Study the organizational structure of this organization. Organization structure

What does it cost us to build a house?
Let's draw, let's live.
folk wisdom

I have a nightmare: an excess of bureaucracy in the state,
where illiteracy has recently been eradicated.
Stanislav Jerzy Lec

1. What is the structure of the organization (definitions)

Organization structure and execution of tasks

The structure of the organization and the execution of tasks are very closely related. So closely that if the structure and other elements of the organizational process do not fit together and no effort is made to adapt the structure, then it becomes impossible to perform tasks (Fig. 2).

This lecture describes the main options for the structure of enterprises and their features, which make it possible to choose the necessary structure for implementing the chosen strategy.

So what is it organization structure? There are various interpretations of this concept.

Ansoff I. (1989) believes that these are static structures for regulating the production activities of the company and the distribution of managerial functions.

Using the approaches of Evenenko L.I. (1983) and Fatkhutdinova R.A. (1997), this formula can be supplemented as follows: organizational structure- this is a set of departments of the organization involved in the construction and coordination of the functioning of the management system, the development and implementation of management decisions, as well as the connections and relations between them arising in the process of management to achieve the intended goals.

There are other definitions as well. Here are some of them.

The organizational structure shows the area of responsibility of each employee and his relationship with other employees of structural units.
The organizational structure shows who is responsible for what areas of work. It shows the interaction (communication) of individual sections among themselves, allows and requires the use of common sense and the ability to assess the situation at all levels of management.
The internal organizational structure of enterprises is designed to actually ensure the integration of science and production; production, maintenance and marketing; production and foreign economic activity; economic responsibility of the organization as a whole and its individual production units. All of these definitions and approaches suffer from some shortcomings. First of all, this is a mechanistic approach that excludes the human factor, but takes into account the human resource. However, in the modern business world, it is the human factor that is given priority. And the second - the organization is considered in isolation from the environment. But no organization can live in isolation.

System approach to organization

Another point of view provides a systematic approach to the organization.

Before talking about this approach, let's define systems. A system is a set of stable, in some period of time, group of elements and links between these elements. Systems can be closed, that is, having no connection with the environment or other systems, and open. From this point of view, the organization can be defined as an open system. Therefore, the structure of this system can be represented as a description of the elements, their location and the nature of the connections between them.

What elements are present in the organization? These are the resources: human, material, financial, informational. These elements, grouped differently in different places of the system, form subsystems or divisions of the organization, between which links are formed. (Connections, of course, are also formed within subsystems). The most complex element in the organization system is. First of all, because of the uniqueness of each individual. From the point of view of the organizational structure, especially when building or changing it, it is important to evaluate, and when building the structure, distribute such features of the human resource as Skills, Knowledge, Abilities (including creative and intellectual) so that power, authority and planning, organization of work and control, disposal of other resources and motivation, functions and operations ensure the most effective achievement of the goals and objectives of the organization.

As for the links between the elements of the organizational structure and the organizational structure and environment, they are defined and can be described through resource flows.

Thus, we can propose the following definition of the organizational structure: The structure of an organization is a set of elements-resources distributed in the organization system (human, material, financial, informational), taking into account their features and characteristics and links through resource flows between these elements, elements and the environment .

Often, when building a structure, organizations forget about such features of a human resource as motivation, leadership, etc. This leads to:

the emergence of unmotivated employees in the organization;
the emergence of groups with internal leaders who achieve goals that are not related to the goals of the organization;
an imbalance of power, when individuals in an organization, having gained power, begin to solve their own problems at the expense of it and / or use power to gain more power. Moreover, of their own free will, people seeking power rarely

stop and, as they move forward, begin to compete for power, including with the first leader, or leave the organization in search of more power (and losing a qualified employee is not always pleasant). All this significantly reduces the efficiency of the organization.

2. How the structure is built (option) What determines the structure of the organization, what you should first of all pay attention to when building it, these are very important issues. Different organizations do things differently. Some start building from the available resources or even from some of their characteristics, such as powers or from operations and functions.

Considering that an organization is an open system, moreover, that the viability of an organization is determined more by its connections with the external environment than by internal processes, it seems that it makes sense to build an organizational structure from the external environment, but most likely from customers and connections with them. This is a marketing approach to structure building and has been around for a long time in the market environment.

