Other

Advantages of a linear organizational structure. Characteristics of the linear management structure

Linear organizational structure is the simplest bureaucratic hierarchical management structure. in its simplest form, it consists of the head of the enterprise and several subordinate employees, while large enterprises can have up to 3-4 or even more levels of hierarchy.

Scheme 1. Linear organizational management structure

Linear structures were built in accordance with the principles of management formulated at the beginning of the twentieth century by the German sociologist Max Weber, who introduced the concept of rational bureaucracy - a set of laws, principles and criteria for a hierarchical or bureaucratic management structure. Below are some of them.

A set of laws must be established that requires obedience from participants in the organization.
Positions form a hierarchical structure, with control rights specified.
Management work is based on written documents.
Employees are free as individuals and must submit to authority only by virtue of their impersonal (official) official duties.
Each position has a clearly defined area of competence in the legal sense.
The performance of official duties is considered as the only or at least the main occupation official.

In practice, the following principles of forming linear structural units are used:

functional model: structural divisions grouped by function;
process model: structural units are grouped by processes;
project model: structural units are grouped by projects;
product model: structural divisions are grouped by products;
counterparty model (customer, supplier, contractor oriented): structural divisions are grouped by counterparties.

A linear organizational structure with a functional model of the formation of linear structural units (according to the functions they perform) is sometimes called. however, the double name determines the duality of the structure, and we consider the definition of a linear structure with a functional model of the formation of linear structural divisions as linear-functional to be incorrect. and the modern economic dictionary says: “a linear-functional management system is a form of company management that combines linear and functional management, which makes it possible to combine centralization and decentralization in management.”

Each article on organizational management structures contains mandatory sections “advantages” and “disadvantages”, “comparative analysis”. But. Can, for example, a low seating position be considered a disadvantage of a Ferrari? Of course not - no one will buy a Ferrari for off-road driving. and it is impossible to conduct a comparative analysis, for example, of a sports car and an SUV. a disadvantage in some conditions can always turn into an advantage in others.

So it is with organizational management structures. we must talk not about the advantages and disadvantages in general, but about the areas of application of specific organizational structures in which they ensure maximum economic efficiency of the enterprise, or about which of the organizational management structures provides maximum economic efficiency to a specific enterprise operating in specific market conditions.

The linear organizational structure is based on the sole management of the enterprise by the head. if lower structural units see the need for various changes in the activities of the enterprise to increase its efficiency, then:

they prepare drafts of relevant decisions and carry them out from the bottom up at all levels of the hierarchy,
the leader makes a decision
the decision made passes from top to bottom through all levels of the hierarchy in the form of directives.

The economic efficiency of linear organizational management structures is the more significant, the smaller the number of hierarchy levels (time for making decisions), the narrower the profile of work (workload of the manager) - internal factors, and the more stable the market conditions (frequency of decisions) - external factors. The “human factor” also influences - the more authoritarian the head of the enterprise, the higher the clarity of the enterprise’s work, but the lower the dynamism.

expanding the work profile of an enterprise with a linear organization leads to overload of the enterprise manager, since it will be more and more difficult for him to make the right decisions on an expanding range of issues.

Increasing the size of an enterprise leads to an increase in the number of levels of hierarchy and an increase in decision-making time.

Increasing market dynamism for an enterprise with a linear organization leads to the fact that the decisions made will lag behind market requirements, and the competitiveness of the products will decrease.

Development of organizational structure in a dynamic market environment and increasing operational efficiency

It is obvious that for a sufficiently large enterprise operating in a dynamic market, it is necessary to have special divisions that simplify and reduce the issues of preparation and decision-making. those. a transition is required from a linear organizational management structure, which has only linear structural divisions and only vertical management links, to other structures:

functional;

Or the head of the enterprise must transfer management powers to lower levels:

(divisional) organizational structures;
organizational structures.

Even structures with only horizontal control connections are possible:

(Business Unit Management).

However, the main way to create an effective optimal organizational structure is to reduce the number of hierarchy levels - application. A striking example increasing operational efficiency is the example of Jack Welch, who led the General Electric company from 1981 to 2001. During this time, he reduced the number of hierarchy levels from 29 to 6 (!), reduced the number of people from 440,000 to 313,000 people and increased profits from 1. 65 billion dollars 7.3 billion dollars!

Examples of enterprises with a linear organizational management structure

Examples of enterprises with a linear organizational structure can be, for example, for small enterprises the audit company “International Consulting and Audit” ak-mka.ru/struct.html, for large enterprises operating in a fairly stable external environment, “Komi Energy Sales Company” komiesc .ru/index.php?page=about&sub=structure, for state organizations “Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS)” of Russia - informprom.ru/about.html?994.

__________________

Reviews, comments and questions about the article:
"Linear organizational structure of enterprise management"

Page 20

06.04.2018 16:10 Consultant Mikhail Zhemchugov, Ph.D.

The theater has administrative management and creative management (artistic director, chief director). So the organizational structure is rather matrix. Perhaps even a project - each performance is a project with its own director.

10.02.2019 21:51 Vlad

What size business organization is a line structure suitable for?

11.02.2019 11:26 Consultant Zhemchugov Mikhail, Ph.D.

The lower size of a business organization with a linear organizational structure is practically unlimited. The upper limit depends on the dynamics of the market and the degree of formalization of the activity - the more dynamic the market and the less formalized the activity - the lower the permissible number of hierarchy levels. In dynamic markets, this is mainly no more than two or three levels of hierarchy - 50-500 people. In static markets - in principle it is not limited. It should be noted that in medium and large business organizations they mainly use modifications of the linear structure - line-staff and line-functional, and also delegate b O greater powers.

Page

Depending on the nature of the connections between the divisions of the organization, the following types of organizational structures are distinguished: linear, functional, linear-functional (headquarters) and matrix.

(Fig. 2.3) is one of the simplest organizational management structures. The scheme is built on the principle of “result - triangle”. It is characterized by the fact that at the head of each structural unit there is a single manager, vested with all powers and exercising sole management of the employees subordinate to him and concentrating in his hands all management functions.

With linear management, each link and each subordinate has one manager, through whom all management commands pass through one single channel. Performance evaluation in a linear management structure has the shape of a triangle. In this case, management levels are responsible for the results of all activities of managed objects. We are talking about the object-by-object allocation of managers, each of whom performs all types of work, develops and makes decisions related to the management of a given object.

Rice. 2.3.

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 a manager at a higher level above him, a kind of hierarchy of organizational leaders is formed (for example, site foreman, engineer, shop manager, director of the enterprise). Schematically, the linear control structure can be represented in the form of Fig. 2.4.

Rice. 2.4.

IN in this case The principle of unity of command operates, the essence of which is that subordinates carry out the orders of only one leader. A higher management body does not have the right to give orders to any executors, bypassing their immediate superior. As can be seen from Fig. 2.4, in a linear management structure, each subordinate has a boss, and each boss has several subordinates. This structure operates in small organizations at the lowest level of management (section, team, etc.).

In a linear structure, the organization's management system is arranged according to production characteristics, taking into account the degree of concentration of production, technological features, range of products, etc.

Examples of enterprises with a linear organizational structure can be, for example, for large enterprises operating in a fairly stable external environment, “Komi Energy Sales Company” (Fig. 2.5), for government organizations “Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS)” of Russia (Fig. 2.6 ).

As can be seen from Fig. 2.5, the organization is headed by a single manager, each division has a chief through whom all management commands pass. As a result, the management structure of the Komi Energy Sales Company organization fully complies with the main criteria of linear management.

The linear organizational management structure has its advantages and disadvantages.

Advantages:

unity and clarity of management;
consistency of actions of performers;
ease of management (one communication channel);

Rice. 2.5.

Management structure of the organization "Komi Energy Sales Company"

Rice. 2.V. Management structure of the organization "Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS)" of Russia

clearly defined responsibility;
efficiency in decision making;
personal responsibility of the manager for the final results of the activities of his department.

Flaws:

high demands on the manager, who must be comprehensively prepared to provide effective leadership in all management functions;
lack of links for planning and preparing decisions;
information overload, many contacts with subordinates, superiors and shift structures;
difficult connections between authorities;
concentration of power in the top management.

Serious shortcomings of a linear structure can be eliminated to a certain extent by a functional structure. Functional management is carried out by a certain set of departments specialized in performing specific types of work necessary for making decisions in the line management system.

The idea is that the performance of certain functions on specific issues is assigned to specialists, i.e. Each management body (or executive) is specialized in performing certain types of activities. In an organization, as a rule, specialists of the same profile are united in specialized structural units (departments), for example, a marketing department, a planning department, an accounting department, etc. Thus, the general task of managing an organization, starting from the middle level, is divided according to functional criteria into several elements. Hence the name - functional management structure.

Rice. 2.7.

Functional management exists along with linear management, which creates double subordination of performers. As can be seen from Fig. 2.7, instead of universal managers who must understand and perform all management functions, a staff of specialists appears who have high competence in their field and are responsible for a certain area (for example, planning and forecasting). This functional specialization of the management apparatus significantly increases the effectiveness of the organization.

An example of an enterprise with a functional organizational structure could be, for example, StroyHolding LLC, whose general director has his own analytical department (Fig. 2.8). As can be seen from the figure, in the StroyHolding LLC organization, specialists of the same profile are united into separate divisions. This division can significantly increase the efficiency of company management.

