Organizational structure. Types of organizational structures

Organizational process is the process of creating organizational structure enterprises.

The organizational process consists of the following steps:

• division of the organization into divisions according to strategies;
• relationship of authority.

Delegation- this is the transfer of tasks and powers to a person who assumes responsibility for their implementation. If the leader did not delegate the task, then he must complete it himself (M.P. Follet). If the company grows, the entrepreneur may not be able to cope with the delegation.

A responsibility- the obligation to perform the existing tasks and be responsible for their satisfactory resolution. Responsibility cannot be delegated. The amount of responsibility is the reason for the high salaries of managers.

Powers- limited right to use the resources of the organization and direct the efforts of its employees to perform certain tasks. Powers are delegated to positions, not individuals. Limits of authority are restrictions.

is the real ability to act. If power is something that can really do, then authority is the right to do.

Line and staff powers

Linear authority is transferred directly from the boss to the subordinate and then to another subordinate. A hierarchy of management levels is created, forming its stepped character, i.e. scalar chain.

Headquarters powers are advisory, personal apparatus (presidential administration, secretariat). There is no descending subordination in the headquarters. Great power, powers are concentrated in the headquarters.

Building Organizations

The leader transfers his rights and powers. Structure development is usually done from the top down.

Stages of organizational design:

• divide the organization horizontally into broad blocks;
• set the ratio of powers for positions;
• define job responsibilities.

An example of building a management structure is the bureaucratic model of an organization according to M. Weber.

Organizational structure of the enterprise

The company's ability to adapt to change external environment influences how the enterprise is organized, how the management structure is built. The organizational structure of an enterprise is a set of links (structural divisions) and links between them.

The choice of organizational structure depends on factors such as:

• organizational and legal form of the enterprise;
• field of activity (type of products, its nomenclature and assortment);
• the scale of the enterprise (production volume, number of employees);
• markets to which the enterprise enters in the course of economic activity;
• technologies used;
• information flows inside and outside the firm;
• the degree of relative endowment with resources, etc.

Considering the organizational structure of enterprise management, the levels of interaction are also taken into account:

• organizations with ;
• departments of the organization;
• organizations with people.

An important role here is played by the structure of the organization through which and through which this interaction is carried out. Firm structure- this is the composition and ratio of its internal links, departments.

Organization management structures

For various organizations characteristic different types of governance structures. However, there are usually several universal types of organizational management structures, such as linear, linear-staff, functional, linear-functional, matrix. Sometimes within a single company (usually big business) is allocated separate subdivisions, the so-called departmentalization. Then the created structure will be divisional. It must be remembered that the choice of management structure depends on the strategic plans of the organization.

The organizational structure regulates:

• division of tasks by departments and subdivisions;
• their competence in solving certain problems;
• the general interaction of these elements.

Thus, the firm is created as a hierarchical structure.

Basic laws of rational organization:

• streamlining tasks in accordance with the most important points of the process;
• bringing management tasks in line with the principles of competence and responsibility, coordinating the “decision field” and available information, the ability of competent functional units to accept new tasks for solving);
• mandatory distribution of responsibility (not for the area, but for the “process”);
• short control paths;
• balance of stability and flexibility;
• ability for goal-oriented self-organization and activity;
• the desirability of the stability of cyclically repeated actions.

Linear structure

Consider a linear organizational structure. It is characterized by a vertical: top manager - line manager (subdivisions) - performers. There are only vertical links. In simple organizations, there are no separate functional units. This structure is built without feature highlighting.

Linear control structure

Advantages: simplicity, specificity of tasks and performers.
Flaws: high requirements for the qualifications of managers and high workload of the manager. The linear structure is used and effective in small enterprises with simple technology and minimal specialization.

Line-headquarters organizational structure

As you grow enterprises, as a rule, a linear structure converted to linear staff. It is similar to the previous one, but management is concentrated in headquarters. A group of employees appears who do not directly give orders to the executors, but perform consulting work and prepare management decisions.

Line-staff management structure

Functional organizational structure

With further complication of production, it becomes necessary to specialize workers, sections, departments of workshops, etc., a functional management structure is being formed. The distribution of work occurs by function.

With a functional structure, the organization is divided into elements, each of which has a specific function, task. It is typical for organizations with a small nomenclature, stability of external conditions. There is a vertical here: the head - functional managers (production, marketing, finance) - performers. There are vertical and interlevel connections. The disadvantage is that the functions of the leader are blurred.

Functional management structure

Advantages: deepening specialization, improving quality management decisions; the ability to manage multi-purpose and multi-profile activities.
Flaws: lack of flexibility; poor coordination of activities of functional units; low speed of making managerial decisions; lack of responsibility of functional managers for the final result of the enterprise.

Linear-functional organizational structure

With a linear-functional management structure, the main connections are linear, complementary - functional.

Linear-functional management structure

Divisional organizational structure

In large firms, to eliminate the shortcomings of functional management structures, the so-called divisional management structure is used. Responsibilities are distributed not by functions, but by products or regions. In turn, divisional departments create their own supply, production, marketing, etc. subdivisions. This creates prerequisites for unloading higher-level managers by freeing them from solving current tasks. The decentralized management system ensures high efficiency within individual departments.
Flaws: rising spending on management personnel; complexity of information links.

The divisional management structure is based on the allocation of divisions, or divisions. This type is currently used by most organizations, especially large corporations, since it is impossible to squeeze the activities of a large company into 3-4 main departments, as in a functional structure. However, a long chain of commands can lead to unmanageability. It is also created in large corporations.

Divisional management structure Divisions can be distinguished according to several criteria, forming structures of the same name, namely:

• grocery.Departments are created by types of products. characterized by polycentricity. Such structures have been created at General Motors, General Foods, and partly at Russian Aluminum. Authorities for the production and marketing of this product are transferred to one manager. The disadvantage is the duplication of functions. This structure is effective for the development of new types of products. There are vertical and horizontal connections;
• regional structure. Departments are created at the location of company divisions. In particular, if the firm has international activities. For example, Coca-Cola, Sberbank. Effective for geographical expansion of market areas;
• customer-oriented organizational structure. Divisions form around certain groups consumers. For example, commercial banks, institutions (advanced training, second higher education). Efficient to meet demand.

Matrix organizational structure

In connection with the need to accelerate the pace of product renewal, program-target management structures arose, which were called matrix. The essence of matrix structures is that temporary working groups are created in the existing structures, while the resources and employees of other departments are transferred to the head of the group in double subordination.

With a matrix control structure, project teams(temporary), implementing targeted projects and programs. These groups are in double subordination, are created temporarily. This achieves flexibility in the distribution of personnel, effective implementation of projects. Disadvantages - the complexity of the structure, the occurrence of conflicts. An example is an aerospace enterprise, telecommunications companies that perform major projects for customers.

Matrix control structure

Advantages: flexibility, acceleration of innovations, personal responsibility of the project manager for the results of work.
Flaws: the presence of dual subordination, conflicts due to dual subordination, the complexity of information links.

Corporate or is considered as a special system of interconnection between people in the process of their joint activities. Corporations as a social type of organization are closed groups of people with limited access, maximum centralization, authoritarian leadership, who oppose themselves to other social communities based on their narrow corporate interests. Thanks to the pooling of resources and, first of all, human resources, a corporation as a form of organizing the joint activity of people represents and provides an opportunity for the very existence and reproduction of one or another social group. However, people are united in corporations through their division according to social, professional, caste and other criteria.

Achieving high performance results is what all companies strive for without exception. However, without a well-established organizational structure, the enterprise runs the risk of failing.

In this article, we will analyze what the organizational structure of enterprise management is and how to choose it correctly.

Features of choosing the organizational structure of the enterprise

The organizational structure is the basis for performing the functions of enterprise management. So, it is understood as the composition, subordination, interaction and distribution of work between individual employees and entire departments.

talking plain language, the organizational structure of an enterprise is a set of departments, as well as managers headed by a general director. Her choice depends on many factors:

• age of the organization younger company, the simpler its organizational structure);
• organizational and legal form (JSC, LLC, IP, ...);
• field of activity;
• scale of the company (number of employees, departments, etc.);
• technologies involved in the work of the company;
• communications within and outside the firm.

Of course, when considering the organizational structure of management, it is necessary to take into account such features of the company as levels of interaction. For example, how departments of the company interact with each other, employees with employees, and even the organization itself with the external environment.

