Description
Study on Fundamentals of Organization Structure, An organizational structure defines how activities such as task allocation, coordination and supervision are directed towards the achievement of organizational aims. It can also be considered as the viewing glass or perspective through which individuals see their organization and its environment.
Chapter
Three
Fundamentals
of
Organization
Structure
A Sample
Organization Chart
CEO
Vice President Vice President
Director
Fianance Manufacturing Human
Resources
Chief Budget Plant Maintenance Training
Benefits
Accountant Analyst u!erintendent u!erintendent !ecialist
Administrator
The Relationship of
Organization Design
to Efciency vs !earning
Outcomes
"orizontal
Organization
Designed for
!earning
"orizontal structure is
dominant
• Shared tas#s$
empo%erment • Rela&ed
hierarchy$ fe% rules
• "orizontal$ face 'to'face
communication
Domina
nt
Structur
al
Approa
ch
(ertical structure is
dominant
• Specialized
tas#s
• Strict hierarchy$ many
rules
• )any teams and tas#
forces
• Decentralized decision
ma#ing
• (ertical communication and reporting
systems
• Fe% teams$ tas# forces or
integrators
• Centralized decision ma#ing
(ertical Organization
Designed for
Efciency
!adder of )echanisms for
"orizontal
!in#age and
Coordination
" *+"
Teams
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
,
u
i
r
e
d
A
m
o
u
n
t
o
f
"
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
Full'time
*ntegrators
Tas# Forces
!O
-
!O
-
Direct
Contact
*nformationSyste
ms
Cost of
Coordination in
Time and "uman
Resources
"*+"
.ro/ect )anager
!ocation
in the
Structure
Financ
e
Departme
nt
Financi
al
Accounta
nt
0udge
t
Analy
st
)anageme
nt
Accounta
nt
Engineeri
ng
Departme
nt
.rodu
ct
Design
er
Draftspers
on
Electric
al
Design
er
.reside
nt
)ar#eti
ng
Departme
nt
)ar#e
t
Research
er
Advertisi
ng
Speciali
st
)ar#e
t
.lanne
r
.urchasi
ng
Departm
ent
0uye
r
0uye
r
0uye
r
.ro/ect
)anager
1e%
.roduct
A
.ro/ect
)anager
1e%
.roduct
0
.ro/ect
)anager
1e%
.roduct
C
Teams 2sed for
"orizontal
Coordination at Rodney "unt
Company
)ar#eting (ice
.res
-ater Control
E,uip
Sales
)anager
-ater Control
.roduct Team
Te&til
e
)achiner
y
Domestic
Sales
)anager
Te&tile
)achinery
E&port
)anager
Advertising
)anager
.resident
Engineering (ice .res
-ater Control E,uip
Chief Engineer
Te&tile )achinery
Chief Engineer
Te&tile .roduct Team
Customer Service$
.urchasing$
.roduction )anager
)anufacturing
(ice .res
Foundry +eneral
Supervisor
)achi
ne Shop
+eneral
Supervisor
Stainle
ss Steel
+eneral
Supervisor
Shipping and
3ard
Superviso
r
Structural Design
Options for
+rouping Employees into
Departments
Functional
+rou
ping
Engineering
Division
al
+roupin
g
Product
Di"ision #
CEO
Marketing
CEO
Product
Di"ision $
Manufacturing
Product
Di"ision %
Source: Adapted from David Nadler and Michael Tushman ,
Strategic Organization Design (Glenview, Ill.: cott!oresman , "#$$%, &$.
Strengths and
-ea#nesses of
Functional Organization
Structure
&
STRE1+T
"S4
• Allo%s
economies of
scale %ithin
functional
departmen
ts
• Ena5les in'
d
e
p
t
h
#
n
o
%
le
dge and s#ill
development
• Ena5les organization to
accomplish functional
goals
• *s 5est %ith only one or
fe% products
& -EA6
1ESSE
S4
• Slo%
response time
to
environment
al changes
• )ay cause
decisions to pile
o
n
t
o
p
$
h
i
e
r
a
r
c
hy overload
• !eads to poor
horizontal
coordination
among
department
s
• Results in less
innovation
• *nvolves restricted
vie% of
organizational
goals
Source: Adapted from 'o(ert Duncan, )*hat Is the 'i+ht
,r+ani-ation tructure. Decision Tree Anal/sis 0rovides the Answer,)
Organizational Dynamics (*inter "#1#%: 23#.
