Organizational Structure and Management Style Organization & Administration
Jan 01, 2016
Organizational Structure and Management Style
Organization & Administration
Organizational Management
Basics of Organizations Organizational structure Organizational culture Bureaucracies and the search for
alternatives Leadership & Management
Organizations
Two or more people working together to achieve something (that often cannot be accomplished alone)
Shared vision? mission? values?
Organizational structure System of relations, governing
activities of employees, reliant upon one another to meet common goals
Embedded in position descriptions Pictured in position relationships
shown on organizational charts Revealed in distribution of authority
and communication channels
Organizational structure
Since it is based upon relationships, it changes, even when it looks fixed
Varies from the simple to complex Can be formal or informal May be centralized or decentralized Marked by specialization and
coordination
Organizational Culture
“…the system of norms, beliefs and assumptions, and values that determine how people in the organization act—even when that action may be at odds with written policies and formal reporting relationships.”
Edgar H. Schein
Organizational Culture Not a model for management but a theory
that explains workplace behavior Often operates unconsciously but guides
action and affects ability to change Exists alongside formal organizational
structure, can be at odds with it Learned responses of an organization in
adapting to an external environment and integrating internally its experiences
Elements of Organizational Culture
Symbols: décor, signs, clothing Language: use of terminology Standards of behavior: meetings Slogans: sayings Heroes: those who embody the culture Mythology: stories that are repeated Ceremonies: special events,
celebrations
Levels of Organizational Culture
Underlying assumptions Unspoken and unconscious but guide
action Espoused values
Stated in mission, ethical codes, etc. Artifacts
Visible evidence of assumptions in behavior, rituals, myths, etc.
Bureaucracies
Distinguished by: Governing rules –often rigid Division of labor Chain of command Specializations
Bureaucratic Structure Pyramidal
Top Level Management Middle Level Management Floor Supervisors Floor Workers
Research indicates that restructuring usually results in the elimination of middle management positions
Horizontal and vertical components
Vertical Structure
Hierarchy Provides the conduit for authority to flow,
traditionally from top down (scalar principle)
Delegation entails assignment of authority from super-ordinate to subordinate
Units may be centralized or decentralized Unity of command means each employee
has a supervisor
Vertical Structure
Span of control refers to number of staff under one manager
Positions: Line relationship: Position of authority over
otherssuper-ordinate
lsubordinate)
Staff relationship: Advisory or supportlateral -> position
Power and/or Authority
Authority: right of supervisor to direct subordinates; flows from chain of command; vested in position, not person
Power: ability to influence the behavior of others; may derive from: management, ability to reward, expertise, and/or respect
Horizontal Structure Departments with specialized
Functions Territory Product Processes Customers
Structure: Coordination Mechanisms
Hierarchy’s elements: order, positions, etc.
Communication Supervision Standardization of work, products, skills Policies & procedures Committees Planning
Tools for Management
Structure Organizational design
Viewed today as means for competitive edge if the design is well matched to needs
All the elements of structure For example, position descriptions,
distribution of authority Use of specialization and coordination, etc.
Bureaucracy’s shortcomings
What are they???
Bureaucracy’s shortcomings Fails to take environment into account Is less effective during change or
turbulence, requiring flexibility and action
Ignores interpersonal relationships and their effects upon the workplace
Has undesirable, unintended consequences in control mechanisms
Structure as an Organic System
Concept of Burns and Stalker Based upon biological model Traits
Emphasizes horizontal communication Relies upon knowledge-based authority Encourages broader system view Has broader, flexible position definitions Refers to external, professional
standards
Structure as an Organic System
Other aspects: Promotes greater employee
commitment Blurs formal and informal elements of
an organization Mostly works for small groups
Looking for Perspectives on Organization, or Sense Making
Bureaucracy: The Model that Stands Organizational Design Approaches:
Classical or Scientific, parallel and support the bureaucratic model
Human Relations, modifies it to better respond to people in the workplace
Systems Theory, modifies it to respond to the role of the environment (organizations function interdependently like organisms)
Participatory Management or shared leadership
Looking for Perspectives on Organization, or Sense Making
New models: Ideas come and go but each may contribute to the development of theory
From the models, new ideas have been incorporated into the bureaucratic model and it continues to evolve
Currently Accepted or Popular Methods to Modify Bureaucracy
Committees Taskforces Retreats Use of consultants Outsourcing
Matrix Structure Self-managing
work teams Quality circles Re-structuring
Questions:
Will bureaucracy endure as a form?