That is, when building a structure, we must, first of all, determine what resources (material - products and services, informational) should be transferred to the buyer or society in order to receive other resources (financial, informational) in return. After that, we analyze the possibility of creating resources that are in demand, and if we come to the conclusion that this is real, we begin to create a structure.

First, we determine what final operations need to be done in order to obtain the final product, then we build the technological chain back from this operation (see Fig. 3). Having registered all the operations, we begin to group them according to certain criteria into functions or jobs. Grouping functions or jobs by features will give us divisions. After that, we begin to allocate resources by associating them with functions and operations. At the same time, for the human resource, Job Responsibilities and Qualifications . The Qualification Requirements define the required Skills, Knowledge and Abilities . In addition, it is better to determine the motivation, attitude to leadership and responsibility, to the power of existing employees, especially from management personnel, and only then make a decision on their appointment to positions.

The Peter Principle: In any hierarchical system, each employee strives to achieve his level of incompetence.

Consequences:

Over time, each position will be filled by an employee who is incompetent in the performance of his duties.
The work is done by those employees who have not yet reached their level of incompetence.

Peter's hidden postulate according to Godin: Every employee starts with his level of competence.
Peter's Transformation: Internal consistency is valued over efficient work.
Peter's observation: Overcompetence is more undesirable than incompetence.
Peter's Law of Evolution: Competence always contains a grain of incompetence.

In fact, the structure of the organization is not necessarily built from the client. It is built and changed from the most scarce resource for the organization at the time of construction. And this resource is not always buyers' money.

Of course, it is not always possible to implement such a method of building a structure for various reasons. For example, in connection with the already existing technology, structure or culture of the organization. But to take into account such an approach when developing the structure, apparently, it makes sense.

Structure Options

Organizations vary greatly in size, capabilities, and goals. However, the differences in their structure are determined by only a few parameters. By understanding these parameters, it is possible to explore and build the structure of many, if not all, organizations. These parameters are: specialization, formalization, norm of manageability, centralization.

1. Specialization

One of the main differences between organizations is how jobs and tasks are distributed. There are organizations with a high degree of specialization. These are usually large organizations. There are small organizations in which employees perform a wide range of responsibilities. Thus, to some extent, one can say that

that the degree of specialization is determined by the size of the organization. However, you should not expect that people working in small organizations will be able to be professionals in all areas for which they are responsible. On the other hand, it is difficult to expect that personnel in organizations with a high degree of specialization will be able to satisfactorily perform tasks that are not characteristic of them or support changes associated with their reprofiling. In addition, significant efforts are needed to coordinate the work of specialists. That is, at first the organization solves the issue of specialization, and having solved it, it begins to think about integration and coordination.

2. Formalization

At one end of the formalization scale are organizations with few written rules. People in such organizations act most often in accordance with the prevailing situation. On the other hand, there are organizations with clear rules about who, when and how should behave, who makes decisions, who is responsible for what. Most likely, the first type of organization provides more opportunities for creativity. Organizations of the second type provide more security for employees and more certainty, but there is a danger of drowning in papers. At the same time, formal organizations are difficult to change, but they are easier to manage. The leader needs to look for the optimal balance between formalization and informal management.

3. Norm of controllability

The third very important aspect of the structure is the rate of manageability. This indicator is determined by the number of people subordinate to one person. From this point of view, there is a flat organization structure and a tower structure. Studies say that when performing routine, repetitive, structured work, it is possible to have up to 30 people in direct subordination. This is when there are precise instructions and employees do not make their own decisions. A middle-level manager can have up to 10-12 subordinates. Since his subordinates are also managers or office workers, their work is less structured and they are able to make independent decisions. At the level of enterprise management, where strategic decisions are made, the manager can be subordinate to no more than 5 people, otherwise he is immersed in routine information from many sources, begins to make a large number of operational decisions, and he does not have time for strategies and planning.

At the same time, the controllability norm can be wider with well-trained and trained personnel or a high level of formalization.

4. Centralization versus decentralization: who makes the decisions?

In some organizations, important decisions are made only by a certain level of management, in others, almost all personnel are involved in the decision-making process, which can make at least some contribution to the decision. When forming the strategy of small organizations, where it is easy to take into account the opinion of all, the second method may be the most effective, but not always. It depends on the training and readiness of the staff. The conducted studies have shown that for the CIS countries, the involvement of employees is often ineffective and does not find support among employees. However, this is not an axiom.