Strengths and
-ea#nesses of
Divisional Organization
Structure
&
STRE1+T
"S4
• Suited to fast change in
unsta5le
environmen
t
• !eads to client
satisfaction
5ecause product
responsi5ility
and contact points are
clear
&
-EA61ESS
ES4
• Eliminates
economies of
scale in
functional
department
s
• !eads to poor
coordination
across product
lines
• *nvolves high
coordination across
functions
• Allo%s units to
adapt to
di7erences in products$
regions$
clients
• 0est in large organizations
%ith
several
products
• Decentralizes decision'
ma#ing
• Eliminates in'
depth
competence and
technical
specializatio
n
• )a#es integration
and
standardization
across
product lines
difcult
Source: Adapted from 'o(ert Duncan, )*hat Is the
'i+ht ,r+ani-ation tructure. Decision Tree Anal/sis
0rovides the Answer,) Organizational Dynamics
(*inter "#1#%: 24".
Reorganization from Functional
Structure
to Divisional Structure at
*nfo'Tech
Functional Structure
Info-Tech
President
R&D Manufacturing Accounting Marketing
Divisional 'nfo(Tech
Structure President
Electronic Office Virtual
Pu&lishing Automation Reality
R)D Mfg Acctg M*tg R)D Mfg Acctg M*tg R)D Mfg Acctg M*tg
Structural Design
Options for
+rouping Employees
8Continued9
)ulti'focused
+rouping
CEO
)ar#eting
)anufacturing
.roduct
Division :
.roduct
Division ;
Source: Adapted from David Nadler and Michael
Tushman , Strategic Organization Design (Glenview, Ill.:
cott !oresman , "#$$%, &$.
Structural Design
Options for
+rouping Employees
8Continued9
"orizontal
+rouping
CEO
"uman Resources
Finance
Core
.rocess :
Core
.rocess ;
Source: Adapted from David Nadler and Michael Tushman ,
Strategic Organization Design (Glenview, Ill.: cott!oresman ,
"#$$%, &$.
+eographical
Structure
for Apple
Computer
A!!le
Products
A!!le
Americas
Canada
+atin
America,
Cari&&ean
CEO
te"e -o&s
A!!le
Euro!e
France
A!!le
Pacific
Australia
-a!an
ales Far East
er"ice and
Mar*eting to
Regions
Source: www.apple.com
Dual'Authority
Structure in a
)atri&
Organization
President
Director Design Mfg Mar*eting Procure(
of Product Vice Vice Vice Controller ment
O!erations President President President Manager
Product
Manager A
Product
Manager B
Product
Manager C
Product
Manager D
Strengths and
-ea#nesses of
)atri& Organization
Structure
& STRE1+T"S4 &
-EA61ESSES4
• Achieves coordination • Causes participants to
e&perience dual
necessary to meet dual authority$ %hich can 5e
frustrating and demands from customers confusing
• Fle&i5le sharing of human • )eans
participants need good
resources across products interpersonal s#ills and
e&tensive
• Suited to
comple& decisions
and fre,uent
changes in
unsta5le
environment
• .rovides opportunity
for 5oth
functional and
product s#ill
developme
nt
• 0est in medium'
sized
organizations %ith
multiple
products
training
• *s time consuming< involves
fre,uent
meetings and con=ict
resolution
sessions
• -ill not %or# unless
participants
understand it and adopt
collegial rather
than vertical'type
relationships
• Re,uires great e7ort to
maintain po%er
5alance
Source: Adapted from 'o(ert Duncan, )*hat Is the 'i+ht
,r+ani-ation tructure. Decision Tree Anal/sis 0rovides the
Answer,)Organizational Dynamics (*inter "#1#%: 23#.
