dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat Institute of Administrative Studies University of Wrocław

dr. hab. Jerzy SupernatInstitute of Administrative Studies

University of Wrocław

The essence of organizational structure


dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat

Definitions of organizational structure

R.H. Hall, P.S. Tolbert: […] organizational structure can be considered as the arrangement of organizational parts.

P.M. Blau: […] the distributions, along various lines, of people among social positions that influence the role relations among these people.

S. Ranson, B. Hinings, R. Greenwood: […] a complex medium of control which is continually produced and recreated in interaction and yet shapes that interaction: structures are constituted and constitutive.


Functions of organizational structure

to guarantee effectiveness

to minimize or at least regulate the influence of indivi-dual variations on the organizations (it is an individual that should conform to requirements of the organization, not the organization to requirements of an individual)

to make possible: exercising power (organizational structure determi-nes which positions have power) making decisions (organizational structure determi-nes the flow of information into a decision) carrying out organizational activities (organizational structure is the arena for organizational actions)



Plurality of structures in an organization

it is a mistake to think that there is only one structure in an organization: there is intraorganizational variation, both across organizational units and up and down the hierarchy

structural differences are especially visible in multinational organizations (in chapters or divisions of international organizations located in different countries)


Types of organizational structure

• ideal type of bureaucracy

• real type of bureaucracy

• mechanistic organization

• organic organization

• adhocracy


Real type of bureaucracy (deviations from ideas and principles of ideal type of bureaucracy) lack of the continuous fulfillment of official tasks (lack of the continuity of administration)

delay in the fulfillment of tasks making decisions on determinants other than legal or not accepted by law ignorance of law and/or wrong interpretation of law non precisely defined competences and/or abuse of competences

nepotism

cronyism

corruption

employing on the basis of non meritorial grounds

lack of proper systematic control

lack of documentation and/or errors in documentation



Real type of bureaucracy (wrong application of ideas and principles of ideal type of bureaucracy)

excessive specialization

rigidity, inertia and autonomization of procedures

non-elasticity of organization

groupthink

making mutually contradictory provisions

conservatism and resistance against innovations

tendency towards oligarchization



Adhocracy

Adhocracy describes an organization which is the diametric opposite of Weber’s bureaucracy. According to Stuart Crainer adhocracy or the new organization disregards the accepted, classical principles of management under which each and every one has a carefully defined and permanent role:

the new organization is flexible and free flowing the new organization is non-hierarchical the new organization is based on participation the new organization is creative and entrepreneurial the new organization is based round networks the new organization is driven by organizational goals – rather than narrowly-defined functional ones the new organization utilizes IT as a key resource dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat


Structural features of an organizations

complexity formalization centralization

Complexity, formalization and centralization may change within one organization: they are multidimensional pheno-mena (they vary from high to low).



Complexity

Complexity of an organization has major effects on the beha-vior of its members, on other structural conditions (formaliza-tion and centralization), on processes within the organization, and on relationships between the organization and its environ-ment.

Components of complexity: horizontal differentiation vertical (hierarchical) differentiation geographical differentiation (dispersion)

Most organizations are more or less complex. One of really highly complex organizations is of course public administration.



Formalization

formalization is not an abstraction (the degree to which an organization is formalized is an indication of the perspectives of its decision makers in regard to organizational members!)

formalization is not a neutral concept: it might be helpful, since formalized procedures assist people in accomplishing their work it is coercive as people are forced into compliance (forma-lization involves organizational control over the individual; the amount of individual discretion is inversely related to the amount of preprogramming of behavior by the organi-zation)

The above allows to say that formalization has an ethical and a political meaning in addition to being a structural component. dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat


Centralization

Centralization is commonly referred to the distribution of power within an organization: If most decision making occurs at the top, the organization is centralized.

The matter is not that simple. Centralization is not only a matter of who makes decisions:

if employees at lower levels in the organization are making many decisions but the decisions are programmed by organi-zational policies, a high degree of centralization remains

if evaluation is carried out by people at the top of the organization, there is centralization, regardless of the level at which decisions are made



Centrality

It is important to distinguish centralization from centrality. Centrality refers to a person’s or a social role’s position in workflow, communications, or friendship networks. It is related to people’s being perceived as influential by both supervisors and nonsupervisors.



The degree of centralization in an organization

the degree of centralization says a great deal about a society: a society in which the majority of organizations are highly centralized is one in which the workers have little to say about their work

the degree of centralization is an indication of what the organization assumes about its members:

• high centralization implies an assumption that the members need tight control • low centralization suggests that the members can govern themselves



Varying degrees of centralization have the major outcome for the organization itself.

High levels of centralization mean:

greater coordination, but less flexibility

consistent organization-wide policies, but possibly in-appropriate policies for local conditions

potential for rapid decision making during emergencies, but overloaded communications channels during normal operations as communications flow up and down the hierarchy


Stand with anybody that stands RIGHT. Stand with him while he is right and PART with him when he goes wrong, The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, volume II, "Speech at Peoria, Illinois" (October 16, 1854), p. 273.

Concluding remark

The only things that evolve by themselves in an organization are disorder, friction, and malperfor-mance.

Peter F. Drucker (1909-2005)


dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat Institute of Administrative Studies University of Wrocław

Documents

Transcript of dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat Institute of Administrative Studies University of Wrocław