Types of organizational structures of enterprise management

Let's take a closer look at the types of organizational structures. There are several classifications, and we will consider the most popular and at the same time the most complete of them.

Linear

The linear structure is the simplest of all existing types of enterprise management structures. At the head is the director, then the heads of departments, then ordinary workers. Those. everyone in the organization is connected vertically. Typically, such organizational structures can be found in small organizations that do not distinguish the so-called functional units.

This type is characterized by simplicity, and tasks in the organization, as a rule, are completed quickly and professionally. If for some reason the task is not completed, then the manager always knows that he needs to ask the head of the department about the task, and the head of the department, in turn, knows who in the department to ask about the progress of the work.

The disadvantage is the increased requirements for management personnel, as well as the burden that falls on their shoulders. This type of management is applicable only to small businesses, otherwise managers will not be able to work effectively.

Linear staff

If a small firm that used a linear management structure develops, then its organizational structure changes and turns into a linear-staff one. Vertical connections remain in place, however, the leader has a so-called "headquarters" - a group of people who act as advisers.

The headquarters does not have the authority to give orders to the performers, however, it has a strong influence on the leader. Based on the decisions of the headquarters, managerial decisions are also formed.

functional

When the load on employees increases, and the organization continues to grow further, the organizational structure moves from a linear-headquarters to a functional one, which means the distribution of work not by departments, but by functions performed. If earlier everything was simple, now managers can safely call themselves directors of finance, marketing and production.

It is with the functional structure that one can see the division of the organization into separate parts, each of which has its own functions and tasks. A stable external environment is a mandatory element to support the development of a company that has chosen a functional structure for itself.

Such companies have one serious drawback: the functions of management personnel are very blurred. If in a linear organizational structure everything is clear (sometimes even too much), then with a functional organizational structure everything is a little blurry.

For example, if there are problems with sales, the director has no idea who exactly to blame. Thus, the functions of managers sometimes overlap, and when a problem occurs, it is difficult to establish whose fault it occurred.

The advantage is that the company can be diversified and do a great job of it. Moreover, due to the functional separation, the firm can have several goals.

Linear-functional

This organizational structure only applies to large organizations. So, it combines the advantages of both organizational structures, however, it has fewer disadvantages.

With this type of control, all the main connections are linear, and the additional ones are functional.

Divisional

Like the previous one, only suitable for large companies. Functions in the organization are distributed not according to the areas of responsibility of subordinates, but according to the types of product, or according to the regional affiliation of the division.

The division has its own divisions and the division itself resembles a linear or linear-functional organizational structure. For example, a division may have a procurement department, a marketing department, and a production department.

The disadvantage of such an organizational structure of the enterprise is the complexity of relations between departments, as well as high costs for the maintenance of managers.

matrix

Applicable to those enterprises that operate in a market where products must be constantly improved and updated. To do this, the company creates working groups, which are also called matrix. It follows from this that a double subordination arises in the company, as well as a constant collaboration of employees from different departments.

The advantage of such an organizational structure of the enterprise is the ease of introducing new products into production, as well as the flexibility of the company to the external environment. The disadvantage is double subordination, which often causes conflicts in work groups.

conclusions

So, the organizational structure of an enterprise is a company management system and the ease of performing tasks, the flexibility of the company to the external environment, as well as the burden that falls on the shoulders of managers depends on its choice.

If the company is small, then at the stage of formation, as a rule, a linear organizational structure naturally arises in it, and as the enterprise develops, its structure becomes more and more complex, becoming matrix or divisional.

Video - an example of the organizational structure of the company:

An important function of management is the function of the organization, which consists in establishing permanent and temporary relationships between all departments of the enterprise, determining the procedure and conditions for the functioning of the enterprise. The function of the organization is realized in two ways: through administrative and organizational management and through operational management.

Administrative and organizational management involves determining the structure of an enterprise (firm), establishing relationships and distributing functions between all departments, granting rights and establishing responsibilities between employees of the management apparatus. Operational management ensures the functioning of the company in accordance with the approved plan. It consists in periodic or continuous comparison of the actual results obtained with the results planned by the plan, and their subsequent adjustment. Operational management is closely related to current planning.

The organizational structure of a firm is understood as its organization from separate divisions with their interconnections, which are determined by the goals set for the firm and its divisions and the distribution of functions between them. The organizational structure provides for the distribution of functions and decision-making powers between the executives of the company responsible for the activities of the structural units that make up the organization of the company.

The main problems that arise in the development of management structures are:

Establishing the right relationship between individual divisions, which is associated with the definition of their goals, working conditions and incentives;

Distribution of responsibility between managers;

Selection of specific management schemes and sequence of procedures for decision-making;

Organization information flows;

Selection of appropriate technical means.

The problem of improving the organizational structure of management involves clarifying the functions of departments, determining the rights and obligations of each manager and employee, eliminating multi-stage, duplication of functions and information flows. The main task here is to improve management efficiency.

The organizational structure is aimed primarily at establishing clear relationships between the individual divisions of the company, the distribution of rights and responsibilities between them. It implements various requirements for improving management systems, expressed in various principles.

Organizational management structures of industrial firms are very diverse and are determined by many objective factors and conditions. These may include, in particular, the size of the company's production activities (small, medium, large); the production profile of the company (specialization in the production of one type of product or a wide range of products from various industries); the nature of the manufactured products and the technology of its production (products of extractive or manufacturing industries, mass or serial production); field of activity of the company
(orientation to the local market, national or foreign market); the scale of foreign activities and the forms of its implementation (the presence of subsidiaries abroad, including production, marketing, etc.); the nature of the monopolistic association (concern, financial group).

The organizational structure of the company and its management are not something frozen, they are constantly changing, improving in accordance with changing conditions.

2. Types of organizational structures.

Depending on the nature of the connections between the various departments, the following forms of organizational management structures are distinguished.

1. The linear organizational structure is based on the principle of unity in the distribution of orders, according to which only a higher authority has the right to give orders. Compliance with this principle should ensure the unity of management. Such an organizational structure is formed as a result of building a management apparatus from mutually subordinate bodies in the form of a hierarchical ladder, i.e. each subordinate has one leader, and the leader has several subordinates. Two leaders cannot communicate directly with each other, they must do this through the nearest higher authority. Such a structure is often referred to as a single-line structure. The advantages of such a structure are:
. Simple construction
. Unambiguous limitation of tasks, competence, responsibility
. Rigid leadership of the governing bodies
. Efficiency and accuracy of management decisions
Flaws:
. Difficult communications between instances
. The concentration of power at the top

The linear management structure is used by small and medium-sized firms that carry out simple production, in the absence of broad cooperative ties between enterprises.

2.2 The functional organizational structure is based on the creation of units to perform certain functions at all levels of management. These functions include research, production, sales, marketing, etc. Here, with the help of directive guidance, hierarchically lower levels of management can be connected to various higher levels of management. The transfer of instructions, instructions and messages is carried out depending on the type of task.

For example, a worker in a shop receives orders from more than one person
(master), but from several staff units, i.e. The principle of multiple subordination applies. Therefore, such an organizational structure is called multilinear.

The functional structure of production management is aimed at performing constantly recurring routine tasks that do not require prompt decision-making. Functional services usually include highly qualified specialists who perform specific activities depending on the tasks assigned to them.

The advantages of such a structure include:

Reduction of coordination links

Reducing duplication of work

Strengthening vertical links and strengthening control over the activities of lower levels

High competence of specialists responsible for the performance of specific functions

To the disadvantages:

Ambiguous distribution of responsibility

Difficult communication

Lengthy decision-making process

The emergence of conflicts due to disagreement with directives, as each functional leader puts his questions first

2.3 Functional-linear structure (headquarters) is a combination of a linear structure with a system of allocation of certain functions. Under line managers, special units are created
(headquarters) that help the line manager in performing individual management functions.

These headquarters can:

Be limited to the central levels of management (management headquarters);

Be in several levels of management;

Form a staff hierarchy at all levels of management.

Headquarters at several levels of the hierarchy should provide advice and participate in the preparation of decisions, but they do not have the right to make decisions and lead subordinate units or performers.