Like a linear structure, a functional structure has its advantages and disadvantages. Advantages:

high competence of specialists responsible for the implementation of specific functions;
exemption of line managers from solving certain special issues;
standardization, formalization and programming of phenomena and processes;
eliminating duplication and parallelism in the performance of management functions;
reducing the need for general specialists. Flaws:
excessive interest in achieving the goals and objectives of “their” departments;
difficulties in maintaining constant relationships between various functional services;
the emergence of trends of excessive centralization;
lengthy decision-making procedure;
a relatively frozen organizational form that has difficulty responding to change.

The disadvantages of linear and functional management structures are largely eliminated linear-functional structures(Fig. 2.9).

With such a management structure, full power is assumed by the line manager, who heads a certain team. In developing specific issues and preparing appropriate decisions, programs, plans, he is assisted by a special apparatus consisting of functional units (directorates, departments, bureaus, etc.).

Rice. 2.8.

Rice. 2.9.

Thus, the linear-functional structure includes special units under line managers that help them carry out the tasks of the organization.

The main area of application of the linear-functional organizational structure is large government agencies, for example, the Federal Migration Service (FMS) (Fig. 2.10), in which a number of divisions provide organizational and methodological management of the activities of the territorial bodies of the FMS of Russia.

Advantages of a linear-functional structure:

deeper preparation of decisions and plans related to the specialization of workers;
freeing the chief line manager from in-depth analysis of problems;
the possibility of attracting consultants and experts. Disadvantages of a linear-functional structure:
lack of close relationships and interaction at the horizontal level between production departments;
there is insufficiently clear responsibility, since the person preparing the decision, as a rule, does not participate in its implementation;
overdeveloped vertical interaction system: subordination according to the management hierarchy, i.e. tendency towards excessive centralization.

A matrix management structure is created by combining the structures of two

Rice. 2.10.

types: linear and program-targeted. When operating a program-target structure, the control action is aimed at fulfilling a specific target task, in the solution of which all parts of the organization participate.

As can be seen from Fig. 2.11, special staff bodies (individuals or a group of individuals) are introduced into the established linear-functional structure (temporarily or permanently), which coordinate existing horizontal connections for the implementation of a specific program (project), while maintaining the vertical relationships inherent in this structure. The bulk of the workers involved in the implementation of the program find themselves subordinate to at least two managers, but on different issues.

With a matrix management structure, the program (project) manager works not with specialists, but with line managers to whom they are directly subordinate, and determines what and when should be done for a specific program. Linear

Rice. 2.11.

Managers decide who will do this or that work and how.

An example of a matrix organizational structure of an enterprise can be, for example, the organizational structure of a university (Fig. 2.12).

The matrix structure also has its advantages and disadvantages. Advantages of a matrix structure:

the ability to quickly respond and adapt to changing internal and external conditions of the organization;
increasing the creative activity of administrative and managerial personnel through the formation of program units that actively interact with functional structures;
rational use personnel due to specialization various types labor activity;
increasing motivation for activity through decentralization of management and strengthening of democratic principles of leadership;
strengthening control over individual project tasks;
reducing the workload on high-level managers by delegating a certain part of authority;
increasing personal responsibility for the implementation of the program as a whole and its components.

Disadvantages of the matrix structure:

A complex structure of subordination, which results in problems associated with prioritizing tasks and allocating time for their implementation;

Rice. 2.12.

the presence of a spirit of unhealthy competition between program managers;
the need for constant monitoring of the balance of power between management tasks by objectives;
difficulty in acquiring the skills necessary to work in a new program.

Matrix management structures, which complemented the linear-functional organizational structure, opened up a qualitatively new direction in the development of the most flexible and active program-targeted management structures. They are aimed at boosting the creative initiative of managers and specialists and identifying opportunities to significantly improve production efficiency.

Security questions

1. What are the goals of the organization's management?
2. What are the tasks of the organization’s management?
3. What are the functions of the organization's management?
4. What are management activities in an organization?
5. What is the essence of the vertical division of labor?
6. What is the essence of the horizontal division of labor?
7. What is the essence of the functional division of labor?
8. What types of organizational structures do you know?
9. What are the advantages of a matrix organizational structure?
10. What are the advantages of a linear-functional organizational structure?

The simplest organizational structure is linear (Fig. 8.1). Its basic principles: all management functions are concentrated in the head of the enterprise, direct subordination of personnel to the manager with a control range of 5-10 people (depending on the situation), hierarchy and unity of command, universalism of the line manager.

Fig.1. Linear organizational structure of enterprise management

Advantages of a linear management structure:

· a clear system of mutual connections between functions and departments;

· a clear system of unity of command - one leader concentrates in his hands the management of the entire set of processes that have a common goal;

· clearly expressed responsibility;

· quick response of executive departments to direct instructions from superiors.

· consistency of actions of performers;

· efficiency in decision making;

· simplicity of organizational forms and clarity of relationships;

· minimum production costs and minimum cost of products;

Disadvantages of a linear structure:

· lack of links dealing with strategic planning issues; in the work of managers at almost all levels, operational problems (“turnover”) dominate over strategic ones;

· a tendency to red tape and shifting responsibility when solving problems that require the participation of several departments;

· low flexibility and adaptability to changing situations;

· criteria for the effectiveness and quality of work of departments and the organization as a whole are different;

· the tendency to formalize the assessment of the effectiveness and quality of work of departments usually leads to the emergence of an atmosphere of fear and disunity;

· a large number of “management levels” between workers producing products and the decision maker;

· overload of top-level managers;

· increased dependence of the organization’s performance on qualifications, personal and business qualities senior managers.

Thus, the noted shortcomings lie not in the plane of a specific linear organizational management structure, but in the plane of organizing the work of the enterprise, and can be eliminated by replacing some of the bureaucratic elements with economic ones.

Conclusion: it can be widely used in modern conditions, but requires the use of modern methods of organizing the work of the enterprise as a whole.

The line management structure is simple and easy to understand. Clearly defined rights and responsibilities of all its participants create conditions for prompt decision-making.

As the company grows, technology becomes more complex, and the range of manufactured products expands, the need arises to create additional functional units in the enterprise structure that solve general and functional problems.

A linear management structure is used by small and medium-sized firms engaged in simple production. Each production or management division is headed by a manager who concentrates in his hands all management functions and decision-making powers. The principle of unity of command is clearly expressed; high degree of centralization in management; The powers of functional specialists are insignificant and are advisory in nature.

Functional structure. With a functional structure (Fig. 8.2), the heads of functional departments specialize in a certain area of activity and are responsible for the implementation of the relevant functions, and directly give orders to production departments on issues within their competence. The main advantages of the functional structure are: direct impact specialists for production, a high level of management specialization, in-depth development and justification of decisions made.

Rice. 8.2. Functional structure diagram. The circles indicate performers

The main disadvantage is complexity and inefficiency (many divisions, and therefore management channels).

Experience shows that it is advisable to use a functional structure at those enterprises that produce a relatively limited range of products and operate in stable external conditions and to ensure their functioning they require solving standard management problems. Examples of this kind can be enterprises operating in the metallurgical, rubber industries, and in industries producing raw materials.

This system has two varieties: a shop management structure, characterized by the creation of functional units under the shop manager for the most important production functions, and a shopless management structure, used in small enterprises and characterized by division not into workshops, but into sections.

The main advantage of this structure is that, while maintaining the focus of the linear structure, it makes it possible to specialize the performance of individual functions and thereby increase the competence of management as a whole.

Pros:

removing most of the load from the highest level of management;
stimulating the development of informal connections at the level of structural blocks;
reducing the need for general specialists;
as a consequence of the previous plus - improvement in the quality of products;
it becomes possible to create headquarters substructures.

Cons:

significant complication of connections within the enterprise;
the emergence of a large number of new information channels;
the emergence of the possibility of transferring responsibility for failures to employees of other departments;
difficulty coordinating the activities of the organization;
the emergence of a tendency towards excessive centralization.

Divisional structure. Currently, in industrialized countries there is a departure from the linear-functional structure ( classic type this organization has survived only in small and medium-sized enterprises operating in traditional areas business).

Among large companies, the divisional type of organizational structure predominates (Fig. 8.3). According to experts, 95% of the 500 largest companies have a divisional management structure. American companies. Factors that determined the transition to this type of organizational structure include: increased diversification entrepreneurial activity, management specialization, international division of labor, increased awareness, self-esteem and expectations of middle managers, etc.

Rice. 8.3. Divisional structure diagram

A divisional organizational structure is characterized by decentralization of management functions: production units have autonomous structures that carry out basic management functions (accounting, planning, financial management, marketing, etc.). This allows production departments to solve independent problems related to the development, production and marketing of their own products. At the same time, the top management of the enterprise can focus on setting and solving strategic problems.

The key figures in the management of organizations with a divisional structure are no longer the heads of functional departments, but managers heading production departments (divisions). Structuring by divisions, as a rule, is carried out according to one of the criteria: by manufactured products (products or services) - product specialization; by targeting certain groups of consumers - consumer specialization; by territories served - regional specialization.

Advantages of a divisional structure:

· it provides management of multidisciplinary enterprises with a total number of employees of the order of hundreds of thousands and geographically remote divisions;

· provides greater flexibility and faster response to changes in the environment of the enterprise compared to linear and line-staff;

· when expanding the boundaries of independence of departments, they become “profit centers”, actively working to improve the efficiency and quality of production;

· closer connection between production and consumers.

Disadvantages of the divisional structure:

· a large number of “floors” of the management vertical; between workers and the production manager of a unit - 3 or more levels of management, between workers and company management - 5 or more;

· disunity of headquarters structures of departments from company headquarters;

· the main connections are vertical, so the disadvantages common to hierarchical structures remain - red tape, overworked managers, poor interaction when resolving issues related to departments, etc.;

· duplication of functions on different “floors” and, as a result, very high costs of maintaining the management structure;

· in departments, as a rule, a linear or linear-staff structure is maintained with all its disadvantages.

