To improve organizational design, managers should consider the pulls of their organizations to discover the configuration that serves as the best fit among component parts.
Conclusion In short, managers should design organizations by fit, not fashion. Highly autocratic, the simple structure is out of fashion, but is a fit for startup organizations, for organizations in simple and dynamic environments, and for organizations that face extreme and hostile pressures.
An organization may achieve internal consistency, but find that its design no longer accommodates the environment. The five configurations Simple structure In the simple structure, the strategic apex coordinates the organizational activities through direct supervision.
The divisionalized structure is fashionable, used throughout the Fortune and in European companies. This design uses an operating core of highly trained professionals with a substantial operating staff. This lean and flexible structure can foster basic creativity, while allowing the organization to outmaneuver bureaucracies in a dynamic environment.
Professional bureaucracy The professional bureaucracy coordinates activities by standardizing skills of employees rather than processes. In spite of being the most prevalent of the five configurations, the machine bureaucracy is out of fashion because it produces monotonous work, isolates employees, becomes obsessed with controlling markets and workers, and produces inflexible organizations.
To understand how to use the configurations as diagnostic tools, managers should consider four forms of misfit, as follows: Abundant managers have a narrow span of control, serving as experts who not only work with the teams but who also link the teams. Used in hospitals, universities, legal firms, and other organizations operating in stable but complex environments, the professional bureaucracy decentralizes authority, putting power in the professionals and in the associations and institutions that train the professionals.
Hospital systems, unions, and government entities have also adapted the divisionalized structure. The support staff handles the routine tasks that the professionals delegate. Management may recognize that a part of the organization needs an autonomous structure.
While adhocracy can be extraordinary at innovation, the structure has difficulty accomplishing the ordinary because it requires inefficiency to be effective, is flooded with managers, requires resource-intensive communication and relationship systems, seemingly takes forever to accomplish simple tasks so that everyone can contribute, and is rife with ambiguity that causes conflict and political behavior.
The question becomes whether to change the organization or to change the environment. Is the right structure in the wrong question? The adhocracy distributes power unevenly into the hands of the experts needed for a particular decision. Changing the organization involves evolving or revolutionizing the organization so that it may adapt to the environment.
Harvard Business Review59 1 Managers should be less concerned about the latest structural innovation and more concerned about pursuing the structure that best fits the organization and its environment. An organization divisionalizes to create semi-autonomous market-based units for diversified products while retaining centralized power.
Revolution involves continuously adapting the organization at the expense of internal consistency. Commonly seen in entrepreneurial companies, the simple structure has minimal staff or middle line workers, little standardization, and makes limited use of planning, training or liaison devices.
Deriving organizational configurations Literature in organizational design identifies five organizational configurations, which develop from a framework of coordinating mechanisms: The technostructure becomes the key part of the machine bureaucracy as analysts standardize work and processes.
Organization design: fashion or fit? Because organizations have natural structures, harmony among parts may be the key to organizational success Henry Mintzherg. And fashion has been shown to be a factor in organization design, the structure of the day often being favored even by organizations for which it.
Spans of control, degrees of job enlargement, forms of emerge with a misfit that, like an ill-cut piece of clothing, decentralization, planning systems, and matrix won’t wear very well.
The key to organizational design, then, is consistency and coherence. structure should not be picked and chosen 5/5(1). Summary: Henry Mintzberg: Organization Design: Fashion or Fit?
In this summary you will understand company configurations in no time. The summary explains each configuration in a clear and understandable way.
In "Organizational design: fashion or fit," Henry Mintzberg () explores the natural configurations of organizations that result from elements of structure and situation to discover that consistency, coherence, and fit are the keys to successful organizational design.Download