)atri& Structure
for
-orld%ide Steel
Company
President
(ertic
"
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
s
al Functions
Industrial
Mf
g.
Marketing Finance Services Metallurgy Field Sales Relations
Vic
e
Vice Vice Vice Vice Vice Vice
Open Die
Business Mgr.
Ring Products
Business Mgr.
Weels ! "#les
Business Mgr.
Steel$aking
Business Mgr.
President President President President President President President
A "orizontal
Structure
Top
)anagement
Team
.rocess Team Team Team
O%ner : ; >
Mar5et 0roduct
A
n
a
l
/
s
i
s
'esearch 0lannin+
Testin+
Custome
r
1e% .roduct Development
.rocess
.rocess Team Team Team
O%ner : ; >
Sources: 6ased on !ran5 ,stroff,
The Horizontal Organization, (New 7or5:
Anal/sis 0urchasin+ Material
!low
Distri(. Custome
r
,8ford 9niversit/ 0ress, "###%: ;ohn A. 6/rne,
)The , "##4, 1&?$": and Thomas A. tewart,
)The earch for the ,r+ani-ation of Tomorrow,)
Fortune, Ma/ "#, "##3, #3?# $ .
.rocurement and !ogistics
.rocess
Strengths and
-ea#nesses of
"orizontal
Structure
& STRE1+T
"S4
• Fle&i5ility and rapid
response to
changes in customer
needs
• Directs the attention of
everyone
& -EA61ESS
ES4
• Determining core
processed to
organize around is
difcult and
time'
consuming
to%ard the production and delivery of
value to the
customer
• Each employee has a
5roader vie% of
organizational
goals
• .romotes a focus on
team%or# and
colla5oration@common
commitment
to meeting
o5/ectives
• *mproves ,uality of life for
employees
5y o7ering them the
opportunity to
share responsi5ility$ ma#e
decisions$
and 5e accounta5le for
outcomes
• Re,uires changes in
culture$ /o5
design$
management
philosophy$ and
information and
re%ard
systems
• Traditional managers
may 5al#
%hen they have to give
up po%er
and
authority
• Re,uires signi?cant
training of
employees to %or#
e7ectively in
a horizontal team
environment
• Can limit in'depth
s#ill
Sources: 6ased on !ran5 ,stroff, The Horizontal
Organization: What the
Organization of the Future Looks Like and Ho !t Deli"ers #alue to
$ustomers, (New 7or5: ,8ford 9niversit/ 0ress, "###%:
and 'ichard A. Daft, Organization Theory and Design, & th ed.,
(=incinnati, ,hio: outh ?*estern =olle+e 0u(lishin+, "##$% 3B4.
developme
nt
"y5rid
Structure
.art : Sun .etrochemical
.roducts
Functio
nal
Structu
re
.rodu
ct
Structu
re
Chie
f
Couns
el
Fuel
s
(ice
.reside
nt
"uma
n
Resourc
es
Direct
or
.reside
nt
!u5rican
ts
(ic
e
.reside
nt
Technolo
gy
(ic
e
.reside
nt
Chemica
ls
(ic
e
.reside
nt
Financi
al
Service
s
(ice
.res
Sources: 6ased on Ainda . Ac5erman, )Transition Mana+ement:
An In?Depth Aoo5 at Mana+in+ =omple8 =han+e,)
Organizational Dynamics (ummer "#$3%: 2&?& & :
and !ran5 ,stroff, The Horizontal Organization,
(New 7or5: ,8ford 9niversit/ 0ress, "###%, !i+. 3.", 42.