The larger the firm and the more complex its management structure, the more acute is the issue of coordinating the activities of functional services or creating large specialized units with highly qualified specialists.
The advantages and disadvantages of linear functional structure can be called:

Advantages:

Opportunity to obtain a high degree of professional specialization of employees

Accurately identify locations and required resources (especially personnel)

Contributes to the standardization, formalization and programming of the process

Flaws:

Difficulty in horizontal alignment

Difficulty responding to change

2.4 Linear organizational structure with cross functions. With such an organizational structure, movement through the authorities is preserved, but certain functions related to the entire enterprise, for example, personnel policy, preparation of production, accounting and reporting, scheduling and control over their implementation, etc. allocated to functional departments, which are given the authority to give orders. line managers and functional departments have the right to joint decision-making for the relevant department of the enterprise. For example, the right to hire labor for workshops belongs jointly to the head of the personnel department and the head technical department. If they do not come to an agreement, then a higher authority must intervene.

2.5 Divisional management structure. As a result of the diversification of production, many enterprises are restructuring their organizational structure, forming departments that focus on the production of certain products (product management structure) or spatial unity (regional management structure).

2.5.1 The organizational structure for the product involves the creation of independent business units in the structure of the company - production departments focused on production and marketing specific types products. This assumes the specialization of production departments in the parent company for certain types or groups of products and the transfer of authority to them to manage production and marketing subsidiaries located both in their own country and abroad. The manufacturing department does not differentiate between domestic and overseas subsidiaries in management practices, which retain responsibility for profits and are subject to financial control and accountability by the manufacturing department. Coordination of activities between domestic and foreign enterprises within the production department, either by the product coordinator or the product coordinator international operations. The functional services of the production departments simultaneously maintain close contacts with the relevant central services, receiving instructions from them on all issues of pursuing a single policy and coordinating activities within the firm as a whole.

Since the production department itself acts as a profit center, it exercises not only financial, but also operational control over the activities of controlled enterprises on a global scale. This control is often exercised through joint and intertwined directorates and is supplemented by travel by the head of production to specific subsidiaries. In some companies, for more effective operational control over the activities of foreign subsidiaries, in the production department, regional offices or departments.

Product organizational structure is widespread due to the massive transition of international firms to a decentralized management structure, when product knowledge and the development of production on a global scale have become of paramount importance.

The organizational structure of product management is preferred by large, widely diversified companies, although it has its own specific features in almost every company. These features stem primarily from the degree of product diversification and the nature of the specialization of each production department and each subsidiary. They also depend on the number of foreign companies, the nature of their activities and the functions they perform. An important role is played by the nature of the products, the degree of its technological complexity and uniqueness.

For example, a feature of the organizational structure of an American company
"Singer" is a different construction and management of the activities of controlled enterprises in each production department by product.
The company (Singer) uses the group management principle, in which production departments are grouped into five groups depending on the nature of the products manufactured. At the same time, differences in the organization and management of production and marketing activities are characteristic not only for production departments by product, but also for each group. Coordination of activities for individual products within the company as a whole is carried out at the level of group leaders, who together form the operational management committee.This committee determines the main directions of the company's industry development and coordinates its activities aimed at achieving the goals and objectives defined at the highest level of management. Linking the activities of various production departments in the regional aspect is carried out by the central service of regional markets.This service is designed to give recommendations and advice to production departments, on the one hand, and the top management of the company, on the other, about all aspects of activity in a particular market, the specialization of subsidiaries, the division of products and markets between them.

The product organizational structure provides great opportunities for centralized management and coordination of the activities of all TNC-owned enterprises on a global scale. Such an organizational structure contributes to the deepening of specialization between subsidiaries of one company, taking into account the advantages derived from the international division of labor, promotes the growth of intracorporate supplies and makes it possible to underestimate the amount of taxes paid by manipulating transfer prices, facilitates the division of markets between subsidiaries, allows to concentrate scientific research and product development in the center and centralized supply of technology to all controlled subsidiaries, makes it possible to focus production on the production of products that are in greatest demand.

At the same time, with such a structure, it is difficult to use the knowledge and experience of management specialists within one country or region; it is difficult to coordinate the activities of enterprises belonging to different production departments of one company on planning, long-term investments in the market of one country. Product-based manufacturing units with subsidiaries in a wide range of countries usually lack knowledge of local conditions and the requirements of individual markets. Therefore, they need the help of central services for regional coordination or divide production departments by product, taking into account the territorial location of enterprises.

2.5.1 Organizational structure by region. It assumes that managerial responsibility for the activities of TNCs both in the domestic and foreign markets is distributed among independent regional divisions. These subdivisions, in terms of the content and nature of their activities, can act as production departments and be profit centers, or they can be organized in the form of subsidiaries and be profit centers and responsibility centers. In both cases, regional divisions coordinate the activities of subsidiaries, sales and production companies in their region for all types of products of the international firm's specialization. The vice-president - manager or manager who heads such a regional division reports directly to the top management of the company and carries out its activities in close contact with all central services. In some companies, regional managers have individual country managers as an intermediate link between the regional division and the local subsidiary. Regional divisions exercise financial control over the activities of each subsidiary company, as well as control the preparation of the current budget and are in charge of planning issues, adhering to the instructions of the company's senior management and central services.
To more closely link the production activities of controlled companies, some TNCs appoint product coordinators who are in charge of the production of specific types of products.

Regional governance structure in pure form currently found in a small number of companies. Basically, these are poorly diversified firms, with a predominance in production structure one or two similar products. For such firms, the main thing is to approach each specific market and adapt to its national characteristics and the needs of end users. Such an organizational structure is typical for some oil companies ((Gulf oil (, (Royal Dutch-Shell (), as well as for the Canadian company (Messi-Fergusson (- manufacturer of agricultural machinery, industrial and construction equipment, Swiss food monopoly (Nestlé (, Anglo-Dutch - (Unilever (.

The regional management structure is used by companies that produce products of a limited range and are focused on broad markets and a specific consumer. The downside of this management structure is the difficulty in transferring technical information to overseas subsidiaries, as well as coordinating country and product activities.
These difficulties are especially exacerbated for equipment companies with many product lines. Another important problem that arises with a regional management structure is the possibility of duplication of linear and functional responsibilities, especially in regional offices.

The regional structure of company management in general is quite rare. At the same time, the regional principle of managing foreign activities in combination with product management is quite common and is typical for companies using a mixed management structure.

The structures described above refer to the bureaucratic type of organization of management structures. The corresponding concept of the approach to building organizational structures was developed at the beginning of the 20th century by the German sociologist
Max Weber. He proposed a normative model of rational bureaucracy, which radically changed the previously existing systems of communication, reporting, remuneration, work structure, and industrial relations. At the heart of this model is the idea of ​​enterprises as "organized organizations" that place strict demands on both the people and the structures within which they operate. The key conceptual provisions of the normative model of rational bureaucracy are as follows: 1) a clear division of labor, the use of qualified specialists in each position; 2) hierarchy of management, in which the lower level is subordinate and controlled by the higher; 3) the existence of formal rules and norms that ensure the uniformity of the performance of their tasks and duties by managers; 4) the spirit of formal impersonality, characteristic of the performance of their duties by officials; 5) implementation of hiring in accordance with the qualification requirements for this position, and not with subjective assessments.

The main concepts of the bureaucratic type of management structure are rationality, responsibility and hierarchy. Weber himself considered the central point of the concept to be the exclusion of the displacement of "person" and "position", because the composition and content of managerial work should be determined based on the needs of the organization, and not the people working in it. Clearly formulated instructions for each work (what needs to be done and by what methods) does not leave room for the manifestation of subjectivity and an individual approach. This is the fundamental difference between the bureaucratic structure and the community structure that historically preceded it, where the main role was assigned to partnership and skill.

Bureaucratic management structures have shown their effectiveness, especially in large and super-large organizations, in which it is necessary to ensure the well-coordinated work of large teams of people working for a common goal. These structures allow mobilizing human energy and cooperating the labor of people in solving complex projects, in mass and large-scale production. However, they have inherent shortcomings, which are especially noticeable in the context of modern conditions and tasks of economic development.
First of all, it is obvious that the bureaucratic type of structure does not contribute to the growth of the potential of people, each of whom uses only that part of his abilities that is directly required by the nature of the work performed. It is also clear: as soon as the issues of strategy and tactics of the development of the organization are resolved only at the highest level, and all other levels are occupied exclusively with the execution of decisions "coming down from above", the general managerial intelligence is lost (which is considered today as the most important factor in effective management).