We can say that the organizations of the first type are centralized, the second type are decentralized. At the same time, both systems have a number of advantages and disadvantages in the areas of staff motivation, control over it, delegation of authority, etc.

Types of organizational structures

All organizational structures can be divided into the following types:

simple linear
functional;
divisional (product; regional; project);
matrix;
adaptive;
organic;
conglomerate, etc.

In this lecture, we will consider the first three as basic ones.

Functional design: When do tasks define structure?

This type of structure is adopted by newly created organizations, so it can be considered basic. Based on this design, departments, divisions and work groups are based on performing specific tasks. This structure allows, as the organization grows, to add departments with new functions. Since employees with the same functions are not dispersed, economies of scale are triggered with this design, employees are stimulated to specialize and develop skills.

The disadvantages include that:

such a design provokes units to go their own way;
employees with the same experience and knowledge tend to support each other and oppose other units;
management may find that it is overwhelmed with the work of creating functional units;
such a structure pushes employees to perform routine work, inhibits innovation and the ability to respond to changes in external conditions.

Rice. 4. Simple functional design

Divisional Design: When Product, Market or Geographic Niche, Projects define Design

As an organization grows and new products and markets emerge, functional design can become a drag on growth. In this case, he begins to change. Functionally similar departments emerge and serve individual products or product groups, individual customer groups, or geographic regions. Through a series of steps, the structure begins to turn into a production or divisional structure (for example, one accounting department, but different marketing departments for different products). Thus, a single organization is divided into several autonomous units, although there remains a number of departments common to all departments, for example, financial (not to be confused with accounting). This may continue until the complete separation of production and auxiliary units.

Variants are possible in the construction of such a structure. Special divisions can be created for individual products, geographical areas, markets, etc. This design increases the organization's flexibility, sensitivity to competitors and customer needs. Since this separation reduces the size of units to manageable, it allows for better coordination of interaction.

Disadvantages include separation of specialists and loss of economies of scale (eg separate and expensive equipment). The second disadvantage is that the reduction of departments reduces the opportunities for growth of employees (demotivation).

As you can see, the functional and divisional approaches have their advantages and disadvantages. The ability to combine the advantages of both has a matrix structure. It is achieved by superimposing the production structure on the functional one. On the one hand, there are managers for various functions who have power over production, marketing, etc. At the same time, there are managers of the production plan, whose power extends to everything related to any one product. The result is that there are people who report to two leaders. It is important to note that in this case there is a small number of persons in the upper echelon or near it, reporting to two managers, the rest are reporting to only one manager.

Rice. 5

In such a structure, there is a Lead Leader, a person who controls both lines. Then there are people who lead individual departments or projects. And finally, there are managers with two bosses.

Organizations move to a matrix structure most often under certain conditions, which include: a complex and uncertain environment, the need to achieve economies of scale when using internal resources. Especially often this structure is adopted by medium-sized organizations with several production lines, which cannot organize separate production units for each line.

Figure 6 A typical example of matrix design

Table 1 Advantages and disadvantages of the matrix structure

8. Contradictions in the structure

As in everything, in this world, any organizational structure, in addition to positive aspects, has negative ones. The negative aspects, in addition to those already listed, include internal, often innate contradictions, which must be remembered and taken into account when working. I would like to introduce some of them.

The basic contradictions built into the structure are:

specialization versus integration (first we specialize people and units, then we start work on integration and coordination;
lack of functions against duplication (some functions and operations are not performed when others are duplicated);
underutilization of resources versus overload (some resources of the organization are idle, others are overloaded beyond the norm);
lack of clarity versus lack of creativity (if the organization is completely clear about everything, then it is difficult to engage in creative problem solving, and vice versa)
autonomy versus dependence (both should have reasonable limits, just how to define them);
delegation versus centralization;
many goals against their absence (lack of goals leads the organization nowhere, many goals destroy priorities);
super-responsibility versus irresponsibility (responsibility is not delegated, it is assumed by everyone. And if one person has taken on a lot of responsibility, then this means that others either do not want to take responsibility, or they did not get anything).

Another group of contradictions are contradictions that give rise to conflicts between employees. These conflicts are often observed in organizations in our country, and many of you will recognize them.