Should bureaucracies persist? Will they evolve? Will they be replaced by
revolutionary new organizational forms or design?
Leadership and Management styles
Think of a manager you worked for and how s/he treated subordinates:
Did s/he build team spirit? Did s/he monitor work closely? Did s/he punish mistakes? Did s/he permit you to share in goal
setting and decision-making?
Leadership & Management
Think of some differences between…LeadershipManagement
Leadership and power Power is based on the subordinate’s perceptions of the
leader/manager (Mullins, 1996) Reward power: ability and resources to obtain rewards for
those who comply, e.g. pay, promotion, recognition, privileges
Coercive power: ability to punish or to bring about undesirable outcomes, e.g. withholding pay rises & promotion, withdrawing friendship, formal reprimands
Legitimate power: the right to exercise power because of leader’s position in the organisation
Referent power: subordinate’s identification with the leader because of attractiveness, reputation, or charisma
Expert power: competence, special knowledge or expertise in a given area. Expert power is normally limited to narrow, well-defined areas or specialties
More a leadership trait
More a management trait
What makes a leader? The qualities or traits approach (“Great person”)
assumes that leaders are born, not made we select leaders, not nurture or train them
common in popular thinking, but no evidence has been found to support this
each person’s list of leadership traits is different
Functional approach Kretch et al (1962) identified 14 leadership functions Both the official leader and the group member who happens
to come up with the right function at the right time are leaders for that moment
The official leader is just a safety net, someone who is expected to fill in the leadership functions when needed
What makes a leader? Styles of leadership approach
Many possibilities Tannenbaum & Schmidt (1973) have a continuum some similarity with Theories X and Z discussed later
Tells: leader identifies problem, chooses a decision, announces to subordinates, no participation
Sells: leader chooses a decision but attempts to persuade subordinates to accept it
Consults: leader identifies problem, listens to advice of subordinates, chooses a decision
Joins: leader defines problem and limits of decisions, group take decision with leader as just a member
Which approach is best depends on forces in the leader, the subordinates and the situation
Country clubmanagement
Teammanagement
Impoverishedmanagement
Authoritycompliance
What makes a leader? Employee-centred vs. production-centred
approach Blake and Mouton (1964), and Likert (1961),
use a two dimensional grid
Concernfor
people
Concern for production
Hi
Lo
Lo Hi
Management: Theory X and Theory Y Management styles: Douglas McGregor
(1960) polarised (caricatured?) managers’ attitudes
Theory X: Average person has an inherent dislike of
work People must be coerced, controlled,
directed, threatened with punishment Average person prefers to be directed,
and wishes to avoid responsibility
"When one treats people with benevolence, justice and righteousness, and reposes confidence in them, the army will be united in mind and all will be happy to serve their leaders.” Sun Tzu (circa 400 BC)
Theory X and Theory Y McGregor suggested: Theory Y
Physical and mental effort is as natural as play or rest
Man will exercise self-direction for objectives to which he is committed
Commitment to objectives is a function of reward Average person learns to accept and seek
responsibility Imagination and creativity is widely distributed People’s potentials are only partially utilised
Theory XAutocratic
Theory YObjective setting(Laissez Faire)
Theory ZDemocratic
Your style mightbe anywhere inthis continuum
Theory Z Theory Z: WS Ouchi, 1980s
Well managed companies in US and Japan had lifetime employment, collective decision making, promotion from within, non-specialised career paths
Characterised as a “democratic” management style
Final Thoughts... Do you believe leadership can pass around a
group depending on the function required? What if there is an official leader?
Think about a manager you have worked for. Was he Theory X, Y or Z? How did that make you feel?
What factors affect whether you adopt a Theory X, Y or Z style of management?