"y5rid
Structure
.art ; Ford Customer Service
Division
Function
al
Structur
e
Director
and
.rocess
O%ner
Financ
e
Team
s
(ice .resident
and
+eneral
)anager
Strategy
and
Communicati
on
"uman
Resources
Di
rec
tor and
.rocess O%ner
"
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
Director
and
.rocess
O%ner
Sources: 6ased on Ainda . Ac5erman, )Transition Mana+ement:
Team
s
Team
s
.arts Supply @ !ogistics
+roup
(ehicle Service and .rograms
+roup
Technical Support
+roup
AnIn?Depth Aoo5 at Mana+in+ =omple8 =han+e,) Organizational Dynamics
(ummer "#$3%: 2& ?&&: and !ran5,stroff , The Horizontal Organization, (New7or5: ,8ford
9niversit/ 0ress, "###%, !i+. 3.", 42.
Organization Conte&tual
(aria5les
that *n=uence
Structure
Cultur
e
Chapter
A
Strateg
y$
+oal
s
Chapter
;
Structu
re
8learning
vs
efcienc
y9
Environm
ent
Size
Chapter B
Technology
Chapters C$D
Sources: Adapted from ;a/ '. Gal(raith,
$om%eting ith Fle&i'le Lateral Organizations, 3 n d ed.
('eadin+, Mass.: Addison?*esle/, "##2%, =h.":
;a/ '. Gal(raith, Organization Design ('eadin+, Mass.:
Addison?*esle/, "#11%, =h. ".
Chapters E$ F
The Relationship of
Structure to
OrganizationGs 1eed for Efciency
vs !earning
Functional %ith
Functional cross'functional Divisional )atri&
"orizontal Structure
teams$ integrators Structure Structure
Structure
"orizont
al4
•
Coordinatio
n
•
Change
Dominant •
!earning
Structural
(ertical4
•
*nnovation
Approach
•
•
Control Efciency
•
Sta5ilit
y
•
Relia5ilit
y
•
Fle&i5ility
Symptoms
of
Structural
De?ciency
& Decision ma#ing is delayed or
lac#ing in
,uality
& The organization does not
respond
innovatively to a changing
environment
& Too much con=ict from
departments 5eing
at cross purposes is
evident
doc_843244322.docx
Study on Fundamentals of Organization Structure, An organizational structure defines how activities such as task allocation, coordination and supervision are directed towards the achievement of organizational aims. It can also be considered as the viewing glass or perspective through which individuals see their organization and its environment.
Chapter
Three
Fundamentals
of
Organization
Structure
A Sample
Organization Chart
CEO
Vice President Vice President
Director
Fianance Manufacturing Human
Resources
Chief Budget Plant Maintenance Training
Benefits
Accountant Analyst u!erintendent u!erintendent !ecialist
Administrator
The Relationship of
Organization Design
to Efciency vs !earning
Outcomes
"orizontal
Organization
Designed for
!earning
"orizontal structure is
dominant
• Shared tas#s$
empo%erment • Rela&ed
hierarchy$ fe% rules
• "orizontal$ face 'to'face
communication
Domina
nt
Structur
al
Approa
ch
(ertical structure is
dominant
• Specialized
tas#s
• Strict hierarchy$ many
rules
• )any teams and tas#
forces
• Decentralized decision
ma#ing
• (ertical communication and reporting
systems
• Fe% teams$ tas# forces or
integrators
• Centralized decision ma#ing
(ertical Organization
Designed for
Efciency
!adder of )echanisms for
"orizontal
!in#age and
Coordination
" *+"
Teams
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
,
u
i
r
e
d
A
m
o
u
n
t
o
f
"
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
Full'time
*ntegrators
Tas# Forces
!O
-
!O
-
Direct
Contact
*nformationSyste
ms
Cost of
Coordination in
Time and "uman
Resources
"*+"
.ro/ect )anager
!ocation
in the
Structure
Financ
e
Departme
nt
Financi
al
Accounta
nt
0udge
t
Analy
st