Line staff vs full-time: Production or Support

As the organization grows and develops, more and more personnel appear in it who are not associated with the main production or service process. These are accountants, lawyers, human resources specialists, computer specialists, marketers, etc. These are, first of all, specialists, and secondly, they are often quite close to management (they are physically closer). Managers listen to their advice or advice from line (production) personnel and accept one or the other. These situations plus different working conditions inevitably lead to conflicts between them.

Accounting vs Development Personnel

Many organizations have departments for long-term planning, strategic planning, marketing, etc. These departments think in terms of more than a year. Financiers, especially accountants, often think in terms of a financial year. This creates controversy and misunderstanding.

Sales staff vs production staff

Sales, marketing, etc. staff always focused on the client. The personnel of production departments are most often focused on the production process. This gives rise to conflicts and contradictions between them.

The last three contradictions are most often resolved at the level of the leader at which the lines of subordination of these divisions meet. Most often this is the first leader. These contradictions do not allow the leader to make rational decisions, since he is forced, in order to maintain peace in the organization, to satisfy the requirements of one or the other, that is, to make political decisions. In addition, the manager loses considerable time to resolve disputes. You can probably get rid of these problems through strategic management (setting goals, planning how to achieve them) and through building the culture of the organization (developing a mission, ethical code, creating traditions, norms, etc.).

Unfortunately, only a few domestic organizations in Kazakhstan are seriously engaged in strategic management, and very few think about organizational culture.

9. Organizational structure and environment

After making sure that the external environment and internal conditions of the organization largely determine the structure of the organization, and even the style of managing the organization, we can ask the following question: does the external environment determine through various effects (complexity, stability, uncertainty, availability of resources)

task execution? Despite the apparent simplicity of the question, the answer to it is quite complicated. Indeed, in order to explore the relationship between environment, internal structure, and performance, we must recognize the leading role of strategy in this. First of all, the environment influences the strategy. In turn, different strategies define a different structure. The relationship between structure and strategy is mutual. In terms of these conclusions, the link between environment, strategy, structure and execution is assured. Successful organizations are those that provide a high level of congruence between these elements.

10. Technology and interdependence

Another very important part of the structure (in terms of technology) is interdependence, which is determined by how people, departments or production units depend on each other to complete tasks.

The lowest level is collective dependency. Such dependence occurs when parts of one organization work independently and tasks are not shared between them.

Serial dependency is when the product of one division is the raw material for another.

And interdependence occurs when the product of one department is the raw material for another, and vice versa.

11. When to change the structure?

The last question I would like to answer in this lecture is when to change the structure?

There are various approaches to the classification of organizational management structures.

Depending on the type of relationship between the participants in the management process, the following types of management structures can be distinguished:

Linear organizational structure of management

This is one of the simplest structures. It uses the principles of centralism and unity of command. At the head of each team is a leader who is accountable to a higher leader.

The leader is responsible for the results of the work of the team. Subordinates carry out orders only from their immediate supervisor. A superior manager cannot give orders to employees, bypassing their immediate superior. In the process of managing an enterprise, a hierarchy of managers is formed (for example, a general director - a production director - a chief - a foreman - a foreman).

The positive aspects of the linear structure include the following:

efficiency in making and implementing managerial decisions;
relative ease of management;
ensuring unity of command from top to bottom;
coordination of actions of performers.

The disadvantage of this structure is that the manager must be knowledgeable in many areas of management, and this leads to his overload and lack of competence in decision-making. Along with this, there is a disunity of horizontal connections, and in the presence of a large number of management levels, the adoption of managerial decisions is delayed.

Functional management structure

In this structure, specialists of the same profile are combined into specialized structural units. For example, planners work in the planning department, finance specialists in the finance department, and marketing specialists in the marketing department. Management, starting from the middle link, is built on a functional basis.

Advantages of the functional management structure:

specialization of managers and specialists improves the quality of managerial decisions;
release of line managers from functions unusual for them.

The disadvantages of the functional structure include the lack of close relationships at the horizontal level of management. In addition, the principle of unity of command ceases to operate, since the executor can receive instructions from several functional managers.

Fuzzy responsibility also belongs to the disadvantages, since the one who prepares the decision is usually not involved in its implementation.

Linear-functional management structure

A feature of this structure is that management is carried out by line and functional managers. The line manager has a special staff (headquarters), consisting of management units (departments, services, groups, individual specialists) that specialize in performing one management function. At the same time, the line manager has full authority over all objects and management functions.