Another drawback of bureaucratic-type structures is the impossibility with their help to manage the process of changes aimed at improving work. The functional specialization of structural elements leads to the fact that their development is characterized by unevenness and different speed. As a result, contradictions arise between the individual parts of the structure, inconsistency in their actions and interests, which slows down progress in the organization.

Another type of organization of enterprise management structures is organic. This type of management structure has a relatively short history and arose as an antithesis of a bureaucratic organization, the model of which has ceased to satisfy many enterprises that are in need of more flexible and adapted structures. The new approach rejects the notion of organizational effectiveness as being "organized" and running like clockwork; on the contrary, it is believed that this model is to carry out radical changes that ensure the adaptability of the organization to the objective requirements of reality.
Researchers of this problem emphasize: a different type of organization is gradually emerging, in which improvisation is valued more than planning; which is guided by possibilities much more than by limitations, prefers to find new actions rather than cling to old ones; which values ​​discussion more than calmness, and encourages doubt and controversy rather than faith.

The original definition of the organic type of structure emphasized its fundamental differences from the traditional bureaucratic hierarchy, such as higher flexibility, less coherence with rules and regulations, and the use of a group (team) labor organization as a basis.
Further developments made it possible to significantly supplement the list of properties that characterize the organic type of management structure. These are the following features. First, decisions are made on the basis of discussion and not based on authority, rules, or traditions. Secondly, the circumstances that are taken into account when discussing problems are trust, not power, persuasion, not a team, work for a single goal, and not for the sake of fulfilling a job description. Thirdly, the main integrating factors are the mission and development strategy of the organization. Fourthly, creativity and cooperation are based on the connection between the activities of each individual and the mission. Fifth, the rules of work are formulated as principles, not guidelines. Sixth, the distribution of work among employees is determined not by their positions, but by the nature of the problems being solved. Seventh, there is a constant readiness to carry out progressive changes in the organization.

The type of structure under consideration implies significant changes in relations within the organization: there is no need for a functional division of labor, and the responsibility of each worker for the overall success increases.

2.6 This type includes a matrix structure - a modern effective type of organizational management structure, which is created by combining two types of structures: linear and program-targeted. In accordance with the linear structure (vertically), management is built for individual areas of the organization's activities: R&D, production, sales, and supply. In accordance with the program-target structure (horizontally), the management of programs (projects, topics) is organized.

With a matrix management structure, when determining horizontal links, it is necessary: ​​selection and appointment of a program (project) manager, his deputies for individual subsystems (topics) in accordance with the structure of the program; determination and appointment of responsible executors in each specialized subdivision; organization of a special program management service.

To ensure work within the framework of the matrix structure, changes in the production structure are required; create special target divisions in the parent company, bringing together leading specialists for the joint development of the main ideas of the program.

With a matrix management structure, the program (project) manager works with specialists who are not directly subordinate to him, who are subordinate to line managers. It basically determines what and when should be done for a particular program. Line managers decide who and how will perform this or that work.

Problems that arise in prioritizing tasks and allocating time for specialists to work on projects can disrupt the stability of the firm and make it difficult to achieve its long-term goals. To ensure the coordination of work in a matrix management structure, the program control center is designed to link the implementation of management procedures by individual functional and linear divisions.

Matrix management structures, which supplemented the linear-functional organizational structure of management with new elements, opened up a qualitatively new direction in the development of the most active and dynamic problem-oriented and program-targeted organizational forms of management, which are aimed at raising the creative initiative of managers and specialists and identifying opportunities for a significant increase in efficiency. production on the basis of accelerating the pace of its technical development, ensuring the growth of labor productivity, reducing production costs and improving the quality of products.

Benefits of a matrix management structure:

Significant activation of the activities of managers and employees of the administrative apparatus due to the formation of program units actively interacting with functional units, strengthening the relationship between them.

The division of management functions between managers responsible for ensuring high final results (heads of project and program groups and departments) and managers responsible for ensuring the fullest use of available production, material and labor resources(Heads of functional departments). Such managers jointly control the work on the preparation of operational production plans and their implementation.

Involvement of managers of all levels and specialists in the sphere of active creative activity for the accelerated technical improvement of production.

The matrix structure allows:

Reduce the burden on senior managers by transferring decision-making powers to the middle level of management while maintaining the unity of coordination and control over key decisions at the highest level

Provide flexibility and efficiency in resource maneuvering when performing several programs within the same firm

Eliminate intermediate structural links in the operational management of programs

Strengthen the personal responsibility of the manager both for the program as a whole and for its elements

Organize clear interaction based on the redistribution of tasks in the management system

Apply modern methods management

Solve such problems as reducing the time for creating new equipment and technology, reducing the cost of work, improving the quality of created technical systems, where the very specificity of production requires a rapid improvement of products and the technology of its production.

Matrix management structures have received the most wide application and development, primarily in the aerospace industry, where there was an objective need to coordinate the activities of a large number of individual industrial firms to implement unique large-scale projects and programs within a limited time frame and allocated financial resources.

Matrix management structures encourage frequent restructuring associated with the introduction of the latest technological processes and more productive technological equipment, which leads to changes in the organizational structure of the company as a whole.

In the transition to matrix control structures, the greatest economical effect achieved on large enterprises and multi-factory industrial complexes producing complex products.

The matrix management structure includes: a project management structure and a problem-target management structure.

The types of matrix structures are very diverse, which allows you to choose the most appropriate structure, taking into account the scale and characteristics of production. These are the simplest forms of work coordination that have been developed in research organizations; intra-company and factory problem-target forms of management used to solve local problems; complex design and software (by product) matrix structures.
All of them are focused on the acceleration and effective solution of a specific goal (task).

3. Features of organizational structures of firm management at the present stage.

At the present stage, there is a formation of such management structures that most fully meet the established principles and functions of management.

In the 1980s, there was an active process of restructuring the organizational structures of management of both large diversified complexes - TNCs, and smaller companies. In practice, the process of reorganization of management structures becomes permanent and is directly dependent on changes in the company's development strategy.

The most important factors causing the need for structural restructuring of companies are the following:

Accelerated development of new types of products under the influence scientific and technical progress in the face of increasing competition;

Intensive introduction of the most advanced technologies;

Systematic introduction of new methods of organization and management of production based on the active use of computer technology.

We can distinguish the following main directions of restructuring the organizational structures of management at the present stage.

1. In the principles of management: periodic changes in the relationship between centralization and decentralization in management due to changes in strategic priorities, activation or weakening of the effectiveness of interaction between departments; strengthening program-target management to consolidate the company's resources in the most advanced areas of scientific and technical research or in the development and implementation of large-scale projects that require the unification of specialists of the same profile in one unit.

2. In the management apparatus: regrouping of units, changing the relationship between them, the nature of interaction, the distribution of powers and responsibilities; reorganization of internal structures as a result of acquisition of other firms or sale manufacturing enterprises, which do not fit into it; separation into independent business units of program-target project groups of a venture nature or the creation of new units on their basis; changing the nature of intercompany relations through partial interpenetration, participation in equity capital; increased integration of formally independent small companies in research and production complexes of large corporations; increased activity in the reorganization of research and production complexes in high technology industries; the creation in the administrative apparatus of an increasing number of intermediate management units - specialized units that oversee production units in which sales volumes of products and profits do not grow and which have problems interacting with other business units and administrative services.

3. In management functions: strengthening strategic planning and forecasting based on the development of long-term economic and technical policies; strengthening control over product quality at all stages from product development to its serial production; giving priority to informatics and economic analysis activities of the company on the basis of improving accounting and reporting based on the comprehensive use of electronic computers; giving more importance than before to issues of production and personnel management; attracting employees to participate in the share capital of the company by acquiring shares; participation in resolving issues at meetings of the Board of Directors and the Management Board; rewarding employees for developing new ideas in the field of improving production technology, creating and implementing new products, strengthening attention to social psychological aspects management; increased attention in the field of marketing activities to the development of activities, forms and methods to achieve the final results outlined in the marketing program for the product and for the production department, to strengthen economic relationships with other divisions of the company and with functional services; increasing the cost effectiveness of marketing activities.