)anageme
nt
Accounta
nt
Engineeri
ng
Departme
nt
.rodu
ct
Design
er
Draftspers
on
Electric
al
Design
er
.reside
nt
)ar#eti
ng
Departme
nt
)ar#e
t
Research
er
Advertisi
ng
Speciali
st
)ar#e
t
.lanne
r
.urchasi
ng
Departm
ent
0uye
r
0uye
r
0uye
r
.ro/ect
)anager
1e%
.roduct
A
.ro/ect
)anager
1e%
.roduct
0
.ro/ect
)anager
1e%
.roduct
C
Teams 2sed for
"orizontal
Coordination at Rodney "unt
Company
)ar#eting (ice
.res
-ater Control
E,uip
Sales
)anager
-ater Control
.roduct Team
Te&til
e
)achiner
y
Domestic
Sales
)anager
Te&tile
)achinery
E&port
)anager
Advertising
)anager
.resident
Engineering (ice .res
-ater Control E,uip
Chief Engineer
Te&tile )achinery
Chief Engineer
Te&tile .roduct Team
Customer Service$
.urchasing$
.roduction )anager
)anufacturing
(ice .res
Foundry +eneral
Supervisor
)achi
ne Shop
+eneral
Supervisor
Stainle
ss Steel
+eneral
Supervisor
Shipping and
3ard
Superviso
r
Structural Design
Options for
+rouping Employees into
Departments
Functional
+rou
ping
Engineering
Division
al
+roupin
g
Product
Di"ision #
CEO
Marketing
CEO
Product
Di"ision $
Manufacturing
Product
Di"ision %
Source: Adapted from David Nadler and Michael Tushman ,
Strategic Organization Design (Glenview, Ill.: cott!oresman , "#$$%, &$.
Strengths and
-ea#nesses of
Functional Organization
Structure
&
STRE1+T
"S4
• Allo%s
economies of
scale %ithin
functional
departmen
ts
• Ena5les in'
d
e
p
t
h
#
n
o
%
le
dge and s#ill
development
• Ena5les organization to
accomplish functional
goals
• *s 5est %ith only one or
fe% products
& -EA6
1ESSE
S4
• Slo%
response time
to
environment
al changes
• )ay cause
decisions to pile
o
n
t
o
p
$
h
i
e
r
a
r
c
hy overload
• !eads to poor
horizontal
coordination
among
department
s
• Results in less
innovation
• *nvolves restricted
vie% of
organizational
goals
Source: Adapted from 'o(ert Duncan, )*hat Is the 'i+ht
,r+ani-ation tructure. Decision Tree Anal/sis 0rovides the Answer,)
Organizational Dynamics (*inter "#1#%: 23#.
Strengths and
-ea#nesses of
Divisional Organization
Structure
&
STRE1+T
"S4
• Suited to fast change in
unsta5le
environmen
t
• !eads to client
satisfaction
5ecause product
responsi5ility
and contact points are
clear
&
-EA61ESS
ES4
• Eliminates
economies of
scale in
functional
department
s
• !eads to poor
coordination
across product
lines
• *nvolves high
coordination across
functions
• Allo%s units to
adapt to
di7erences in products$
regions$
clients
• 0est in large organizations
%ith
several
products
• Decentralizes decision'
ma#ing
• Eliminates in'
depth
competence and
technical
specializatio
n
• )a#es integration
and
standardization
across
product lines
difcult
Source: Adapted from 'o(ert Duncan, )*hat Is the
'i+ht ,r+ani-ation tructure. Decision Tree Anal/sis
0rovides the Answer,) Organizational Dynamics
(*inter "#1#%: 24".
Reorganization from Functional
Structure
to Divisional Structure at
*nfo'Tech
Functional Structure
Info-Tech
President
R&D Manufacturing Accounting Marketing
Divisional 'nfo(Tech
Structure President
Electronic Office Virtual
Pu&lishing Automation Reality
R)D Mfg Acctg M*tg R)D Mfg Acctg M*tg R)D Mfg Acctg M*tg
Structural Design
Options for
+rouping Employees
8Continued9
)ulti'focused
+rouping
CEO
)ar#eting
)anufacturing
.roduct
Division :
.roduct
Division ;
Source: Adapted from David Nadler and Michael
Tushman , Strategic Organization Design (Glenview, Ill.:
cott !oresman , "#$$%, &$.