Conclusion: the advantages of divisional structures outweigh their disadvantages only during periods of fairly stable existence; in an unstable environment, they risk repeating the fate of the dinosaurs. With this structure, it is possible to implement most of the ideas of modern quality philosophy.

Matrix (program-target) management structure

This structure is a network structure built on the principle of double subordination of performers: on the one hand, to the immediate head of the functional service, which provides personnel and technical assistance to the project manager, on the other, to the manager of the project or target program, who is endowed with the necessary powers to carry out the management process. With this organization, the project manager interacts with 2 groups of subordinates: with permanent members of the project team and with other employees of functional departments who report to him temporarily and on a limited range of issues. At the same time, their subordination to the immediate heads of divisions, departments, and services remains. For activities that have a clearly defined beginning and end, projects are formed; for ongoing activities, targeted programs are formed. In an organization, both projects and targeted programs can coexist.

Advantages of a matrix structure:

· better orientation to project (or program) goals and demand;

· more efficient ongoing management, the ability to reduce costs and increase the efficiency of resource use;

· more flexible and efficient use of the organization’s personnel, special knowledge and competence of employees;

· the relative autonomy of project groups or program committees contributes to the development of decision-making skills, management culture, and professional skills among employees;

· improving control over individual tasks of a project or target program;

· any work is formalized organizationally, one person is appointed - the “owner” of the process, who serves as the center of concentration of all issues related to the project or target program;

· response time to the needs of a project or program is reduced, since horizontal communications and a single decision-making center have been created.

Disadvantages of matrix structures:

· the difficulty of establishing clear responsibility for work on the instructions of the unit and on the instructions of the project or program (a consequence of double subordination);

· the need for constant monitoring of the ratio of resources allocated to departments and programs or projects;

· high requirements for qualifications, personal and business qualities of employees working in groups, the need for their training;

· frequent conflict situations between heads of departments and projects or programs;

· the possibility of violating the rules and standards adopted in functional departments due to the isolation of employees participating in a project or program from their departments.

Conclusion: The introduction of a matrix structure gives a good effect in organizations with a sufficiently high level of corporate culture and employee qualifications, otherwise management disorganization is possible (at Toyota, the introduction of a matrix structure took about 10 years). The effectiveness of implementing the ideas of modern quality philosophy in such a structure has been proven by the practice of the Toyota company.

Linear - headquarters organizational structure.

With a further increase in the number of employees, in order to increase the efficiency of the enterprise, a qualitative structural restructuring of the enterprise is necessary - the creation of a manager's headquarters (in the simplest case, an assistant) for more effective management of the enterprise (line-staff organizational structure). In principle, it is possible even at one level of hierarchy.

In a line-staff organizational structure, the headquarters works only with the leader, and does not work with the divisions. When the enterprise expands, its functions expand, and the issues resolved by the manager together with the headquarters increase, the manager’s overload begins again. The horizontal connection between the manager and the staff becomes the bottleneck of the enterprise, and the economic efficiency of the enterprise begins to decline.

Advantages of the linear staff structure:

· deeper elaboration of strategic issues than in the linear one;

· some relief for senior managers;

· the ability to attract external consultants and experts;

· When assigning functional leadership rights to headquarters units, such a structure is a good first step towards more effective organic management structures.

Disadvantages of the line-staff structure:

· insufficiently clear distribution of responsibility, since the persons preparing the decision do not participate in its implementation;

· tendency towards excessive centralization of management;

· similar to the linear structure, partially in a weakened form.

Conclusion: a line-staff structure can be a good intermediate step in the transition from a linear structure to a more efficient one. The structure allows, albeit within limited limits, to embody the ideas of modern philosophy of quality.

The solution is to create functional units that will work not only with the manager, but directly with all structural units, so we move to a linear-functional organizational structure.

Linear - functional structure .

As the size of an enterprise with a linear-staff organizational structure increases, the number of issues that arise that require solutions increases, the headquarters grows, and the Manager’s workload again becomes excessive.

The solution is to create functional units. Emerging issues are considered not at the level of the Manager, but at the level of structural units. At the same time, structural divisions, together with functional ones, consider emerging issues and prepare draft decisions, without first contacting the Head. At the same time, he receives not questions, but only answers—prepared draft decisions.

Along with line managers (directors, heads of branches and workshops), there are heads of functional departments (planning, technical, financial departments, accounting) who prepare draft plans and reports, which turn into official documents after signing by line managers.

In this structure, the indications of functional units are advisory in nature. They, together with line departments, prepare only draft decisions. Ultimately, the final decision is made by the head of the enterprise, but all routine preparation of these decisions is carried out without him, at lower structural levels.
Compared to linear and linear-staff organizational structures, overhead costs still increase, but increasing the economic efficiency of the enterprise is achieved by further improving the quality of decisions made and reducing the time for making them.

Functional services can be organized according to project criteria and other criteria, thereby resulting in new organizational structures. Well, the structure can be not only two-dimensional, but also multidimensional.
However, with a further increase in the size of the enterprise, the manager and functional departments may no longer cope with the increasing volume of work, with the increasing flow of draft solutions, the economic efficiency of the enterprise will begin to decrease, and a transition to functional or, in a broader sense, matrix organizational structures will be required.

The main area of application of the linear-functional organizational structure is small and medium-sized wide-profile enterprises

Product organizational structure.

Organizing divisions along product lines (Figure 11.4) is one of the earliest forms of divisional structure, and today most of the largest consumer goods manufacturers with diversified products use a product organization structure.

When using a divisional-product management structure, departments are created for the main products. Management of the production and marketing of any product (service) is transferred to one person who is responsible for this type of product. The heads of support services report to him.

Product (commodity) organizational structure characterized by the fact that the manager has the ability to coordinate and control all work on a product (group, family of products), knowing well its market opportunities. Flaws: high possibility conflicts with unclear division of powers, product implementation by functional managers.

The product structure makes it easy to handle the development of new products based on competition, technology improvement, or customer needs.

Project management structure

The main principle of constructing a project structure is the concept of a project, which is understood as any purposeful change in the system, for example, the development and production of a new product, the introduction of new technologies, the construction of facilities, etc. The activity of an enterprise is considered as a set of ongoing projects, each of which has a fixed beginning and ending. For each project, labor, financial, industrial, etc. resources are allocated, which are managed by the project manager. Each project has its own structure, and project management includes defining its goals, forming a structure, planning and organizing work, and coordinating the actions of performers. After the project is completed, the project structure disintegrates, its components, including employees, move to a new project or are fired (if they worked on a contract basis). The form of the project management structure can correspond to: brigade (cross-functional) structure and divisional structure , in which a certain division (department) does not exist permanently, but for the duration of the project.

The project structure (Fig. 3) is completely opposite to the matrix one in its organization. Here, project teams form their own temporary units, created for the duration of the project and headed by project managers. With such an organization, functional units perform a service function in relation to projects, that is, they provide them with services, such as technical support or accounting services. Also, functional departments play the role of a pool of resources (for example, specialists) that are dynamically redistributed between projects. In a project structure, team members are focused only on achieving the goals of the project and report only to its leader.

With such an organization, the project actually represents a branch of the company, while the “laws” by which an employee operates within the project are completely determined by the project management. This structure is effective in large, significant projects for the company, usually lasting more than two years.

Benefits of a project management structure:

· high flexibility;

· reduction in the number of management personnel compared to hierarchical structures.

Disadvantages of the project management structure:

· very high qualification requirements, personal and business qualities of the project manager, who must not only manage all stages life cycle project, but also take into account the project’s place in the company’s network of projects;

· fragmentation of resources between projects;

· complexity of interaction of a large number of projects in the company;

· complication of the process of development of the organization as a whole.

Conclusion: The advantages outweigh the disadvantages in businesses with a small number of simultaneous projects. The possibilities of implementing the principles of modern quality philosophy are determined by the form of project management.

Business Unit Management (BUM)

The symbiosis of a matrix organizational structure and a divisional organizational structure is a network organizational structure, which is characterized by high autonomy of linear structural units (up to their registration as legal entities) with strict functional regulation in certain areas.

An example of a network organizational structure is the technology and organizational and financial management structure of Business Unit Management (BUM). It is based on the introduction of full internal cost accounting - intra-company purchase and sale of intermediate results of labor and the formation of internal and external competition in the enterprise.

Fig.6. Organizational and financial management structure Business Unit Management (BUM) (management using business units).

The dotted lines from the manager (or possible functional units) in this figure are not directive instructions, but “rules of the game” - long-term provisions and regulations. Horizontal dotted lines - contractual relations between structural divisions (domestic market), and between divisions and the external market.

Each structural division (business unit) is an independent structural unit that is fully accountable. Each business unit has a defined area of activity and some “rules of the game”, but otherwise it is independent. It buys the results of other business units and sells the results of its work to others, and not only in the internal “market” of the enterprise. If the conditions of the foreign market are more favorable to it, it can refuse the services of other business units and work in the foreign market.
This structure forces all business units to work with a constant eye on the external market. As soon as it inflates its prices, it may immediately find itself without internal orders, go bankrupt, or be disbanded. The motivation for the financial result of a business unit is very strong. But this motivation is mainly for immediate results; you even have to look for ways (in the “rules of the game”) to correct this imbalance.
Strong financial motivation of business units, for its part, increases the economic efficiency of the enterprise. But in this case, the controllability of the enterprise is practically lost - business units are independent. The enterprise actually ceases to operate as a single company with its own mission, strategy, and plans to achieve strategic results. These issues are of little interest to business units.
In Russia, this organizational management structure was used by some large enterprises and banks in transition period from socialism to capitalism, but then almost all enterprises abandoned it. It does not correspond to the modern management philosophy, which is focused on the mission, vision and strategic goals of the enterprise.

