03.06.2015 Views

Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL

Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL

Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!