us to observe that both forms of organization design have their own set advantages and disadvantages. The functional structure facilitates the acquisition of specialized inputs. In permits pooling of resources and sharing them across products or projects.

 

The organization can hire, utilize and retain specialists. However the problem lies in coordinating the varying nature and amount of skills required at different times. The product or project organization, on the other hand, facilitates coordination among specialists; but may result in duplicating costs and reduction in the degree of specialization. For example, a blinds manufacturing company who manufacture roller shades and woven wood shades, need to adopt product forms not functional. It depend on the type of business company is doing. A term life insurance company can go with functional while a motels industry need to select product. Thus, if functional structure is adopted, projects may fall behind; if product/project organization is chosen technology and specialization may not develop optimally. Therefore, the need for a compromise between the two becomes imperative.

 

The possible compromises between product and functional bases include, in ascending order of structural complexity:

 

  1. The use of cross-functional teams to facilitate integration. These teams provide some opportunity for communication and conflict resolution and also a degree of common identification with product goals that characterizes the product organization. At the same time, they retain the differentiation provided by the functional organization.

We will discuss on two other structural complexity in next post.

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

APPROACH TO UNDERSTAND THE ORGANIZATION

The word “organization” may be used to refer to the process of organizing, the structure that evolves out pf this process and the processes/activities that take place within it. 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. 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.

Leave a Comment

Understanding organizations -1

Organisational Design, development and change we are talking here. As part of our talk we are talking what is organization and understaning organizations. Insurance CRM Software and Insurance SFA Software helps to understand how to deal with customer and helps to understand lead management.

The word “organization” may be used to refer to the process of organizing, the structure that evolves out pf this process and the processes/activities that take place within it.

All activities involving two or more persons entail the formation of an organization. Organizations could be simple or complex depending upon their purposes, size, technology or nature of activities. They can have both macro and micro aspects. If a factory is considered ‘macro’ unit of an organization, each section of the shop floor or each functions or even a dyad comprising a worker and his/her supervisor can be considered as the ‘micro’ unit ( or a component part) or a sub-system in the larger organizations. Each part/unit can have its own objectives or other characteristics.

The basic elements of organizations have remained the same over the years. Organizations have purpose (be they explicit or implicit), attract people, acquire and use resources to achieve the objectives, use some form of structure to divide (division of labour) and coordinate activities, and rely on certain positions/people to lead or manage others. While the elements of organizations are the same as ever before, the purpose of organization, structure ways of doing things, methods of coordination and control have always varied widely over the years and even at the same time amongst different organizations.

ref: Insurance Agency Management Software, Insurance CRM Software

Comments (2)