Innovation-production management structure.

Innovation - production management structure - management structure that provides for the separation of:

· - management of departments performing innovative functions: strategic planning, development and preparation of new products;

· - daily operational management of established production and sales of mastered products.

Innovative production enterprises (IPE) are understood as unified organizational and economic structures consisting of scientific organizations, manufacturing enterprises, suppliers of raw materials, materials and components, consumers of finished products, and also including transport and storage systems created for the purpose of developing , production and sale of science-intensive, high-tech products.

The innovation-production complex is a set of organizationally and financially interrelated innovative organizations and production enterprises, as well as subjects of the infrastructure of innovation activities, representing a single economic system that integrates scientific, technical, technological, production, financial, information resources to achieve the goals of innovation and production activities and for joint effective development based on meeting market needs in innovation.

Innovation and production complexes are concentrated in a certain territory, as a rule, they operate within the framework of a regional innovation system or several administrative-territorial units. It is required to characterize in detail each aspect of the definition of the innovation-production-complex.

Aspect 1. The name “innovation-production” implies a combination of innovative and production characteristics of the complex. This is due to their equivalence, close interdependence, and compliance with the process of development and production of innovations.

Aspect 2. Relationships as an integral characteristic of the complex are divided into two types - organizational and financial. They make it possible to link participants in the innovation-production complex, determine their powers, responsibilities, nature of activities, and functions performed.

Organizational relationships are determined through direct and feedback connections of the management system of the innovation-production complex, its structure, the organizational and legal forms of its participants, and organizational processes. Financial relationships are manifested through mutual financial interests, financial flows, financial results and the mechanism of their distribution. In addition to these relationships, participants in the innovation-production complex have a number of other connections - informational, marketing, resource, etc.

Aspect 3. The composition of the innovation-production complex is determined by its participants.

Participants of the innovation-production complex are:

1) Innovative organizations are organizations and enterprises whose main goal is the development and implementation of innovations in order to meet market needs and make a profit.

2) Manufacturing plants, leading innovative activities or participating in the implementation of the innovation process.

3) Subjects of innovation infrastructure are a set of organizations and structures that support innovation activities on the basis of regulatory, material, financial, organizational, methodological, information, educational and consulting services for innovation processes. These entities are not always directly involved in the creation of innovations, but are auxiliary organizations.

Aspect4. The unity of the economic system is manifested in the fact that the innovation-production complex has system characteristics and can be considered as a unified economic system for managing the innovation and production activities of its subsystems - enterprises, innovative organizations, entities supporting innovation activities.

Aspect5. The integration nature of the complex is determined by its essence, since it connects several business entities. By definition, integration [from Lat. integration - restoration, replenishment from integer - whole] - this is the combination of any parts into a whole.

Aspect6. The resources of the innovation-production complex must be considered in combination with each other.

Aspect 7. The goals of innovation and production activities are considered in relation to each other, and not as separately set innovation goals and production goals. This is important for achieving the unity of all types of activities of the complex, determining its strategy, directions of functioning and development, and identifying a clear hierarchy of goals.

The essence of the innovation-production complex is the spatiotemporal unification of many elements of innovation and production activity, their micro- and macro-environment for the development of innovative projects and programs and their implementation in production in order to achieve a cumulative innovation-production effect and a qualitative change in economic activity.

To characterize the innovation-production complex, the author has identified a number of approaches to describing its content:

1) this is a set of interconnected subsystems, components and elements of an innovative production nature, and each of the subsystems has both production and innovative characteristics;

2) this is the interaction of the subject and object of management, which can be considered at various levels of the hierarchy of the complex;

3) it is part of a more complex economic system that interacts with others components and subordinate to its general purpose; at the same time, each of the subsystems of the innovation-production complex is revealed as complex system lower level;

4) this is a complex of interconnected business processes of innovation and production activities that use available resources and conditions to achieve planned results;

5) this is a single innovation and production cycle from the development of innovative ideas to the expanded production of innovations, provided with information, methodology, resources, and regulatory materials;

6) this is a flexible mechanism for the interaction of many elements of innovation and production activity, working continuously, clearly and purposefully and suppressing emerging risks;

7) it is a source of development of the economic system based on intellectual property, innovation and production potential, human capital, and production resources.

The essence of an effectively operating innovation-production complex is to combine its production and innovation elements, coordinate their activities, maintain innovation infrastructure and determine ways to continuously increase the efficiency of innovation-production activities. To do this, it is necessary to conduct an analysis and assessment current state complex, identify positive and negative aspects, develop promising directions its development.

Modern types of organizational structures include: horizontal, multidimensional, network, shell, virtual, fractal structures. Based on the construction features, one can also distinguish a ring structure, a “wheel”, a star structure, a multi-connected structure, a honeycomb structure, and a mixed structure.

Companies of the future.

Network organizations. Network organizational structures

Go to modern methods management is inextricably linked with network companies and network organizational structures. Ahead is the era of network companies and networks of companies professing new management principles.

By the beginning of the new century, the use of network principles for organizing companies becomes Western countries leading direction in management. This is due to the following:

Constant changes in the external environment and the need for companies to adapt to these changes;

Constant complication of production and commercial activities of companies;

Increasing the importance of the time factor (increasing the efficiency of actions requires a new approach to production and management methods);

Expanding the company’s space (if it wants to survive, it needs to very quickly expand its market to a national and then to a global scale);

Low effectiveness of generally accepted forms of cooperation in solving complex problems economic activity;

The desire for autonomous forms of labor;

Availability of inter-organizational information and communication systems.

As we noted above, humanity has entered a new stage of its development - the “stage of building an information society”, and information society can be characterized by the following features that create the necessary conditions for the emergence of network and virtual companies:

Any person or group of persons can, anywhere and at any time, freely have access through automated communication systems to any information they need;

Any person or group of people knows how to use modern information technology to solve the problems they face;

Any person, group of persons or society as a whole has the necessary technical means, infrastructure and social base for the production and reproduction of the required information.

Network systems reflect the connections between elements of the internal and external environment of companies.

The term “ networking ” means a method of forming a network with its nodes and connections to achieve goals in accordance with the needs and expectations of partners and business conditions.

The network model is designed to simply change the world; it is equally applicable as a model of intra-organizational cooperation between potential resources and between companies and groups of companies.

When creating network companies For a more flexible implementation of production programs, the enterprise is divided into economically and sometimes legally independent centers (economic units, departments, production segments, profit centers). Federal structures are replacing centralized ones.

Networks from companies can be represented by two organizational models:

A network forming around a large company . In this case, a large company, which represents the core of the network, gathers smaller firms around itself, entrusting them with certain types of activities. A large company dominates business operations as the main customer, and the network becomes hierarchical. Small companies quickly become dependent on a more powerful partner.

A network of companies similar in scale. Most of the companies united in the network are legally independent, but in economic terms they support each other’s sustainability, which is very important for everyone.

Certain types of activities during networking can be transferred to other companies specializing, for example, in marketing research, provision of raw materials and materials, preparation of accounting reports, personnel selection and professional development, after-sales service for products of one industry or group of companies. In general, a company can free itself from many types of activities and concentrate all resources on its priority areas of specialization, on its own unique processes. Unique to a company are those areas that may contain the competitive advantages of a given company, and first of all, these include scientific and technical developments and the production process.

Consequently, the networking strategy is comparable to methods of narrowing its own production activities, when the company ceases to engage in certain areas itself and transfers them to external performers. Sometimes the production of products itself is entrusted to external contractors; in this case, we are dealing with so-called shell companies.

Advantages are quite significant. Let's list them:

Adaptability of companies to changing conditions, quick response to changing conditions;

Concentration of the company's activities on priority areas of specialization, on unique processes;

Significant reduction of costs, their rational structure and increase in income;

Low level of employment, eliminating duplication of skilled labor;

Attracting the best partners to joint activities within the network, eliminating the use of second-rate performers.

The attractiveness of network structures is explained by very high economic indicators, which in turn are determined by two factors - the competence and efficiency of the organizational network.

Network structures are an ideal school for improving the competence of company employees. After all, the best performers are involved in solving certain problems. Such an elite principle of cooperation, inherent in a network company, excludes the use of second-rate performers, although the latter work in the same company.

The efficiency of the companies under consideration is guaranteed by a low level and rational cost structure. Networks eliminate duplication of labor and capacity across different areas. Thus, it is possible to avoid high total costs for the production of final products.

Network companies and network structures have an optimal cost structure. At the same time, the costs of preparatory and final work can be easily minimized. Cost reduction is also achieved by the fact that network structures are less burdened with so-called political organizational units, which include the company's supervisory board, production council, conciliation groups, etc. Unlike ordinary companies, they are focused primarily on target activities and to a much lesser extent on resolving political issues.

Published with permission from Lanit

"The office reaches perfection just at the time when the company declines."
Parkinson's 12th law

By management philosophy we will understand the most general principles on the basis of which the organization’s management structure is built and management processes are carried out. Of course, the philosophy of quality and the philosophy of management are interrelated - the philosophy of quality sets the goal and direction of the organization's activities, the philosophy of management determines the organizational means to achieve this goal. The foundations of management philosophy, as well as quality philosophy, were laid by F.W. Taylor.

Both Deming's quality management program and the principles of Total Quality Management are actually aimed at changing the structure of the enterprise management system. Let's consider the main types of enterprise management structures from the point of view of their compliance with the ideas of modern quality management.