Functional managers are of two types: those who implement one or more management functions.

This structure combines the advantages of linear and functional structures.

The disadvantages of the structure include the expansion of the administrative apparatus, its bureaucratization, the increase in decision-making time due to the need for coordination, and the problem of coordination of functional services.

Linear-functional management structures are currently the most common types of structures. The linear-functional type of structures is especially effective where the control apparatus performs repetitive standard procedures. It creates a fertile ground for the formalization of powers and responsibilities, but does not always have the necessary flexibility when new tasks arise.

Matrix control structure

This structure allows you to quickly respond to market changes due to its flexibility.

It is formed by combining two types of structures: linear and program-targeted. In accordance with the linear structure, management is built vertically: divisions are created that manage individual areas of activity - production, marketing, supply, etc. In accordance with the program-target structure, horizontal management is carried out - management of programs and projects, that is, the main task is to develop programs. Each program may include a number of projects.

To develop a program (project), a so-called matrix group , to which workers from various departments are sent. Members of the matrix (project) group have dual subordination. On the one hand, they report to the program manager, and on the other hand, to the functional head of the unit (department) in which they constantly work. The authority of the project (program) manager is delegated by senior management, so they may vary depending on the complexity, importance and urgency of the project.

In the matrix structure, there is a distribution of responsibilities for program managers. The program manager is responsible for the quality and timing of program development. It is the responsibility of functional managers to create the necessary conditions for the development of programs.

This structure is most effective when there is a need for the development and production of science-intensive products, the introduction of technological innovations and a quick response to market fluctuations.

The advantages of the matrix structure include the fact that it becomes possible to quickly rebuild the structure of the team when setting and solving new tasks (flexibility and adaptability). Managers and specialists of all levels are involved in active creative work to improve production. The efficiency of the use of resources and, above all, human resources is increasing.

However, the application of this structure is associated with a number of difficulties.

The main disadvantage is the complexity, which is associated with the need to establish and coordinate numerous connections.

The disadvantages also include the need for periodic retraining of employees in connection with a change in the program.

Matrix groups are not a stable formation. When using them, employees are constantly moving from the main workplace to project teams and the whole organization becomes, as it were, temporary.

Divisional management structure

This structure uses the democratic principle of governance. The centralization of strategic decisions at the highest level of management is combined with the independent activities of the lower divisions (divisions). The top management of the company (president, management board, board of directors) determines long-term guidelines and responsibility for making a profit.

The structure is often used by international companies with branches in different countries.

The divisional management structure has a number of varieties. The main types include the following:

regional;
grocery;
consumer.

Regional structure assumes that management is carried out for certain types of products manufactured in different parts of the country or abroad.

The structure allows maximum consideration of the peculiarities of local legislation, customs and needs of consumers.

Peculiarity product structure consists in the fact that the authority to manage the production and marketing of any product is transferred to one manager who is responsible for this type of product.

This type of management is typical for companies with a widely differentiated product range.

By applying a product structure, a large company can give as much attention to a particular product as firms that produce one or two types of products pay it.

In many cases, the highest level of management has a linear-functional structure, and the middle level can have the whole variety of management structures. This allows you to better take into account the characteristics of the company and take advantage of various management structures.

Gives a clear idea of who in the enterprise is responsible for making .

Any organizational structure can be represented as a diagram, the separate blocks of which will be the director or head of the enterprise, its structural divisions, individual management units and the links between them.

Understanding the organizational structure of the enterprise will allow you to instantly diagnose the problems of interaction between managing subjects and managed objects of the enterprise, see how they are arranged, evaluate their strengths and weaknesses.

The clearer the structure, the easier it is to overcome disagreements and ensure the movement of all members of the work collective towards the achievement of a unified one.

An ill-conceived, "concocted by eye" organizational structure is fraught with a significant increase in the timing of work or services, confusion in documents, shifting one employee's duties to another (in the absence of a normally formed division of duties).

Organizational structure of the enterprise- this is a system of relationships between the structural divisions of the enterprise in the production process.

The elements of such a system are:

management relations;
internal rules and regulations;
personal responsibility of each unit for the performance of a particular work;
distribution of powers of staff and managers.

A properly built, well-functioning and well-thought-out structure of the enterprise organization guarantees stable and dynamic development and full-fledged functioning of the institution as a whole.