4. In economic activity: change technological process; application of flexible automated technologies; widespread use of robots, machine tools with numerical program management; deepening of intercompany cooperation on international level in the field of specialization and cooperation of production, the implementation of major joint scientific and production programs and agreements on economic and scientific and technical cooperation; creation of joint production enterprises not only in the field of natural resources development, but, in particular, in high-tech promising industries in developed countries.

4. Features of the organization of management in American, Western European and Japanese firms.

The management structure of large industrial firms is formed under the influence of various factors. On the one hand, these are the requirements put forward by the growth in the scale of production, the strengthening of its diversification and the sophistication of products; expansion as a result of internationalization of the territorial disunity of production. On the other hand, it bears the imprint of the historical features of the formation and development of specific firms. Here the predominance of traditional types of companies in individual countries is directly affected; difference in the legislation regulating economic activity of firms; the connection of firms with the military-industrial complex, etc. Although each of these factors has independent significance, it is their combination that determines the features of the organizational structure of both a particular firm and firms in individual countries.
Therefore, although there are many common features inherent in the management structure of large firms, nevertheless, it is important to take into account and study the specific features of the organizational structure that have developed in specific conditions.

To the greatest extent, the features of the management structure of modern TNCs are determined by the historical conditions of their formation and development and bear the imprint of the type of enterprises that developed at the early stages of the development of the company. This, in particular, finds expression in the nature of the relationship between the production departments of a modern firm and determines the place and role of production departments in the organizational structure of the company.

AT modern conditions Western European and Japanese companies have acquired many common features with American firms in applying the principles of decentralization in management. This is due to the intensification of the processes of concentration and centralization of production under the influence of the scientific and technological revolution and the intensification of competition in the world market. First of all, there was an increase in the size of Western European and Japanese companies, which are approaching American ones in terms of turnover.

The growth in the scale of economic activity led to the reorganization of management carried out by most Western European companies and the use of American experience in the formation of the organizational structure of management. Great importance has a departure of both Western European and Japanese firms from the narrow specialization of production and their transformation into highly diversified complexes. This was reflected in the management structure, as within the companies, production departments or groups of departments were created according to various types diversified products and areas of activity.

However, along with many common features American, Western European and Japanese TNCs have their own characteristics in the organization of management, which stem primarily from the historical conditions for the development of certain types of companies in different countries. American firms at an early stage of their development were created in the form of trusts. Therefore, in such companies as, for example, General Motors, Chrysler, Ford Motor, industrial enterprises members of the production departments are deprived of any independence. The directors of such enterprises are completely subordinate to the orders of the management of the production departments to which they belong.
In particular, this concerns the issues of removing old products from production and switching to the production of new ones, setting prices, acquiring equipment, etc. The production department in such companies distributes orders between enterprises, provides logistics, monitors the implementation of production plans, monitors the implementation of such plant functions such as planning, quality management, equipment maintenance, staffing, etc.

In companies in Western European countries and in Japan, production departments play a slightly different role. With the transition to a decentralized form of management, production departments act as coordinators of the activities of their subsidiaries, which have operational, economic, financial and legal independence. At the same time, subsidiaries themselves act not only as profit centers, but also as responsibility centers. The latter means that they independently develop strategic directions for production activities within the framework of the commodity nomenclature, conduct research and development, identify potential consumers of products, carry out its production and marketing, provide the necessary capital investments for the modernization of production, organize the material and technical supply of their enterprises. As profit centers, they are fully responsible for the rate of return set by the management of the concern, maintain independent balance sheets and have separate profit and loss accounts, which are drawn up in a single form and are included in the free balance sheet of the company. The functions of the production department include the control and coordination of the activities of the subsidiaries assigned to it, usually in the following most important areas: research, production, marketing, finance.

Due to the close ties between individual companies of a production nature, Western European concerns (especially German, French, Swedish) are usually referred to as "industrial groups" or simply "groups", regardless of whether they are headed by operational production companies or holding companies.

The presence in the majority of German concerns of a large number of legally independent subsidiaries with a high degree of operational independence, geographically dispersed and at the same time highly specialized in the production of products assigned to them, requires coordination of their activities through centralized management functions that provide a unified and comprehensive management of the activities of subsidiaries. companies and subordinating them to a single goal set by the top administration.

The organizational structure of American, Western European and Japanese companies is very diverse and almost every company has its own distinctive features.

In the 1980s, there were significant changes in American management that led to the transition to new management structures and a redistribution of priorities in making managerial decisions. The tasks of strategic planning based on the setting and implementation of long-term goals are now coming to the fore in the largest companies. These goals and objectives are largely based on the development and implementation of fundamentally new products that not only meet the needs of the market, but also adapted to the requirements put forward by the legislation of their country and other countries in the field of price regulation, investment control, protection environment, safety in operation, energy saving, as well as numerous measures developed within the framework of international economic organizations and approved by national authorities. These and other trade and political measures have led to significant changes in the conduct of the economic policy of many American companies.

characteristic feature entrepreneurial activity American companies in modern conditions is a systematic restructuring of organizational structures as a result of strengthening the process of acquisitions and mergers.

The following are put forward as the goals of such reorganizations:

Further diversification of production through the acquisition of a company that has accumulated significant scientific, technical and industrial experience, complementing its own base;

The desire to increase the efficiency of the scientific and technical complex through the integration of specialized firms capable of optimizing the structure of the parent company;

Changing strategic priorities to gain a foothold in new markets, increase flexibility in the company's operational activities.

The process of mergers and acquisitions required the restructuring of organizational management structures. In the first half of the 1980s, 56% of American companies out of 500 industrial giants changed the management structure.

It should also be noted that the American management style differs significantly from the Japanese. Thus, in American companies, the responsibility of each employee is clearly defined and each manager is personally responsible for meeting the established indicators in terms of directive planning, while in Japanese companies collective responsibility for the development, adoption and implementation of decisions. Another feature is that foreign affiliates of American corporations more freely use the capital, technology, organizational and managerial experience of the parent company. Legally, the vast majority of foreign firms of American TNCs
- these are subsidiaries subject to local laws, while Japanese TNCs are dominated by branches with 100% participation of Japanese capital and full control over their activities by the parent company.

A feature of the organization of management in Japanese companies is that they attach paramount importance to the improvement of the style and methods of management. Japanese companies, as a rule, are more centralized than American and Western European ones. However, within the framework of high centralization, the principles of coordination, coordination of actions, development and adoption of decisions after their careful preliminary discussion and approval by the executive level are widespread. It is believed that the Japanese management style based on group decision-making is more effective because it involves:

Participation of the middle management in the development of decisions by coordinating and discussing draft decisions not only with managers, but also with the personnel of the relevant departments;

Compliance with the principle of unanimity in decision-making;

Lack of clear job descriptions defining the range of duties of the employee; it is assumed that the content of the work of each employee can constantly change and they must be able to perform any work within their competence;

The use of a specific personnel management system, which mainly provides for lifetime hiring of employees, promotion and promotion wages for years of service social Security old age and sickness;
Continuous improvement of the art of management, including the quality of products, the effectiveness of marketing activities; control over the production process.

Japanese TNCs focus on the functioning of the parent company, but they tend to pay more attention to the activities of the corporation as a whole. Decisions on the appointment of managers to senior positions, the determination of the product range, the volume of investment and production, the development of new products are made by the top management of the parent companies or jointly with the top management of the branch.
The parent company and its senior management have also become more focused on development prospects, more boldly put forward and make strategic decisions that are implemented in a “top-down” way. At the same time, the use of economic methods in intra-company management while simultaneously strengthening centralized principles. So, the parent company usually takes upon itself the determination of the price level for parts, parts, components exported to its subsidiaries abroad, ensures a higher level of profit. The parent company exercises strict control over the transfer of the latest technology to its foreign affiliates for fear of leaking secrets through local partners. By law, Japanese TNCs are now required to publish consolidated financial reports which will allow deeper and better understanding economic mechanism Japanese management.

It is noteworthy that the Japanese are also transferring their management style to subsidiaries of foreign TNCs based in Japan. Thus, the subsidiaries of the American corporations "IBM", "Xerox" located in Japan use the Japanese style and management experience, product quality control. This is ensured by the fact that Japanese management specialists are fluent in English language, know how to use the Japanese management style, and are highly competent. The Japanese branch managers bring technological expertise from the American parent company there.
They are regularly sent to the parent company for retraining. This is especially true of top managers, who in most cases are Japanese. The number of American representatives in
boards of directors is insignificant, which is due to the difficulties of mastering Japanese management methods and mastering the Japanese language. For many countries, it was the Japanese, and not the American, system of management organization that became the standard. Japanese workers are distinguished by a high level of education, technological experience and stability. Japan creates a unique infrastructure based on the most advanced technologies, is a leader in the field of product quality, and has outstripped all other countries in terms of labor productivity growth.