The term "organizational chart" immediately conjures up in our mind a two-dimensional tree diagram consisting of rectangles and lines connecting them. These rectangles show the work performed and the scope of responsibilities and thus reflect the division of labor in the organization. The relative position of the rectangles and the lines connecting them show the degree of subordination. The relationships discussed are limited to two dimensions: up - down and across, since we operate with the limited assumption that the organizational structure must be represented on a two-dimensional diagram drawn on a flat surface.

The organizational structure itself contains nothing that would limit us in this regard. Moreover, these restrictions on the organization's structure often have serious and costly consequences. Here are just four of them. Firstly, competition, rather than cooperation, arises between individual parts of organizations of this kind. There is stronger competition within organizations than between organizations, and this internal competition takes on much less ethical forms. Secondly, the usual way of representing the structure of organizations seriously complicates the definition of the tasks of individual units and the measurement of corresponding performance indicators due to the great interdependence of units combined in a similar way. Third, it contributes to the creation of organizations that resist change, especially changes in their structure; therefore, they degenerate into bureaucratic structures that cannot be adapted. Most of these organizations learn extremely slowly, if they learn at all. Fourthly, representing the organizational structure in the form of a two-dimensional tree limits the number and nature of possible solutions to emerging problems. In the presence of such a limitation, solutions are impossible to ensure the development of the organization taking into account technical and social changes, the pace of which is increasing more and more. The current environment requires that organizations are not only prepared for any changes, but also capable of undergoing them. In other words, a dynamic balance is required. Obviously, to achieve such a balance, the organization must have a fairly flexible structure. (Although flexibility does not guarantee adaptability, it is nevertheless necessary to achieve the latter.)

Building an organizational structure that is flexible or has any other advantages is one of the tasks of the so-called “structural architecture”. Using the terminology accepted in architecture, we can say that in this essay outlines the basic ideas on the basis of which can be developed various options solving the problem of organizational structure without the limitations associated with its graphical representation.

The above disadvantages can and should be overcome by building a multidimensional organizational structure. The multidimensional structure implies a democratic principle of management.

Hierarchical type of management structures

Management structures in many modern enterprises were built in accordance with management principles formulated at the beginning of the twentieth century. The most complete formulation of these principles was given by the German sociologist Max Weber (the concept of rational bureaucracy):

the principle of hierarchy of management levels, in which each lower level is controlled by a higher one and is subordinate to it;
the resulting principle of the correspondence of the powers and responsibilities of management employees to their place in the hierarchy;
the principle of division of labor into separate functions and specialization of workers according to the functions performed; the principle of formalization and standardization of activities, ensuring the uniformity of employees’ performance of their duties and the coordination of various tasks;
the resulting principle of impersonality in the performance of their functions by employees;
the principle of qualification selection, in accordance with which hiring and dismissal from work is carried out in strict accordance with qualification requirements.

An organizational structure built in accordance with these principles is called a hierarchical or bureaucratic structure. The most common type of such structure is linear - functional (linear structure).

Linear organizational structure

The basis of linear structures is the so-called “mine” principle of construction and specialization of the management process according to the functional subsystems of the organization (marketing, production, research and development, finance, personnel, etc.). For each subsystem, a hierarchy of services (“mine”) is formed, permeating the entire organization from top to bottom (see Fig. 1). The results of the work of each service are assessed by indicators characterizing the fulfillment of their goals and objectives. The system of motivation and encouragement of employees is built accordingly. At the same time, the final result (the efficiency and quality of the organization as a whole) becomes, as it were, secondary, since it is believed that all services, to one degree or another, work to achieve it.

Fig.1. Linear management structure

Advantages of a linear structure:

a clear system of mutual connections between functions and departments;
a clear system of unity of command - one leader concentrates in his hands the management of the entire set of processes that have a common goal;
clear responsibility;
quick response of executive departments to direct instructions from superiors.

Disadvantages of a linear structure:

lack of links involved in strategic planning; in the work of managers at almost all levels, operational problems (“turnover”) dominate over strategic ones;
a tendency to red tape and shifting responsibility when solving problems that require the participation of several departments;
low flexibility and adaptability to changing situations;
criteria for the effectiveness and quality of work of departments and the organization as a whole are different;
the tendency to formalize the assessment of the effectiveness and quality of work of departments usually leads to the emergence of an atmosphere of fear and disunity;
a large number of “management levels” between workers producing products and the decision maker;
overload of top-level managers;
increased dependence of the organization’s performance on the qualifications, personal and business qualities of senior managers.

Conclusion: in modern conditions, the disadvantages of the structure outweigh its advantages. This structure is poorly compatible with modern quality philosophy.

Line-staff organizational structure

This type of organizational structure is a development of the linear one and is intended to eliminate its most important drawback associated with the lack of strategic planning links. The line-staff structure includes specialized units (headquarters), which do not have the rights to make decisions and manage any lower-level units, but only assist the corresponding manager in performing certain functions, primarily the functions of strategic planning and analysis. Otherwise, this structure corresponds to linear (Fig. 2).

Fig.2. Linear staff management structure

Advantages of the linear staff structure:

deeper elaboration of strategic issues than in the linear one;
some relief for senior managers;
the ability to attract external consultants and experts;
When assigning functional leadership rights to headquarters units, such a structure is a good first step towards more effective organic management structures.

Disadvantages of the line-staff structure:

insufficiently clear distribution of responsibility, since the persons preparing the decision do not participate in its implementation;
tendencies towards excessive centralization of management;
similar to the linear structure, partially in a weakened form.

Divisional management structure

Already by the end of the 20s, the need for new approaches to organizing management became clear, associated with a sharp increase in the size of enterprises, the diversification of their activities (versatility), and the increasing complexity technological processes in a dynamically changing environment. In this regard, divisional management structures began to emerge, primarily in large corporations, which began to provide a certain independence to their production divisions, leaving development strategy, research and development, financial and investment policies, etc. to the management of the corporation. In this type of structure, an attempt was made to combine centralized coordination and control of activities with decentralized management. The peak of implementation of divisional management structures occurred in the 60s and 70s (Fig. 3).

Fig.3. Divisional management structure

The key figures in the management of organizations with a divisional structure are no longer the heads of functional departments, but managers heading production departments (divisions). Structuring by divisions, as a rule, is carried out according to one of the criteria: by manufactured products (products or services) - product specialization; by targeting certain consumer groups - consumer specialization; by territories served - regional specialization. In our country, similar management structures have been widely introduced since the 60s in the form of the creation of production associations.

Advantages of a divisional structure:

it provides management of multidisciplinary enterprises with a total number of employees of the order of hundreds of thousands and geographically remote divisions;
provides greater flexibility and faster response to changes in the environment of the enterprise compared to linear and line-staff;
when expanding the boundaries of independence of departments, they become “profit centers”, actively working to improve the efficiency and quality of production;
closer connection between production and consumers.

Disadvantages of the divisional structure:

a large number of “floors” of the management vertical; between workers and the production manager of a unit - 3 or more levels of management, between workers and company management - 5 or more;
disunity of headquarters structures of departments from company headquarters;
the main connections are vertical, so there remain shortcomings common to hierarchical structures - red tape, overworked managers, poor interaction when resolving issues related to departments, etc.;
duplication of functions on different “floors” and, as a result, very high costs of maintaining the management structure;

In departments, as a rule, a linear or line-staff structure with all its disadvantages is preserved.

Organic type of management structures

Organic or adaptive management structures began to develop around the end of the 70s, when, on the one hand, the creation of an international market for goods and services sharply intensified competition among enterprises and life demanded from enterprises high efficiency and quality of work and quick response to market changes, and on the other hand, the inability of hierarchical structures to meet these conditions became obvious. The main property of organic type management structures is their ability to change their form, adapting to changing conditions. Varieties of structures of this type are design, matrix (program-targeted), brigade forms of structures . When introducing these structures, it is necessary to simultaneously change the relationships between the divisions of the enterprise. If you maintain the system of planning, control, resource allocation, leadership style, methods of motivating staff, and do not support employees’ desire for self-development, the results of the implementation of such structures may be negative.

Brigade (cross-functional) management structure

The basis of this management structure is the organization of work into working groups (teams). The form of brigade organization of work is a fairly ancient organizational form, it is enough to recall workers’ artels, but only in the 80s did its active use begin as a structure for managing an organization, in many ways directly opposite to the hierarchical type of structures. The main principles of this management organization are:

autonomous work of working groups (teams);
independent decision-making by working groups and horizontal coordination of activities;
replacing rigid bureaucratic management ties with flexible ties;
attracting employees from different departments to develop and solve problems.

These principles are destroyed by the rigid distribution of employees inherent in hierarchical structures among production, engineering, technical, economic and management services, which form isolated systems with their own goals and interests.

In an organization built according to these principles, functional divisions may be preserved (Fig. 4) or absent (Fig. 4). In the first case, employees are under double subordination - administrative (to the head of the functional unit in which they work) and functional (to the head of the work group or team to which they belong). This form of organization is called cross-functional , in many ways it is close to matrix . In the second case, there are no functional divisions as such; we will call it properly brigade . This form is widely used in organizations project management .

Fig.4. Cross - functional organizational structure

Fig.5. Structure of an organization consisting of working groups (team)

Advantages of a team (cross-functional) structure:

reduction of the administrative apparatus, increasing management efficiency;
flexible use of personnel, their knowledge and competence;
work in groups creates conditions for self-improvement;
possibility of application effective methods planning and management;
the need for general specialists is reduced.

Disadvantages of a team (cross-functional) structure:

increasing complexity of interaction (especially for a cross-functional structure);
difficulty in coordinating the work of individual teams;
highly qualified and responsible personnel;
high requirements for communications.