The organizational structure is formed under the influence of many factors:

legal form of the enterprise;
activities;
the scale of the enterprise and the volume of products;
used and technologies;
ways of selling goods and services;
sizes, available, etc.

To create a high-quality enterprise structure, its constant analysis and timely adjustments are required based on the data obtained as a result of the analysis.

The general structure of the enterprise includes: production, service departments, as well as the management of the structure.

On the example of a garment factory, the following personnel units can correspond to the indicated elements:

PRODUCTION: seamstresses, cutters, packers;
SERVICE: , fabric suppliers, delivery of ready-made items, cleaners;
MANAGEMENT: and his deputies.

A textual and graphic description of the organizational structure of an enterprise requires not only a thorough knowledge of the types of organizational structures, but also the ability to subtly notice the characteristic features, pluses and minuses of each of them.

Most often, enterprises implement the following types of organizational structures:

linear;
functional;
line staff;
matrix;
design.

Each of these types is substantively discussed further in separate sections.

Less common types of organizational structures include:

budgetary (built around the budgeting process and the enterprise);
administrative (links the internal organizational structure of the enterprise with external subordinate objects of management - branches, subsidiaries,; heads of the structure can appoint and dismiss directors of subordinate organizations);
divisional (grouping of positions - the formation of divisions - depends on the nature of the products, industry or regional focus of the production unit).

There are also economic, network, combined (mixed), technological, regular organizational structures of the enterprise, focusing on various aspects of the production and economic activities of the enterprise.

Often one structure passes into another, or there may be several structures in one institution (for example, linear and project).

Video about types of organizational structures:

This is an extremely simple and most demanded organizational structure, usually used in medium and large enterprises.

With a linear structure, subordinates are required to follow orders only from their immediate supervisor. Employees no longer report to anyone.

Even the founder does not have the right to command employees without the consent of the head of the enterprise.

The linear structure of the enterprise has a lot of advantages, which include:

ease of implementation in a modern economy;
clear and short connections;
specific division of powers and responsibilities;
the possibility of quick interaction between employees and management;
maximum speed of order execution;
the possibility of coordinated work and the creation of a regular or project organizational structure based on a linear one;
ease of control of the actions of a subordinate, the possibility of instant adjustments "in the direction of travel";
each employee or department is responsible for one issue, the personal responsibility of the employee motivates to perform tasks efficiently and professionally;
high speed of work with clients in the provision of services.

The linear organizational structure of the enterprise also has disadvantages:

recurring conflicts and misunderstandings due to the "inaccessibility" of top management;
many intermediate management links do not allow the employee to quickly contact and get an answer to the question from the top management itself;
it is difficult to create connections between employees in the presence of several branches and large departments (applies only to large companies);
high workload of other senior and middle managers, whose mistakes lead to loss of profit and business reputation of the company;
local problems become a priority for solving, and global tasks are relegated to the background, which greatly affects the quality of their implementation.

With proper adjustment of the organizational system, the presence of competent personnel and a competent leader, the linear structure can become ideal for any amount of work performed or services provided by the institution.

The functional structure of an enterprise is often referred to as multilinear due to the presence of several managers in ordinary performers who are responsible for different areas of production and economic activity.

The functional structure of the enterprise has undeniable advantages:

the presence of a minimum number of links in the control system;
elimination of duplication of duties and reduction of staff;
vertical connections of the highest quality and "fast";
ease of control over employees and tasks assigned to them;
the ability to concentrate efforts on solving complex and energy-intensive tasks with high emotional stress and employee involvement;
maintaining a high level of qualification and professional skills of specialists through constant communication and cooperation.

Among the shortcomings of the functional organizational structure of the enterprise include:

incessant friction between "competing" units of the same level;
the coordination of urgent issues and the adoption of managerial decisions are extremely slow, which is why all work processes in the company are slowed down;
difficulties in establishing cooperation between employees at all levels;
it is difficult or impossible to make changes to the organizational form of the company with this type of structure.

The choice of the type of organizational structure of the enterprise (linear, functional) depends on the production specifics, the number of employees, the goals and industry affiliation of the enterprise, and many other factors.

Ideally, the organizational structure should be flexible, easy to adapt to the new conditions of economic activity and at the same time contribute to the achievement of the company's predicted economic indicators.

