Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL
Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL
Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>Organizational</strong> <strong>for</strong>ms<br />
These ideas have pointed the way … that allows us to break free of bureaucratic thinking <strong>and</strong> to<br />
organize in a way that meets the requirements of the environment<br />
Gareth Morgan<br />
Literature on management is full of descriptions <strong>and</strong> classifications of <strong>for</strong>mal organizational<br />
structures – from a rigid authoritarian ‘pyramid’, to almost a virtual structure - in which short-term<br />
combinations of generally uncombined (or uncombined in the longer run) components, may come<br />
together to create certain relations in a given moment, but then change their interaction in the next<br />
moment, thus responding to the changing environment <strong>and</strong> tasks an organization per<strong>for</strong>ms. The<br />
term ‘virtual organization’ has become very popular.<br />
In 1979, Henry Mintzberg identified five configurations or species of organization: the machine<br />
bureaucracy, the divisional <strong>for</strong>m, the professional bureaucracy, the simple structure, <strong>and</strong> the<br />
adhocracy. As proved by numerous research <strong>and</strong> practice, these structural patterns all have<br />
different applicability. Some conclusions are summarized in the above-mentioned Gareth Morgan<br />
book, ‘Images of Organization’, as given below.<br />
The machine bureaucracy <strong>and</strong> the divisional <strong>for</strong>m tend to be ineffective except under conditions<br />
where tasks <strong>and</strong> environment are simple <strong>and</strong> stable.<br />
The professional bureaucracy modifies the principles of centralized control <strong>and</strong> allows greater<br />
autonomy to staff <strong>and</strong> is appropriate <strong>for</strong> dealing with relatively stable conditions where tasks are<br />
relatively complicated. This has proven to be an appropriate structure <strong>for</strong> universities, hospitals,<br />
<strong>and</strong> other professional organizations where people with key skills <strong>and</strong> abilities need a large<br />
measure of autonomy <strong>and</strong> discretion to be effective in their work.<br />
The simple structure tends to work best in unstable environmental conditions. It usually comprises<br />
a chief executive, often the founder or an entrepreneur, who may have a group of support staff<br />
along with a group of operators who do the basic work. Such an organization is very in<strong>for</strong>mal <strong>and</strong><br />
flexible <strong>and</strong>, although run in a highly centralized way by the chief executive, is ideal <strong>for</strong> achieving<br />
quick changes <strong>and</strong> manoeuvres. This <strong>for</strong>m of organization works very well in entrepreneurial<br />
organizations where speedy decision-making is at a premium, provided that tasks are not too<br />
complex.<br />
The term “adhocracy” was coined by Warren Bennis to characterize organizations that are<br />
temporary by design. They are similar to Burns <strong>and</strong> Stalker’s ‘organic <strong>for</strong>m’ of organization. The<br />
44