Bibliography.

1. Gerchikova I. N. Management: Textbook. –M.: Banks and exchanges, 1995
2. Fundamentals of management: Proc. allowance; Team of authors / Ed. ed. G. E.

Bazhenov. -Novosibirsk: NSTU, 1998
3. Meskon M. Kh., Albert M., Hedouri F. Fundamentals of management / Per. from English.

–M.: Delo, 1992.
4. A. A. Belyaev, D. V. Gross History of management: Proc. allowance - M .:

INFRA-M, 1997.

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

The organizational structure of any enterprise has its own characteristics. A clear structure shows which areas of work are duplicated and which are left unattended. This helps to optimize work, reduce costs, increase the efficiency of production costs. See what types of organizational structures are, how they differ, what are their strengths and weaknesses.

What is an organizational structure

The organizational structure of an enterprise is a document that schematically reflects the composition and hierarchy of departments. It gives an idea about the enterprise itself, allows you to see its work from the inside and trace the relationship between employees, departments, areas and management, their responsibilities, areas of competence, rights and obligations.

Creation goals:

1. Coordination of management, determination of superiors and subordinates, managers and performers.
2. Distribution of rights and responsibilities for representatives of all levels of the organization.

Types of enterprise structures

Informal - often has no description. It is formed spontaneously on the basis of personal preferences, taking into account traditions and unwritten rules in the course of interactions within the team. The connections built in the informal system are often more rigid than in the formal one; it is much more difficult to change or transform these connections.

In the formal hierarchy and relationships within the team are prescribed in the form of legal requirements, taking into account the goals, norms and standards of production, and are also maximally impersonal.

There is also a division into mechanistic and organic company structures. The mechanistic one provides for a rigid hierarchy, the predominance of vertical ties, many horizontal divisions, a directive method of management, a single leading center that makes almost all managerial decisions individually. In general, this is a rather complicated scheme, communications between participants are regulated and limited, mainly, by orders and instructions.

The organic is distinguished by an extensive communication network between a small number of levels, the absence of a single control center, moreover, the control is very flexible and quickly adapts to changing circumstances. The partnership style of communication and consensus decision-making prevail here. A significant number of decisions at the lowest level can be made independently. This is what an ideal democratic society looks like.

The vast majority of industrial companies use the following formalized mechanistic organizational structures.

Linear

It assumes a strict hierarchy and horizontal subordination of the lower to the higher. The leader alone makes decisions and manages subordinates. In general, the organization repeats the production hierarchy of the company, the division takes place taking into account the specifics of production. Mainly used, small firms producing simple products.

How to analyze the organizational structure and make sure that it corresponds to the real state of affairs

If the organization structure is already described in the company, it is necessary to make sure that it is not outdated and shows how orders are actually given, decisions are made and responsibilities are distributed in the company. It happens that the business is developing dynamically, while the management does not pay attention to the formalization of the management system, they may “forget” to include positions, entire services, or even recently acquired business areas in the organizational structure. Only when they begin to form a hierarchy of centers of financial responsibility, they suddenly remember that “right there we still have a branch in Samara!”.

Make sure that the organizational structure reflects the roles and tasks of significant job units. If there is no clear distribution of functions among positions, then the structure itself may be useless. .

It repeats the linear one, but the chief has an additional headquarters for collecting and analyzing information, developing managerial decisions, and planning. Representatives of the headquarters do not make decisions, but only provide information and analytical support for the activities of the leader, removing part of the load from him.

Functional organizational structure of the enterprise

Departments are formed in the company - financial, marketing, production, etc. Each department has its own head. Each department performs its function in the work of the company. This division allows you to get functional managers-managers who specialize in their area. The functional organizational structure of the company is effective in mass production or service, where there is no need for operational management and constant development of new solutions.

Advantages

Flaws

functional managers are highly competent in their area of ​​influence, due to which they perform tasks better than generalists; line managers can focus on solving operational problems; you can invite third-party experts to consult on individual areas of work

decision-making time increases; communications between functional divisions are deteriorating, which leads to a struggle for resources within the company; the narrow specialization of functional managers complicates their transition to the highest level of managers; the performer in his work must be guided by the instructions of both his head of the department and the functional manager. This reduces the responsibility of the performer and leads to inconsistency or duplication of orders.

Linear construction allows you to strictly manage the company, and functional managers take on the task of setting work standards through instructions, schedules and regulations. Typically, functional managers do not give orders, but deal with the development of issues related to the launch of new products.

Advantages	Flaws
maintains a vertical relationship between the leader and the subordinate; line managers are focused on solving operational management issues; functional managers focus on planning, financial and logistics issues; this separation allows to increase the productivity and quality of the work of managers	the leading leader is forced to simultaneously solve both strategic and operational tasks; communications are built vertically, which worsens the interaction between departments at the horizontal level; competition between departments

The company is divided into production departments according to the directions, depending on the selected criterion. This may be a territorial, product, consumer or other principle. The formed division is distinguished by great independence, within it the functional managers report to the head of the division, who reports to the head office. Production issues are decided by the head of the division, the head office is engaged in strategic planning, the development of new products, and research.

Advantages	Flaws
division leaders receive greater responsibility and freedom of action; this approach simplifies the training of senior managers; the division is more mobile and dynamic, capable of responding faster to consumer needs; closer communication between performers and the head of one division	weak communication between the division and the head office can lead to a weakening of control and losses; poor communication within the division between departments; the ability to adapt to customer requirements can be significantly limited by the center, so this scheme is preferable in a stable development environment

In the 1970s, companies with organic structures began to emerge. These include the following options.

It is created to solve a specific problem by a specially selected group of specialists. After implementation, the group disbands. It is mainly used in the development of innovations, at the intersection of several science-intensive areas. In project teams, closer personal ties are formed that positively affect the quality of work of all team members.

The ancestor of this scheme is the Toyota company. In the company, the creation of innovations is put on stream, therefore, to support such work, targeted programs are created that deal with certain issues. If the question is finite in time, then a project team is created. Subordination is double - to the head of the program and the head of the functional unit whose employees work under the program. For target program a special functional committee is formed, no more than five people. A secretary is appointed to lead the affairs of the committee. The Committee periodically considers issues that need to be addressed, creates project teams, establishes rules for the relationship between departments, both in the vertical and horizontal planes.

Advantages

Flaws

the autonomy of groups or programs develops the managerial and professional skills of their members; each process has a person responsible for all the details of the work within the project; high quality of communications and control due to horizontal links and one decision-making center within a project or program, due to this, management becomes more efficient, flexible and responsive to consumer needs

for the full operation of this scheme, a high corporate culture is required; it is necessary to constantly train employees, high requirements for their business and professional qualities; responsibility is blurred due to dual subordination - to the project and the unit; competition for resources between projects and departments, conflicts between their leaders; work standards may be violated due to the employee's employment in design work

A direct analogy is the working artels of the late 80s. Within this scheme, teams make decisions and coordinate their activities independently. There are developed horizontal communications. For their activities, the brigades involve various specialists. If there is a division into functional units in the brigade, then it is called cross-functional and resembles matrix structure. If there is no such division, then it is called a brigade and resembles a design one. The scheme shows maximum efficiency with a high level of specialists and good technical equipment.

What requirements should the structure of the organization satisfy?

The developed structure should take into account the characteristics of the enterprise, the nature of work, the type of products produced and many other factors. It should be rational, optimal and economical.

Basic development principles:

1. A balance between a rigid hierarchy and the ability to remain flexible in decision making. The structure must have the ability to self-organize, set new goals and remain active.
2. The set of operations performed within the company must be stable and cyclical so as not to develop new procedures each time. Key points of operations should be ordered.
3. The ways of translation of managerial decisions should be as short as possible, and the decisions themselves should be made on the basis of competence, responsibility and availability of information.
4. The distribution of responsibility should occur in accordance with the processes performed.