Conclusion: This form of organizational structure is most effective in organizations with a high level of qualified specialists and good technical equipment, especially in combination with project management. This is one of the types of organizational structures in which the ideas of modern quality philosophy are most effectively embodied.

Project management structure

The main principle of constructing a project structure is the concept of a project, which is understood as any purposeful change in the system, for example, the development and production of a new product, the introduction of new technologies, the construction of facilities, etc. The activity of an enterprise is considered as a set of ongoing projects, each of which has a fixed beginning and ending. For each project, labor, financial, industrial, etc. resources are allocated, which are managed by the project manager. Each project has its own structure, and project management includes defining its goals, forming a structure, planning and organizing work, and coordinating the actions of performers. After the project is completed, the project structure disintegrates, its components, including employees, move to a new project or are fired (if they worked on a contract basis). The form of the project management structure can correspond to: brigade (cross-functional) structure and divisional structure , in which a certain division (department) does not exist permanently, but for the duration of the project.

Benefits of a project management structure:

high flexibility;
reduction in the number of management personnel compared to hierarchical structures.

Disadvantages of the project management structure:

very high requirements for the qualifications, personal and business qualities of the project manager, who must not only manage all stages of the project life cycle, but also take into account the project’s place in the company’s network of projects;
fragmentation of resources between projects;
the complexity of interaction between a large number of projects in the company;
complication of the process of development of the organization as a whole.

Matrix (program-target) management structure

This structure is a network structure built on the principle of double subordination of performers: on the one hand, to the immediate head of the functional service, which provides personnel and technical assistance to the project manager, on the other, to the manager of the project or target program, who is endowed with the necessary powers to carry out the management process. With such an organization, the project manager interacts with 2 groups of subordinates: with permanent members of the project team and with other employees of functional departments who report to him temporarily and on a limited range of issues. At the same time, their subordination to the immediate heads of divisions, departments, and services remains. For activities that have a clearly defined beginning and end, projects are formed; for ongoing activities, targeted programs are formed. In an organization, both projects and targeted programs can coexist. An example of a matrix program-target management structure (Toyota company) is shown in Fig. 6. This structure was proposed by Kaori Ishikawa in the 70s and, with minor changes, still functions today not only at Toyota, but also at many other companies around the world.

Management of target programs is carried out at Toyota through functional committees. For example, when creating a functional committee in the field of quality assurance, a quality management representative is appointed as the chairman of the committee. From Toyota's practice, the number of committee members should not exceed five. The committee includes both employees of the quality assurance department and 1-2 employees of other departments. Each committee has a secretariat and appoints a secretary to conduct business. Major issues are considered by the committee at monthly meetings. The committee can also create groups working on individual projects. The Quality Committee determines the rights and responsibilities of all departments related to quality issues and establishes a system of their relationships. On a monthly basis, the quality committee analyzes quality assurance indicators and understands the reasons for complaints, if any. At the same time, the committee is not responsible for quality assurance. This task is solved directly by each department within the vertical structure. The responsibility of the committee is to connect the vertical and horizontal structure to improve the performance of the entire organization.

Fig.6. Matrix management structure at Toyota

Advantages of a matrix structure:

better orientation to project (or program) goals and demand;
more efficient day-to-day management, the ability to reduce costs and improve resource efficiency;
more flexible and efficient use of the organization’s personnel, special knowledge and competence of employees;
the relative autonomy of project groups or program committees contributes to the development of decision-making skills, management culture, and professional skills among employees;
improving control over individual tasks of a project or target program;
any work is formalized organizationally, one person is appointed - the “owner” of the process, who serves as the center of concentration of all issues related to the project or target program;
The response time to the needs of a project or program is reduced, since horizontal communications and a single decision-making center have been created.

Disadvantages of matrix structures:

the difficulty of establishing clear responsibility for work on the instructions of the unit and on the instructions of the project or program (a consequence of double subordination);
the need for constant monitoring of the ratio of resources allocated to departments and programs or projects;
high requirements for qualifications, personal and business qualities of employees working in groups, the need for their training;
frequent conflict situations between heads of departments and projects or programs;
the possibility of violating the rules and standards adopted in functional departments due to the isolation of employees participating in a project or program from their departments.

Conclusion: The introduction of a matrix structure gives a good effect in organizations with a sufficiently high level of corporate culture and employee qualifications, otherwise disorganization of management is possible (at Toyota, the introduction of a matrix structure took about 10 years). The effectiveness of implementing the ideas of modern quality philosophy in such a structure has been proven by the practice of the Toyota company.

Multidimensional organizational structure

Any organization is a purposeful system. In such a system there is a functional division of labor between its individuals (or elements) whose purposefulness is associated with the choice of goals, or desired outcomes, and means ( lines of behavior). This or that line of behavior involves the use of certain resources ( input quantities) for the production of goods and provision of services ( output values), which should be of greater value to the consumer than the resources used. Resources consumed include labor, materials, energy, production capacity and cash. This applies equally to public and private organizations.

Traditionally, the organizational structure covers two types of relationships:

responsibility(who is responsible for what) and subordination(who reports to whom). An organization with such a structure can be represented as a tree, while responsibilities are depicted by rectangles, the relative position of which shows level of authority, and the lines connecting these rectangles are distribution of powers. However, such a representation of the organizational structure does not contain any information regarding at what cost and with the help of the organization’s means it was possible to achieve certain results. At the same time, a more informative description of the organizational structure, which can be the basis for more flexible ways of structuring the organization, can be obtained on the basis of matrices like inputs - output or type means - ends. Let's illustrate this with the example of a typical private corporation producing some product.

Information about manufactured products can be used to determine the goals of the organization. To do this, for example, you can classify products according to their types or quality characteristics. The elements of the structure responsible for ensuring the production of products or the provision of services by the consumer outside this organization are called programs and denote P1, P2,. . . , Pr. The funds used by programs (or activities) can usually be divided into operations And services.

Operation- this is a type of activity that directly affects the nature of the product or its availability. Typical operations (O1, O2,..., Om) are the purchase of raw materials, transportation, production, distribution and sales of products.

Services- these are the activities necessary to support programs or perform an operation. Typical services (S1, S2,..., Sn) are work performed by departments such as accounting, data processing, maintenance, labor conflict resolution department, financial department, human resources department, legal services.

Types of activities, carried out within the framework of the program and as part of the actions for its implementation, can be presented as in Fig. 7 and 8. The results of each individual type of activity can be used directly by the same type of activity, programs and other types of activity, as well as by the executive body and external consumers.

General programs may be subdivided into private ones, for example, by type of consumer (industrial or individual), geographic area supplied or served, by type of product, etc. Private programs, in turn, can also be further subdivided.

Programs / Activities	P1	P2	. . .	RK
Operation Q1
Operation Q2
. . . .
Operation Qm
Service S1
Service S2
. . . .
Sm service

Fig.7. Scheme of interaction between activities and programs

Consumer divisions / consumer divisions	Operation Q1	Operation Q2	. . . .	Operation Qm	Service S1	S2	. . . .	Sn
Operation Q1
Operation Q2
Operation Qm
Service S1
Service S2
. . . .
Sn service

Rice. 8. Scheme of interaction between activities

In a similar way, you can detail the types of activities of the types of activities. For example, the operations for manufacturing a product may include the production of parts, assemblies, and assembly, and each of these operations may be broken down into smaller operations.

If the number of programs and core and support activities (operations and services) is so large that the manager is unable to coordinate effectively, then there may be a need for coordinators within specific management functions (Figure 9). Each activity may require more than one coordinator or coordination unit. In cases where the number of coordinators is too large, it is possible to use higher-level coordinators or coordination units ( in this context, "coordination" means precisely coordination, and not management). To carry out coordination, a group consisting of heads of coordinating departments and managers is quite sufficient.

Fig.9. Coordination structure in large organizations

Certain requirements are imposed on programs as well as on functional units. Programs and functional units can be grouped by product types, types of customers, geographic areas, etc. If there are too many customers for the program's products and they are widely dispersed, then it is possible unconventional using the characteristics of the geographical location as an additional dimension to the three-dimensional diagram of the organizational structure (Fig. 10). In this case there is a need in regional representatives, whose responsibility is to protect the interests of those who consume products or are affected by the activities of the organization as a whole. Regional representatives play the role of external intermediaries who can evaluate the programs and various activities of the organization in each specific region from the point of view of those whose interests they represent. In the future, this information can be used by the governing body, coordinators and heads of departments. By receiving such information simultaneously from all regional representatives, the manager can draw up full view about the effectiveness of its program throughout the service territory and in each region. This allows him to more rationally distribute available resources across regions.

However geographical location not the only criterion for organizing the activities of external intermediaries; Other criteria may be used. For example, for an organization that supplies various industries with lubricants, it is advisable to have representatives not by region, but by industry (this could be automotive, aerospace, machine tool and other industries). A utility organization may determine the responsibilities of its representatives based on the characteristics of the socioeconomic status of users.

Fig. 10. Three-dimensional organizational structure

Sharing of responsibilities. The considered “multidimensional” organization has something in common with the so-called “matrix organizations”. However, the latter are usually two-dimensional and do not share many of the important features of the organizational structures discussed, especially in matters of financing. In addition, they all have one common drawback: employees of functional departments are in double subordination, which, as a rule, leads to undesirable results. It is this most frequently noted shortcoming of matrix organizations that is the cause of the so-called “occupational schizophrenia.”
A multidimensional organizational structure does not create the difficulties inherent in a matrix organization. In a multidimensional organization, the personnel of the functional unit whose performance the program manager buys treats him as an external client and is accountable only to the head of the functional unit. However, when assessing the performance of his subordinates, the head of a functional unit, naturally, must use assessments of the quality of their work given by the program manager. The position of the person leading a functional unit group that performs work on behalf of a program is much like the position of a project manager in a construction and consulting firm; he has no uncertainty as to who the owner is, but he has to deal with him as a client.