It is characterized by the presence of line managers and departments, which in fact are not authorized to make independent decisions.

The main purpose of such units (headquarters) is to help the manager in managing and performing individual functions.

In fact, the headquarters is an expert council, which includes key experts on certain issues (lawyers, economists, personnel officers, and others).

This is a collegial body, of which the head of the enterprise is also a member.

First, the issue is submitted for discussion by the headquarters. In the process of debate, a solution to the issue is formulated, which the director of the enterprise or top manager must subsequently implement.

The advantage of this form of management is to reduce the burden on line managers. The disadvantages are the imperious “powerlessness” of the headquarters and the blurring of the responsibility of the head of the enterprise for the decisions made (in which case, everything can be “blamed” on the headquarters).

The project (team) organizational structure is created for a limited time period to solve a specific issue. Can be created in emergency situations.

Its existence is limited by the period of relevance of the problem.

The project structure usually involves only a part of the management personnel with the necessary knowledge and competence.

For the period of existence of the structure, the members of the group are not distracted to solve other tasks, due to which the necessary degree of concentration of efforts on one project is achieved.

This is the main advantage of the project organizational structure of the enterprise.

The disadvantages of the project structure are the difficulties with the targeted allocation of resources, ensuring the full workload of team members during the implementation process and their employment after its completion.

A variation of the design structure is the shop organizational structure, which is implemented, as a rule, in mass production.

It is characterized by a mixture of properties of the design and functional organizational structures of the enterprise.

A distinctive feature is the presence of two managers of the same level at once, one of whom is the direct leader due to the distribution of job responsibilities, the other is the manager responsible for the implementation of the project.

Project managers report to the top management of the enterprise.

The specialists involved in the project report to two managers at once: the project manager for everything related to the project, and the functional manager for everything else.

The advantage of such management relationships is excellent adaptability to difficult external conditions and the possibility of efficient allocation of resources for the benefit of the implementation of ongoing projects.

The disadvantages of the matrix organizational structure of the enterprise lie in the violation of the basic principle of unity of command, which gives rise to interpersonal conflict situations (“who is more important”) and provokes disputes over the rights to.

Improving the organizational structure of the enterprise is a prerequisite for building a strong and growing company from year to year.

Optimization of production processes and maximization are possible only with a constant analysis of the effectiveness of the organizational structure and a comparison of the results of the analysis with specific economic results.

In the process of modernizing the organizational structure of the enterprise, the following tasks are solved:

quantitative and statistical current state of the organizational structure of the enterprise;
checking the functionality of the company as a whole and its basic structural units (departments, workshops, teams);
simplifying the description and automation of repetitive tasks;
allocation of strategically important tasks and determination of priority areas of production;
delimitation of powers and responsibilities of each department, debugging their functional cooperation;
maximum separation and functional simplification of the work of the managerial link - managers, heads of departments;
designing the organizational structure of the enterprise in order to significantly improve the company;
reorganization of the company structure taking into account the changed requirements;
planned change in the organizational structure of the enterprise;
assessment of the effectiveness of the interaction of all elements of the organizational structure;
giving an opinion on the success of the measures taken to optimize and improve the organizational structure.

The introduction of innovative approaches to the management of production and personnel directly affects the qualitative state of the organizational structure of the enterprise, creating conditions for business development and maximizing profits.

Instruction

There are several types of organizational structure management: linear, linear-staff, functional, linear-functional, matrix and divisional. The choice of structure is influenced by the strategy of the future work of the enterprise. Structure management has a hierarchical structure.

According to the technological structure, workshops or sections are grouped according to the principle of homogeneity of the technologies used on them. Usually a separate phase production corresponds to a specific division. At machine-building plants, foundry, mechanical, forging shops are distinguished, within which several sections operate, for example, within the framework of a mechanical production turning, milling sections, etc. work.

With subject structure production shops are subdivided according to the type of products (items) they manufacture or their components. For example, in automobile manufacturing plants, workshops are structured according to the type of machine parts they produce: chassis, frames, bridges, etc.

To auxiliary subdivisions of the workshop or sections that are current or scheduled repairs of equipment, transport service. Examples: tool, model, transport, etc. shops. Auxiliary ones are formed according to the same principles as the main ones: technological, subject and mixed type.