Forms and methods of implementing the principles of formation of organizational structures make it possible to distinguish several types of them. So, according to the level (degree) of differentiation and integration of management functions, two classes of structures are distinguished:

• mechanistic, or bureaucratic, pyramidal, based on the centralist type of integration;
• organic, or adaptive, multidimensional, based on a combination of centralist and free types of integration.

Mechanistic (bureaucratic) pyramidal structures

Sustainability and rationalism were the priority parameters for the formation of bureaucratic structures for managing organizations already at the beginning of the 20th century. The concept of bureaucracy, formulated then by the German sociologist Max Weber, contains the following characteristics of a rational structure:

• a clear division of labor, which leads to the emergence of highly qualified specialists in each position;
• hierarchy of management levels, in which each lower level is controlled by a higher one and is subordinate to it;
• the presence of an interconnected system of generalized formal rules and standards, ensuring the uniformity of the performance by employees of their duties and coordination various tasks;
• formal impersonality of execution by officials official duties;
• recruitment in strict accordance with qualification requirements; protection of employees from arbitrary layoffs.

Pyramid bureaucratic structures include: linear, functional, linear-functional, linear-staff, divisional organizational structures.

Linear organizational structure of management

The linear structure implements the principle of unity of command and centralism, provides for the performance by one head of all management functions, subordination to him on the rights of unity of command of all lower units (Fig. 11.1).

This is one of the simplest organizational management structures. Hierarchy is clearly manifested in linear structures: at the head of each structural unit there is a head endowed with all powers, who exercises sole management of subordinate employees and concentrates all management functions in his hands.

At linear control each link and each subordinate has one leader, through whom all management commands pass through one channel at a time. In this case, management links are responsible for the results of all activities of managed objects. We are talking about the allocation of managers per object, each of which performs all types of work, develops and makes decisions related to the management of this object.

Since in a linear management structure decisions are passed down the chain from top to bottom, and the head of the lower level of management is subordinate to the head of a higher level above him, a kind of hierarchy of heads of this particular organization is formed (for example, section head, department head, store director, site foreman, engineer , head of the shop, director of the enterprise). In this case, the principle of unity of command applies, the essence of which is that subordinates carry out the orders of only one leader. In a linear management structure, each subordinate has his own boss, and each boss has several subordinates. Such a structure functions in small organizations, and in large ones - at the lowest level of management (section, brigade, etc.).

The linear organizational structure of management has its advantages and disadvantages (Table 11.1).

Table 11.1

Advantages and disadvantages of a linear management structure

Advantages

Flaws

Unity and clarity of command. Consistency of actions of performers. Ease of management (one communication channel). Clearly defined responsibility. Efficiency in decision making. Personal responsibility of the head for the final results of the activities of his unit.

High demands on the leader, who must be prepared comprehensively in order to ensure effective leadership for all management functions. Lack of links for planning and preparation of decisions. Information overload of medium levels due to many contacts with subordinate and higher organizations. Difficult communication between units of the same level. The concentration of power at the top level of management.

In the functional structures, functional units are created, endowed with authority and responsibility for the results of their activities. Linear links differ from functional ones by the integration of object management functions, a set of powers and responsibilities. The bottom line is that the performance of certain functions on specific issues is assigned to specialists, i.e. each governing body (or executor) is specialized in the implementation certain types management activities. In an organization, as a rule, specialists of the same profile are combined into specialized structural units (departments), for example, a planning department, accounting, etc. Thus, the overall task of managing the organization is divided, starting from the middle level, according to the functional criterion. Hence the name - functional management structure (Fig. 11.2). Instead of universal managers who must understand and perform all management functions, there is a staff of specialists with high competence in their field and responsible for a certain area (for example, planning and forecasting).

The functional structure implements the principle of separation and consolidation of management functions between structural divisions, provides for the subordination of each lower-level linear division to several higher-level managers who implement management functions. The advantages and disadvantages of this structure are presented in Table. 11.2.

Table 11.2

Advantages and disadvantages of the functional management structure

Advantages

Flaws

High competence of specialists responsible for the implementation of functions (increasing professionalism). Exemption of line managers from solving some special issues. Standardization, formalization and programming of management processes and operations. Elimination of duplication and parallelism in the performance of managerial functions. Reducing the need for generalists. Centralization of strategic decisions and decentralization of operational ones.

Excessive interest in the implementation of the goals and objectives of their units. Difficulties in maintaining constant relationships between different functional units. Emergence of tendencies of excessive centralization. Duration of decision-making procedures. Relatively frozen organizational form difficult to respond to change. The complexity of the division of power (multiplicity of subordination).

Experts point to a close relationship between the size of the firm and the organizational structure of management. The expansion of the size of the enterprise, the complication of internal relationships create conditions, and also necessitate the adoption integrated solutions aimed at restructuring the organization of intra-company management, an increase in the size of the firm leads to a deepening of structural differentiation (branches, management levels, organizational units).

In turn, this leads to an increase in administrative and management costs, as well as costs associated with coordination, but does not reduce the advantage of homogeneity of large firms, which is due to the fact that these firms are managed from a single center. However, the structural differentiation inherent in large firms requires the use of indirect (economic) methods of management and coordination of the activities of various organizational units.

Types of committees

There is no doubt about the advantage of using committees in such work, which requires the coordination of actions of management units, consultation in decision-making, the definition of powers and responsibilities, and the development of a work schedule.

New types of organizational structures

Currently, such types of structures are developing as network and virtual organizations, organizations with "internal" markets, multidimensional organizations, market-oriented organizations, entrepreneurial organizations, participatory, adhocracy, intellectual, learning organizations, circular corporations, etc.

A network structure means that an organization disaggregates its core functions (manufacturing, sales, finance, research and development) between individual contracting companies brokered by a small parent organization. The organizational chart of a hypothetical network organization is shown in fig. 11.10.

Network organizations differ from organizations of other types in a number of ways. First, network organizations rely more on market mechanisms than on administrative forms of resource management. Second, many of the networks that have recently been developed involve a more active and motivated role for participants. Thirdly, in an increasing number of industries, networks represent an association of organizations based on cooperation and mutual ownership of shares by group members - manufacturers, suppliers, trading and financial companies.

The so-called virtual organization or structure is closely related to the network structure. Unlike traditional mergers and acquisitions, partners in virtual organizations share costs, use each other's production experience and access to international markets.

The hallmarks of networked virtual organizations of the future can be summarized as follows:

1. the use of information technology to establish strong contacts;
2. joining forces to realize new opportunities;
3. lack of traditional boundaries - with close cooperation between manufacturers, suppliers, customers, it is difficult to determine where one company begins and another ends;
4. the main advantages and disadvantages of such organizations are given in Table. 11.7;
5. trust - partners share a sense of "common destiny", realizing that the fate of each of them depends on the other;
6. Excellence – Since each partner brings their “core competencies” to the union, it is possible to create an organization that is modern in every way.

Table 11.7

The main advantages and disadvantages of the network structure of the organization

Advantages	Flaws
Competitiveness at the global level. Flexible use of labor force. High adaptability to market requirements. Reducing the number of hierarchy levels (up to 2-3 levels) and, accordingly, the need for managerial personnel.	Lack of direct control over the activities of the company. Possibility of unwanted loss of group members (if the subcontractor retires and his company goes bankrupt). Low employee loyalty.

Multidimensional organization. This term was first used in 1974 by W. Goggin when describing the structure of Dow Corning Corporation. Multidimensional organizations are an alternative to the traditional type of organizational structures. As we know, in traditional organizational structures, the allocation of organizational units occurs, as a rule, according to one of the following criteria:

• functional (finance, production, marketing);
• grocery (for example, factories or production units that produce various goods and services);
• market (say, by regional principle or by type of consumer).

Depending on the specifics of the activity, one or another criterion prevails in the construction of the organizational structure. Over time, under the influence of external changes and changes in the company itself (its size, scope of activities, other internal factors), the very organizational structure of the company, and the prevailing principle of separating divisions can change. For example, with access to regional markets, the traditional linear-functional structure can be transformed into a regional divisional one. At the same time, reorganization is a rather lengthy and complicated process.

In a dynamic external environment, the company must be able to respond instantly to changes, so a structure is required that would not need to be rebuilt. Such a structure is a multidimensional organization.