M numbered organizational structure and program financing. Usually practiced (or traditional) program financing is only a way of preparing cost estimates for functional departments and programs. It is not about providing resources and choice to program units or requiring functional units to independently pursue markets within and outside the organization. In short, program funding generally does not take into account organizational structure or flexibility. This method of distributing funds between functional units ensures only the implementation of programs, while providing a more efficient than usual determination of the cost of their implementation. A multidimensional organizational structure allows you to retain all the advantages of the traditional method of financing and, in addition, has a number of others.

Benefits of a Multidimensional Organizational Structure

A multidimensional organizational structure allows you to increase the organization's flexibility and its ability to respond to changing internal and external conditions. This is achieved by dividing the organization into units whose viability depends on their ability to produce at competitive prices the goods in demand and provide the services that customers need. Such a structure creates a market within the organization, whether it is private or public, commercial or non-profit, and increases its ability to respond to the needs of both internal and external customers. Since the structural units of the "multidimensional" are relatively independent of each other, they can be expanded, reduced, eliminated or changed in any way. The performance indicator of each division does not depend on similar indicators of any other division, which makes it easier for the executive body to evaluate and control the activities of the divisions. Even the work of the executive body can be assessed autonomously in all aspects of its activities.

A multidimensional structure prevents the development of bureaucracy due to the fact that functional units or programs cannot become victims of service units, the procedures of which sometimes become an end in themselves and become an obstacle to achieving the goals set by the organization. Customers inside and outside the organization control internal suppliers of products and services; suppliers never control consumers. Such an organization is focused on goals, not means, while bureaucracy is characterized by the subordination of goals to means.

Disadvantages of a Multidimensional Organizational Structure

However, a multidimensional organizational structure, although devoid of some significant shortcomings inherent in conventional organizations, nevertheless cannot eliminate all shortcomings completely. Such a structural organization in itself does not guarantee meaningful and interesting work at lower levels, but it facilitates the application of new ideas that contribute to its improvement.

The introduction of a multidimensional organizational structure at an enterprise is not the only way to increase the flexibility of an organization and its sensitivity to changing conditions, but serious study of this allows one to “increase the flexibility” of people’s ideas about the capabilities of organizations. It is this circumstance that should contribute to the emergence of new, even more advanced organizational structures.

Submitting your good work to the knowledge base is easy. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

RUSSIAN FEDERATION

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE

STATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION

HIGHER PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION

"TYUMEN STATE UNIVERSITY"

INSTITUTE OF DISTANCE EDUCATION

SPECIALTY “State and municipal management”

TEST

Subject: Organization Theory

On the topic: “Linear structure of an organization”

WITHpossession

Introduction

1. Determination of the organizational management structure

1.1. Basic concepts of management structure

2. Hierarchical type of management structures

3. Linear management structure

3.1. The essence of linear structure

3.2. Tectonic features of the linear control structure

3.3. Principles for constructing a linear management structure

3.4. Advantages and disadvantages of linear management structures

3.5. Linear-staff organizational structure.

Conclusion

List of used literature

INconducting

The radical restructuring of the economic management system, during the transition to market economic conditions, contributed to the formation of new organizational forms of enterprises, as a result of which the scientific ideas about a new link in the economy. In a market environment, an enterprise not only produces products that are in demand on the market, but also creates working masses, provides employment to the population and solves other important issues.

Being an independent subject of commodity-money relations, autonomous in making management decisions and fully responsible for the results of its economic activities, an enterprise in modern conditions needs to pay constant attention to the adequacy of the management system to the needs of maintaining a high level of stability in the market position, increasing competitiveness and operational efficiency.

Enterprises of various organizational and legal forms operate in a constantly changing environment. Their effectiveness, and in some cases survival, largely depends on how adapted they are to the external environment, the extent to which organizational structures are flexible and mobile, and the ability to innovate, which is the main feature and criterion of the professionalism of managers when making management decisions.

With the increasing role of organizational management structures, including small enterprises, in modern economic science, the importance of theoretical generalization of accumulated experience is clearly underestimated. That is why the study of this issue is relevant.

The objects of work are enterprises and organizations. The subject of the study is the relationships that develop when building organizational structures for enterprise management.

1. Determination of organizational management structure.

Management structure is understood as an ordered set of stably interconnected elements that are in stable relationships with each other, ensuring their development and functioning as a single whole.

Within the framework of the structure, a management process takes place, among the participants of which management functions and tasks are distributed. From this position, the organizational structure is a form of division and corporation of management activities, within which the management process takes place, aimed at achieving the goals of the organization. Hence, the management structure includes all goals distributed among various units, the connections between which ensure coordination for their implementation.

The elements of the management structure are:

- Management employee - a person performing a specific management function;

- Management body - a group of employees connected by certain relationships, consisting of certain groups;

- The primary group is a group of management workers who have a common leader, but no subordinates.

The relationships between the elements of the management structure are maintained through connections, which are usually divided into horizontal And vertical.

The first ones are of the nature of coordination and are single-level. The second is the relationship of subordination. The need for them arises when the management system is structured hierarchically, that is, when there are different levels of management, each of which pursues its own goals.

With a two-level structure, upper levels of management (management of the organization as a whole) and lower levels (managers who directly supervise the work of performers) are created. With three or more levels in the OSU, a so-called middle layer is formed, which in turn can consist of several levels.

Goals of creation:

- Division of labor and distribution of official responsibilities among individual employees and groups;

- Determination of the sphere of control of managers and subordination in the organization;

- Coordination of all functions - a single whole.

Criteria for selecting an organizationnoh structure:

- Size of activity (small, medium, large company);

- Production profile of the company (production of one type of product or a wide range);

- The nature of the products and the technology of their production;

- Field of activity (orientation to local, national or foreign markets).

The management structure should reflect the goals and objectives of the company, be subordinate to production and change with it, reflect the functional division of labor and the scope of authority of management employees.

There are many requirements for the management structure that reflect its key importance for management. They are taken into account in the principles of formation of the general management system. The main of these principles can be formulated as follows.

1. The organizational structure of management must first of all reflect the goals and objectives of the organization, and therefore be subordinate to production and its needs.

2. An optimal division of labor should be provided between management bodies and individual workers, ensuring the creative nature of the work and normal workload, as well as proper specialization.

3. The formation of a management structure should be associated with the determination of the powers and responsibilities of each employee and management body, with the establishment of a system of vertical and horizontal connections between them.

4. Between functions and responsibilities, on the one hand, and powers and responsibilities, on the other, it is necessary to maintain consistency, the violation of which leads to dysfunction of the management system as a whole.

5. The organizational structure of management is designed to be adequate to the socio-cultural environment of the organization, which has a significant impact on decisions regarding the level of centralization and detail, distribution of powers and responsibilities, the degree of independence and the scope of control of leaders and managers. In practice, this means that attempts to blindly copy management structures that successfully function in other socio-cultural conditions do not guarantee the desired result.

1. 1 Basic concepts of management structure

The management structure must be organically integrated into the market and change with it. If the management structure of an organization does not evolve, then such an organization is doomed to death or vegetation. However, it is useful to remember that there is no universal correct way to organize management. There are two polar ways of constructing management structures: hierarchy and heterarchy. An illustration of the first method can be the crew of a warship, all of whose actions are regulated by charters or orders in a system of relations of strict subordination. Football, basketball teams, where everyone, guided by the rules of the game, where everyone can take the initiative in the interests of the whole team, is a heterarchical structure.

The management structure is usually depicted as a graphical diagram consisting of three key elements: link, link and level.

Link - a graphic representation of an employee’s position, the name of the unit or function performed.

Communication is a graphical representation of the trajectory of workers. They can be linear and functional.

Level - the vertical location of a link relative to the highest management body or official for a given organization. There are upper, middle and lower levels of management.

There is the following scheme of management structures:

Basic schemes of management structures:

1. Basic diagrams of management structures - diagrams that implement the main types of organizational relationships: linear and functional connections.

Linear connection - characterized by the transfer of management influence from the subject of management to the object in the form of a set of specific functions or procedures, including administrative functions.

Functional connection - characterized by the transfer of management influence in the form of a set of specific functions that does not include administrative functions.

These include:

Scheme<<линии >> (Fig. 1). This is the simplest scheme to construct; on its basis, organizational structures work well in small organizations with the high professionalism of the leader and his authority. The manager delegates some of his functions to other elements of this scheme. There is no specially created feedback in the circuit, because unconditional implementation of the manager's decisions is assumed.

Scheme<<колесо>> (Fig. 2) assumes functional connections between performers (employees or departments) and linear (coordinating) connections between the manager and each performer.

The scheme should have a clear division of functional responsibilities among professional workers. The manager, in addition to strategic issues, must deal with tactical and operational issues of the organization's activities.

Production diagrams of management structures:

Scheme<<звезда>> (Fig. 3) - a set of linear schemes in conditions of stable separation of production and management functions.

The scheme assumes only linear connections and performers (employees or departments) who work separately from each other. The leader or management structure performs full-scale planning, coordination and control functions. The scheme gives positive results with a branch or holding structure of an organization or if it is necessary to ensure confidentiality in the activities of employees or divisions.