Structural Design
Options for
+rouping Employees
8Continued9
"orizontal
+rouping
CEO
"uman Resources
Finance
Core
.rocess :
Core
.rocess ;
Source: Adapted from David Nadler and Michael Tushman ,
Strategic Organization Design (Glenview, Ill.: cott!oresman ,
"#$$%, &$.
+eographical
Structure
for Apple
Computer
A!!le
Products
A!!le
Americas
Canada
+atin
America,
Cari&&ean
CEO
te"e -o&s
A!!le
Euro!e
France
A!!le
Pacific
Australia
-a!an
ales Far East
er"ice and
Mar*eting to
Regions
Source: www.apple.com
Dual'Authority
Structure in a
)atri&
Organization
President
Director Design Mfg Mar*eting Procure(
of Product Vice Vice Vice Controller ment
O!erations President President President Manager
Product
Manager A
Product
Manager B
Product
Manager C
Product
Manager D
Strengths and
-ea#nesses of
)atri& Organization
Structure
& STRE1+T"S4 &
-EA61ESSES4
• Achieves coordination • Causes participants to
e&perience dual
necessary to meet dual authority$ %hich can 5e
frustrating and demands from customers confusing
• Fle&i5le sharing of human • )eans
participants need good
resources across products interpersonal s#ills and
e&tensive
• Suited to
comple& decisions
and fre,uent
changes in
unsta5le
environment
• .rovides opportunity
for 5oth
functional and
product s#ill
developme
nt
• 0est in medium'
sized
organizations %ith
multiple
products
training
• *s time consuming< involves
fre,uent
meetings and con=ict
resolution
sessions
• -ill not %or# unless
participants
understand it and adopt
collegial rather
than vertical'type
relationships
• Re,uires great e7ort to
maintain po%er
5alance
Source: Adapted from 'o(ert Duncan, )*hat Is the 'i+ht
,r+ani-ation tructure. Decision Tree Anal/sis 0rovides the
Answer,)Organizational Dynamics (*inter "#1#%: 23#.
)atri& Structure
for
-orld%ide Steel
Company
President
(ertic
"
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
s
al Functions
Industrial
Mf
g.
Marketing Finance Services Metallurgy Field Sales Relations
Vic
e
Vice Vice Vice Vice Vice Vice
Open Die
Business Mgr.
Ring Products
Business Mgr.
Weels ! "#les
Business Mgr.
Steel$aking
Business Mgr.
President President President President President President President
A "orizontal
Structure
Top
)anagement
Team
.rocess Team Team Team
O%ner : ; >
Mar5et 0roduct
A
n
a
l
/
s
i
s
'esearch 0lannin+
Testin+
Custome
r
1e% .roduct Development
.rocess
.rocess Team Team Team
O%ner : ; >
Sources: 6ased on !ran5 ,stroff,
The Horizontal Organization, (New 7or5:
Anal/sis 0urchasin+ Material
!low
Distri(. Custome
r
,8ford 9niversit/ 0ress, "###%: ;ohn A. 6/rne,
)The , "##4, 1&?$": and Thomas A. tewart,
)The earch for the ,r+ani-ation of Tomorrow,)
Fortune, Ma/ "#, "##3, #3?# $ .