Multidimensional organizations are organizations in which structural units simultaneously perform several functions (as if in several dimensions) (Fig. 11.11), for example:

• provide their production activities the necessary resources;
• produce a specific type of product or service for a specific consumer or market;
• ensure the sale (distribution) of their products and serve a specific consumer.

The basis of a multidimensional organization is an autonomous working group (subdivision) that implements all three functions: supply, production, distribution.

Such a group may be a "profit center". Sometimes these can be independent companies.

Units are easily included in the organizational structure and can leave it, their viability depends on the ability to produce goods and services that are in demand. Product or service-oriented divisions pay internal and external suppliers on a contractual basis. Functional divisions (production, warehouse, personnel, accounting) provide services mainly to other divisions of the company, being suppliers for them. Thus, there is an internal market within the organization. Divisions respond flexibly to changing needs of internal and external customers. Consumers automatically control their suppliers. At the same time, the performance of the unit does not depend on the performance of another unit, which facilitates the control and evaluation of the unit's performance.

Features of multidimensional organizations are as follows:

• departmental budgets are developed by the departments themselves, the company invests in them or gives loans;
• in multidimensional organizations there is no dual subordination, as in a two-dimensional matrix model, the leadership of the group is one;
• many divisions within a multidimensional organization can also be multidimensional. Departments can also be multidimensional, even if the organization as a whole is not multidimensional (for example, regional office large corporation may have a multidimensional structure, while the corporation as a whole is a divisional structure);
• there is no need to carry out any reorganization of the organizational structure as a whole and the relationship of autonomous groups, units can simply be created, eliminated or modified;
• each division of the organization can be completely autonomous, engaging in both recruitment and sales of finished products, etc .;
• the main indicator of the effectiveness of the work of autonomous groups is the profit received; this simplifies the analysis and control over the activities of groups, reduces bureaucratization, and the management system works more efficiently.

The main advantages and disadvantages of multidimensional organizations are given in Table. 11.8.

Table 11.8

Key Advantages and Disadvantages of Multidimensional Organization

Advantages	Flaws
Flexibility and adaptability to changes in the external environment. Reduction of bureaucracy and simplification of the management system. Focus on ends, not means. The combination of broad autonomy of departments using the synergy effect at the organization level.	In itself, the multidimensionality of the structure does not ensure the efficiency of the work of departments. tendency towards anarchy. Competition for resources within the organization. Lack of direct control over units. Difficulties in the implementation of strategic projects.

Circle organization. The basic principle of the circular organization is the democratic hierarchy. Leaders are not commanders, but act more like leaders. Unlike the hierarchical structure of traditional organizations, a circular organization has such features as the lack of undivided authority of leaders, the possibility of participation of each member of the organization in management, collective decision-making by the management of each member of the organization. These principles are implemented through the features of the structure of the circular organization, the main of which is that a council is formed around each leader (Fig. 11.12).

Each council, in addition to the head of the unit, includes his subordinates, as well as third-party representatives - heads of other structural units, external clients and consumers, public representatives. Participation in the council is mandatory for managers, but is voluntary for subordinates.

virtual organization. The emergence of the concept of a virtual organization is associated with the publication in 1992 of the monograph "Virtual Corporation" by W. Davidow and M. Malone.

A virtual organization is a network that includes the union of human, financial, material, organizational, technological and other resources of various enterprises and their integration using computer networks. This allows you to create a flexible and dynamic organizational system, the most adapted to the rapid creation of a new product and its introduction to the market. A virtual organization does not have a geographical center; the functioning of its divisions is coordinated with the help of modern information technologies and means of telecommunications.

The development of information technology has made it possible to make the physical presence of managers in the workplace unnecessary. Virtual associations are grouped according to the design principle, i.e. on a temporary basis.

as the need arises to create a certain product, implement a project, make a profit. The concept of a virtual organization creates fundamentally new business opportunities and is widely used in the 21st century.

An organization with an "internal market". The evolution of organizational structures is gradually evolving from hierarchical bureaucratic structures to matrix and project structures, and in recent decades to decentralized networks and business units.

Concept " domestic markets” is in stark contrast to the hierarchical structure. On the one hand, it allows you to use the potential of entrepreneurship within the organization, on the other hand, it has the disadvantages of market relations.

The basic principle of such organizations is the broad autonomy of departments (both linear and functional). The divisions are treated as autonomous " domestic enterprises who buy and sell goods and services, participate in intra-company and inter-company relationships.

We list the principles of formation and functioning of organizations with "internal markets":

1. Transformation of the hierarchy into internal business units. All divisions are transformed into autonomous "internal enterprises", becoming responsible for the results of activities.

2. Creation of economic infrastructure, including general systems reporting, communications and incentives.

3. Purposeful stimulation of synergy.

4. All departments are accountable for results, creative entrepreneurship is encouraged. Each division is treated like a small, separate company that independently manages its activities and manages resources. Divisions are given the freedom to conduct business operations within and outside the organization.

5. Auxiliary functional divisions are commercial centers that sell their services to both other divisions of the firm and external customers.

So, considering the trends in the development of organizations and organizational structures, it can be noted that modern organization- this is:

• market oriented organization. They are organic, rapidly adaptable divisional or matrix organizations in which all of their parts (R&D, manufacturing, human resources, marketing, sourcing, sales, finance, service) are clustered around a market or markets. These are organizations "driven by the market";
• entrepreneurial organization, i.e. an organization more focused on growth and on available opportunities and achievements than on controlled resources;
• participatory organization - an organization that maximizes the participation of employees in management;
• adhocracy organization - an organization that uses a high degree of freedom in the actions of employees, their competence and ability to independently solve emerging problems. This is an organic structure of a matrix, project, network type, with a predominance of informal horizontal connections. Often the structure of the organization is completely absent, the hierarchical structure is constantly changing, vertical and horizontal connections are predominantly informal;

An analysis of the experience of building organizational structures shows that the formation of management units is significantly influenced by the external and internal environment of the organization. This is the main reason for the impossibility of applying a single model of the management structure for all organizations. In addition, this impossibility is due to the specific features of a particular organization. The creation of a modern effective management structure should be based on scientific methods and principles for building organizational structures.

The main characteristic feature of the new systems of intra-company management should be: orientation to the long term; conducting fundamental research; diversification of operations; innovative activity; maximum use of the creative activity of the staff. Decentralization, reduction of levels in the administrative apparatus, promotion of employees and their payment depending on real results will become the main directions of changes in the administrative apparatus.

The process of modification of organizational management structures is developing in a number of specific areas. The main ones are the following.

1. Implementation of decentralization of production and marketing operations. For this purpose, semi-autonomous or autonomous branches have already been created or are being created within the largest companies, fully responsible for profit and loss. These departments are entrusted with full responsibility for the organization of production and marketing activities. Each department fully finances its activities, enters into commercial basis in partnership with any organization.

2. Innovative expansion, search for new markets and diversification of operations. This direction is implemented through the creation of innovative companies within large companies focused on the production and independent promotion of new products and technologies on the markets and operating on the principles of "risk financing". The widespread practice of large companies is the creation of small enterprises in the most promising areas, aimed at gaining a strong position in the market in the shortest possible time.

3. Debureaucratization, constant increase in the creative production efficiency of the personnel. To this end, a wide variety of measures are being taken, including the distribution of shares among the staff and the formation of enterprises collectively owned by their employees.

In modern conditions, not only fundamentally new forms of organization for our country are required, not only radically different methods of management, but also transitional modes of activity, a gradual transformation of one structure into another. In order to comprehensively take into account both the internal characteristics of organizations and dynamically changing external circumstances, as well as emerging progressive trends, it is necessary to use systems approach to the formation and reorganization of enterprises.

The systematic approach to the formation of the organizational structure is manifested in the following:

• do not lose sight of any of the management tasks, without which the implementation of the goals will be incomplete;
• to identify and interconnect in relation to these tasks a system of functions, rights and responsibilities along the vertical of management;
• explore and institutionalize all connections and relationships along the horizontal of management, i.e. to coordinate the activities of different links and management bodies in the performance of common current tasks and the implementation of promising cross-functional programs;
• provide an organic combination of vertical and horizontal management, meaning finding the optimal ratio of centralization and decentralization in management for the given conditions.

All this requires a carefully developed step-by-step procedure for designing structures, a detailed analysis and definition of a system of goals, a thoughtful selection of organizational units and forms of their coordination, and the development of relevant documents.