Question 1
In the modern business sector, it is crucial that businesses and companies have an organizational structure that optimizes all of their resources including the human resources. The high levels of competition within the business environment necessitate the adoption of a structure that will help the business to compete effectively with other businesses and gain a solid market share. The structures of interactions between the various members or stakeholders of the organization such as the management, employees, suppliers and the public have to be formulated in a somber manner that will guarantee sufficient functioning of the organization within the business environment. In the modern days, organizations are adopting various structures that they believe will enable them to compete effectively and achieve their goals and objectives. These organizational structures affect members of the organization in different ways as will be shown later in this essay. The structure if an organization has a direct influence or effect on the way that organizational members coordinate, communicate, and make decisions as well as their productivity levels. It is crucial to consider the effects of different organizational structures before adopting one specific structure.
First, organizational structure affects the morale of the employees. Employees will feel loyal when they are treated respectfully, are given challenging tasks and when they are given opportunities for advancement. The structure of the organization can also negatively affect the employee’s morale, for instance, in situations where department heads and managers are constantly awarded bonuses and raises at the expense of subordinates. The organizational structure determines how issue related to discipline, incentive programs as well as advancement are actualized within an organization, and this directly translate into the member’s morale and productivity levels.
The organization structure also determines how well various members of the organization communicate with one another. If the structure is rigid and has an environment that is highly separated, the members may have trouble accessing information or even the personnel required to complete tasks. A structure characterized by a command chain that is vague may mean that members do not know whom to report to or enquire about projects and tasks.
The organizational structure also affects the efficiency of members in completing tasks and achieving the overall organizational objectives. For instance, a poorly structured organization can lead to work slowdown in many areas.
Different organizational structures have several behavioral implications. Three organizations will be used to analyze this aspect.
The Federal Bureau of Investigations has a system and structure based on one major assumption, which is that crime is to be identified after it has taken place. Throughout time, the assumption has resulted into a situation whereby instead of members abiding by an overarching strategy, each of the FBI units is highly decentralized. In simple, terms, FBI field agents are the ones who determine the mode of pursuing investigations. This decentralization has both negative and positive implications of behavior of members. One is that is they are motivated to work hard since they are given the discretion of carrying out their investigations as they please and, therefore, show great commitment. The negative implications that some become reckless due to decentralization of power and use tactics that are against the law.
IKEA is renowned furniture manufacturer from Sweden. The company uses a distinctive organizational design or structure that has led to its success. This is a flat structure with wide spans of control. Such a structure has led great satisfaction within employees due to greater freedom and responsibility that comes with this structure. The employees work with much enthusiasm as they also seek to achieve self-actualization. The structure at IKEA has been used to create a mentality within the employees of not only job involvement but also job ownership.
SAS is another company that has achieved massive success due to its organizational structure. In fact, Forbes magazine recently ranked the company as the second best organization to work for in America. The organization specializes in the production of business analytics software. It has adopted a simple, flat organizational structure or design with limited hierarchies. Instead of creating new management layers as the company grows, it has alternatively created new divisions. The structure is fluid, and member’s employees can interchange roles quite easily. Most of the employees, as well as the management of the company, show great morale and motivation, and this has resulted to high levels of productivity. This can be attributed to the organization structure of the company, which gives the employees autonomy as well as a platform for development of self-ideas. In fact, product development at the company takes into considerations all the opinions if organization members.
Question 2
It is quite accurate to state that some organizational structures are significantly better than others. Although some critics might argue that, the success of any organizational structure depends on a myriad of factors, research has proven that they are some structures that are superior and that significantly work better than others do.
Buhler (2001) states, “today’s organizations are viewed as open systems” which are dependent on outside factors. She states that an organization design must therefore be flexible and adaptable to the environment. Such an organizational structure, which with high flexibility can be viewed to be superior. One of the characteristics of such organization is that it usually exhibits large spans and minimal hierarchical structure (Lillrank et.al 2004). Employees are given great autonomy and responsibility. Consequently, they are motivated to work hard and increase the overall productivity of an organization. They are also motivated by such a structure, which encourages innovation. As Rosabeth Moss Kanter states in her interview “Innovation is central activity that needs to be encouraged everywhere to fulfill the human drive for improvement and to solve problems that limit opportunity” (Puffer, 2004). Organization with tall hierarchical structures and smaller spans of control are usually demotivating to employees especially in situations where every single task is under the supervisions and the direction of individual who is higher up in the hierarchy chain (Lillrank et.al 2004).
Buhler (2001) quotes the contingency approach to organizational structure that states, “there is no one best structure appropriate for every organization." This approach is however faulty as organizations that are largely decentralized and that minimal hierarchical structures and wider spans f control have been found to be some for the most successful. These include companies such as Google and SAS, which was described earlier.
References
Puffer, S. (2004) Changing organizational structures: An interview with Rosabeth Moss Kanter. Academy of Management Executive, 18(2).
Buhler, P. M. (2011). Changing organizational structures and their impact on managers. Supervision, 72(2), 24-26.
Lillrank, P., Shani, A. & Lindberg, P. (2001). Continuous improvement: Exploring alternative organizational designs. Total Quality Management,12(1), 41-55.