The organization of the administrative apparatus implies the creation of several levels of leadership. At large enterprises - 8-12 levels. All levels are hierarchically interconnected, and the structure of the management unit depends on the nature production, industry of work, scope production, as well as the level of technical equipment of the enterprise.

Tip 4: What is the organizational structure of an enterprise

All modern enterprises basically have a different organizational structure that covers all areas of activity. It is the skeleton of any company, so you need to figure out what the organizational structure of an enterprise is.

Definition

The organizational structure of the enterprise as such was discussed at the beginning of the 20th century, when there was a rapid qualitative leap in production, which required a revision of management approaches. The organizational structure of an enterprise in general terms is a set of rules, connections, attitudes and subordinations of all levels of enterprise management, from top managers to performers. The organizational structure of the enterprise existed even before the beginning of the 20th century, otherwise large enterprises and industries would not have arisen, however, from a theoretical point of view, they began to think about it precisely in this era. At the moment, there are many types of organizational structures, but the most basic are hierarchical, divisional and organic.

Hierarchical organizational structure

This is the most classic and canonical type of organizational structure possible in an enterprise. As the name implies, this structure is based on a clear hierarchy between management levels, there is a clear distribution of duties and powers and, accordingly, a clear division of labor, in relation to which the personnel policy of the enterprise is conducted. This organizational structure has such disadvantages as poor coordination of interaction between related departments, a developed and impersonal attitude towards personnel. This type of organizational structure is characteristic of large industrial and enterprises in Russia and the CIS countries.

The largest theorist and practitioner of organizational structures is Henry Ford, whose management style was adopted by many manufacturing firms of that era.

Divisional organizational structure

Due to the emergence of diversified enterprises and the expansion of the fields of activity of international corporations, by the end of the 20th century there was an urgent need to create new types of organizational structures. One of them was the divisional organizational structure, which is characterized by the division of the areas of activity of the enterprise into divisions / divisions, headed by responsible managers. A division may include several thousand employees acting in the same direction. Also, divisions can be divided on a territorial basis, this is especially true for international ones. Such an organizational structure also has disadvantages, the biggest of which are a too branched management system, duplication of functional responsibilities between divisions, as well as the burden of divisions to form hierarchical organizational structures within themselves.

Existing organizational structures are most often mixed. Within the framework of hierarchical structures, there may be project divisions, and vice versa - an organic structure may have elements of a hierarchical one.

Organic org chart

This type of organizational structure arose due to the need for a quick response of the enterprise to changing market conditions, within which competition is extremely dense. There are several types of organic organizational structures: project, matrix and team. Each of these types is characterized by such features as the formation of responsible groups (project or team) on a professional basis, the division of powers within them and the responsibility of each for the final result. Organic organizational structure is characteristic of large companies working in the field of IT, when they carry out many projects. Professional growth and well-coordinated work in a team are welcome here, where all the work on the project can move out because of one link.

Managment structure

When establishing any legal entity - a commercial organization, or an industrial enterprise - it is always initially determined. The choice of a management system goes through several main stages. First, it is selected which of the management structures will be applied in the organization. It can be a hierarchical, functional or direct reporting structure.

The second stage defines the powers and distributes responsibilities between the main levels, management personnel and departments. Finally - the third stage, when the powers of the administrative apparatus, its duties and degree of responsibility are finally indicated. Despite the fact that there are currently a sufficient number of management systems, most often in organizations a hierarchical management structure prevails.

Principles of a hierarchical management system

The hierarchical control system is essentially a pyramid in which any lower level is subject to the subordination and control of a higher level. Such a structure implies a high responsibility of the top management in comparison with the lower ones. The distribution of labor between employees of the organization occurs according to specialization in accordance with the functions performed.

Employment is based on the professional skills of the applicant. In addition, they pay attention to how much a person is manageable and whether he himself can play the role of a manager. According to the hierarchical structure, all employees are divided into three groups: managers, specialists, executive employees.

The main types of hierarchical structures

The main types of hierarchical structures are:
- a structure in which the management of the organization is directly in the hands of the head - this is possible in small organizations, when the manager personally gives tasks to each subordinate;
- functional, in which each link performs its tasks, according to the specialization of the unit for its functional purpose.

Each division reports to the head of the department. A mixed type of control, where, along with a linear apparatus, there is an extensive hierarchy of various functional groups. In them, line managers have line managers, and functional ones have functional powers to their subordinate subordinates.