.rocurement and !ogistics
.rocess
Strengths and
-ea#nesses of
"orizontal
Structure
& STRE1+T
"S4
• Fle&i5ility and rapid
response to
changes in customer
needs
• Directs the attention of
everyone
& -EA61ESS
ES4
• Determining core
processed to
organize around is
difcult and
time'
consuming
to%ard the production and delivery of
value to the
customer
• Each employee has a
5roader vie% of
organizational
goals
• .romotes a focus on
team%or# and
colla5oration@common
commitment
to meeting
o5/ectives
• *mproves ,uality of life for
employees
5y o7ering them the
opportunity to
share responsi5ility$ ma#e
decisions$
and 5e accounta5le for
outcomes
• Re,uires changes in
culture$ /o5
design$
management
philosophy$ and
information and
re%ard
systems
• Traditional managers
may 5al#
%hen they have to give
up po%er
and
authority
• Re,uires signi?cant
training of
employees to %or#
e7ectively in
a horizontal team
environment
• Can limit in'depth
s#ill
Sources: 6ased on !ran5 ,stroff, The Horizontal
Organization: What the
Organization of the Future Looks Like and Ho !t Deli"ers #alue to
$ustomers, (New 7or5: ,8ford 9niversit/ 0ress, "###%:
and 'ichard A. Daft, Organization Theory and Design, & th ed.,
(=incinnati, ,hio: outh ?*estern =olle+e 0u(lishin+, "##$% 3B4.
developme
nt
"y5rid
Structure
.art : Sun .etrochemical
.roducts
Functio
nal
Structu
re
.rodu
ct
Structu
re
Chie
f
Couns
el
Fuel
s
(ice
.reside
nt
"uma
n
Resourc
es
Direct
or
.reside
nt
!u5rican
ts
(ic
e
.reside
nt
Technolo
gy
(ic
e
.reside
nt
Chemica
ls
(ic
e
.reside
nt
Financi
al
Service
s
(ice
.res
Sources: 6ased on Ainda . Ac5erman, )Transition Mana+ement:
An In?Depth Aoo5 at Mana+in+ =omple8 =han+e,)
Organizational Dynamics (ummer "#$3%: 2&?& & :
and !ran5 ,stroff, The Horizontal Organization,
(New 7or5: ,8ford 9niversit/ 0ress, "###%, !i+. 3.", 42.
"y5rid
Structure
.art ; Ford Customer Service
Division
Function
al
Structur
e
Director
and
.rocess
O%ner
Financ
e
Team
s
(ice .resident
and
+eneral
)anager
Strategy
and
Communicati
on
"uman
Resources
Di
rec
tor and
.rocess O%ner
"
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
Director
and
.rocess
O%ner
Sources: 6ased on Ainda . Ac5erman, )Transition Mana+ement:
Team
s
Team
s
.arts Supply @ !ogistics
+roup
(ehicle Service and .rograms
+roup
Technical Support
+roup
AnIn?Depth Aoo5 at Mana+in+ =omple8 =han+e,) Organizational Dynamics
(ummer "#$3%: 2& ?&&: and !ran5,stroff , The Horizontal Organization, (New7or5: ,8ford
9niversit/ 0ress, "###%, !i+. 3.", 42.
Organization Conte&tual
(aria5les
that *n=uence
Structure
Cultur
e
Chapter
A
Strateg
y$
+oal
s
Chapter
;
Structu
re
8learning
vs
efcienc
y9
Environm
ent
Size
Chapter B
Technology
Chapters C$D
Sources: Adapted from ;a/ '. Gal(raith,
$om%eting ith Fle&i'le Lateral Organizations, 3 n d ed.
('eadin+, Mass.: Addison?*esle/, "##2%, =h.":
;a/ '. Gal(raith, Organization Design ('eadin+, Mass.:
Addison?*esle/, "#11%, =h. ".
Chapters E$ F
The Relationship of
Structure to
OrganizationGs 1eed for Efciency
vs !earning
Functional %ith
Functional cross'functional Divisional )atri&
"orizontal Structure
teams$ integrators Structure Structure
Structure
"orizont
al4
•
Coordinatio
n
•
Change
Dominant •
!earning
Structural
(ertical4
•
*nnovation
Approach
•
•
Control Efciency
•
Sta5ilit
y
•
Relia5ilit
y
•
Fle&i5ility
Symptoms
of
Structural
De?ciency
& Decision ma#ing is delayed or
lac#ing in
,uality
& The organization does not
respond
innovatively to a changing
environment
& Too much con=ict from
departments 5eing
at cross purposes is
evident
doc_843244322.docx