Scheme<<иерархическая>> - consists of circuits like<<линия>>, <<кольцо >>, and<<колесо>>. Several lower levels report to the manager. Figure 4 shows a hierarchical diagram based on the “wheel” scheme; this scheme is applicable for large organizations with a clear division of labor.

2. Hierarchical type of management structure

Management structures in many modern enterprises were built in accordance with management principles formulated at the beginning of the 20th century. The most complete formulation of these principles was given by the German sociologist Marx Weber (the concept of rational bureaucracy):

The principle of hierarchy of management levels, in which each lower level is controlled by a higher one and is subordinate to it;

The resulting principle is that the powers and responsibilities of management employees correspond to their place in the hierarchy;

The principle of division of labor into separate functions and specialization of workers according to the functions performed, the principle of formalization and standardization of activities, ensuring the uniformity of employees’ performance of their duties and the coordination of various tasks;

The resulting principle of impersonality in the performance of their functions by employees;

The principle of qualified selection, according to which hiring and dismissal from work is carried out in strict accordance with qualified requirements.

An organizational structure built in accordance with these principles is called a hierarchical or bureaucratic structure. The most common type of such structure is linear-functional, which is the result of the evolution of a linear structure.

It should be noted that most modern organizations are various versions of hierarchical structures. Other types of structures are exceptions to the rule and are rare.

The reasons for the widespread use of hierarchy are that the characteristics of these structures are adequate to solve most management problems. With the help of such structures, issues of production management, sales, logistics, and financial management are quite effectively resolved.

Hierarchical structures are universal in nature, i.e. applicable for any size of business and for most sectors of the economy. management structure headquarters linear

3. Linear management structure

3.1 Essenceb linear control structure

The simplest control structure is linear. She represents<скелет>organization as such and is clearly focused on building vertical connections. Organization in its pure form, as opposed to the market mechanism of interaction between elements of the system, is a linear organization. It is no coincidence that it is the oldest structure, and many generations of humanity did not know any other possible structure. Early capitalist enterprises began and late XIX centuries also had a mainly linear structure, borrowing it from the army and the church. Only later, with the development of management theory, was it replaced by more complex structures.

The essence of the linear management structure is that the leader is the boss for his subordinates on all issues related to their activities, just as a foreman leads a platoon of soldiers. The leader himself is in the same subordination to the higher leader, etc. up to the top person in the organization. The linear structure forms a clear, consistent hierarchy: ideally, a superior manager does not have the right to give orders to any performers without going through their immediate supervisor. Such a leader himself sees the main function in the transmission of orders coming from above and is very limited in his initiative. At the same time, he bears full responsibility for the subordinates entrusted to him.

Such an organization of management is possible only in small departments of the operation service, for example, when a foreman or foreman directly distributes instructions to everyone working in the department.

With an increase in the volume of operational activities, for example, when accepting new facilities for maintenance, the number of operating personnel and their territorial disunity increase accordingly. In such a situation, direct operational contact between the manager and each employee becomes almost impossible. Therefore, a multi-level hierarchical management system is used, in which a superior manager exercises sole management of the subordinate managers subordinate to him, and subordinate managers report to only one person - their immediate superior manager. For example, the repair and construction department is divided into foreman and workshop areas. A multi-level linear management structure has only vertical connections between elements and is built on the principle of hierarchy. This structure is characterized by a clear unity of command. Each employee or manager reports directly to only one superior person and through him is connected with higher levels of management. Thus, a hierarchical ladder of subordination and responsibility is created in the management apparatus.

The linear organizational structure is based on the sole management of the enterprise by the head. If lower structural units see the need for various changes in the activities of the enterprise to increase its efficiency, then:

1. They prepare drafts of relevant decisions and carry them out from the bottom up through all levels of the hierarchy,

2. The manager makes a decision

3. The decision made passes from top to bottom through all levels of the hierarchy in the form of directives.

This results in a fairly wide scope of application of linear organizational structures: from small enterprises operating in any market conditions, to narrowly specialized enterprises of any size operating in stable market (or non-market) conditions. Examples of enterprises with a linear organizational structure can be, for example, for small enterprises the Audit company "International Consulting and Audit", for large enterprises operating in a fairly stable external environment, "Komi Energy Sales Company", for government organizations "Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) )" Russia.

Expanding the work profile of an enterprise with a linear organization leads to overload of the enterprise manager, since it will be more and more difficult for him to make the right decisions on an expanding range of issues.

Increasing the size of an enterprise leads to an increase in the number of levels of hierarchy and an increase in decision-making time.

The linear structure is characterized by the division of the organization vertically from top to bottom and the direct subordination of the lowest level of management to the highest on all issues. The manager is vested with full powers and exercises sole management of the employees subordinate to him, and bears full responsibility for the results of the activities of the units subordinate to him.

3.2 Tectonic features of the linear structure ofboard

Tectonic features of linear control structures are:

A clear system of mutual connections, functions and divisions;

A clear system of unity of command - one leader concentrates in his hands the management of the entire set of processes that have a common goal;

Lack of links involved in strategic planning; There are operational problems in the work of managers at almost all levels (<<текучка>>) dominate strategic ones;

Low flexibility and adaptability to changing situations;

Large number<<этажей управления>> between workers producing products and the decision maker.

Features of the linear management structure are also:

Clearly expressed responsibility;

Quick response of executive departments to direct instructions from superiors;

Tendency to red tape and shifting responsibility when solving problems that require the participation of several departments;

The criteria for the effectiveness and quality of work of departments and the organization as a whole are different;

The tendency to formalize the assessment of the effectiveness and quality of work of departments usually leads to the emergence of an atmosphere of fear and disunity;

Overload of top-level managers;

Increased dependence of the organization's performance on the qualifications, personal and business qualities of senior managers.

3.3 Principles of constructing linearmanagement structures of the organization

A set of laws must be established that requires obedience from participants in the organization.

Positions form a hierarchical structure, with control rights specified.

Management work is based on written documents.

Employees are free as individuals and must submit to authority only by virtue of their impersonal (official) official duties.

Each position has a clearly defined area of competence in the legal sense.

The performance of official duties is considered to be the only, or at least the main, occupation of an official.

In practice, the following principles of forming linear structural units are used:

Functional model: structural divisions are grouped by function;

Process model: structural units are grouped by processes;

Project model: structural units are grouped by projects;

Product model: structural divisions are grouped by products;

Counterparty model (customer, supplier, contractor oriented): structural divisions are grouped by counterparties.

3.4 Advantages and disadvantages of linear stationmanagement structures

Advantages:

Unity of management;

Simplicity and clarity of subordination;

Full responsibility of the manager for the results of the activities of his subordinate units;

Efficiency in decision making;

Coherence of actions of performers;

Receipt of agreed orders and assignments by lower levels.

Easy to use. All responsibilities and powers are clearly distributed, and therefore all the necessary conditions are created for an operational decision-making process and to maintain the necessary discipline in the team. In addition, increasing the responsibility of the manager for the results of the activities of the unit he heads, the executors receiving interconnected orders and tasks, provided with resources, and personal responsibility for the final results of the activities of their unit.

The ability for the organization to function in the mode of simple and quick solutions. At the same time, there is practically no uncertainty in the perception of decisions and the most complete control is exercised over literally all the actions of members of the organization;

Minimizing the possibility of creating coalitions of managers at the same level, which significantly reduces the resistance of middle managers in relation to the decisions of senior managers;

Minimizing the number of managers in the organization. Lack of specialization, multifunctionality of managers at various levels, formalization and rigidity inherent in the very basis of the linear structure lead to a reduction in the number of specialized functions, and the main emphasis is on the control function. The latter can be performed with a minimum of costs if the manager has authority among his subordinates.

But the shortcomings of these structures are so significant that modern organizations are practically not built on the basis of purely linear structures.

Their disadvantages primarily include:

Large information overload of the manager.

Huge flow of documents.

High requirements for the manager, who must be a highly qualified specialist with extensive, versatile knowledge and experience in all management functions and areas of activity carried out by employees subordinate to him;

The structure is suitable for solving only operational current problems;

The structure does not allow solving problems caused by the constantly changing operating conditions of the organization.

Disunity of horizontal connections in production systems;

With a large number of management levels, the process of making and implementing management decisions is lengthened;

Increasing the number of management levels as the organization grows;

Structure rigidity;

Inflexibility;

Inability to further growth and development of the enterprise;

Extreme difficulties in adapting to any changes in the external environment (both market and institutional), which is due to the dependence of the head of each link on stable corporate norms and the need to apply a strict management style that does not allow deviations. As a rule, technological, political and cultural changes here proceed extremely slowly. For example, in army (line) structures, management and life norms may not change for decades, as a result of which the entire system or its system units function ineffectively, and the original goals and meaning of corporate norms are distorted. Often, only military action, the need to achieve goals in new conditions, or other extraordinary events can change the norms in the army. As for the distortion of the meaning of corporate norms of the army subculture, this can be traced to the phenomenon of hazing, when the patronage of old soldiers over young soldiers that originated in the Russian army gradually turned into a semi-criminal and humiliating informal code;

The lack of initially provided specialization, as a result of which managers in line structures have to perform not only the functions of managing all processes at the level of their department, but also the role of experts on all technical issues, i.e. specialists-professionals in a narrow production field. In addition, he must solve a large number of production-related problems. We can say that a manager in linear structures is initially doomed to overload and, moreover, to the impossibility of implementing all functions in full. As a result of this, most managers in line structures strive to primarily carry out the most important functions related to management and, in particular, control, and the functions of a specialist - a professional in the production sector fade into the background. Therefore, linear organizational structures are appropriate in cases where the organization is focused on the production of a product that requires minimal intervention from specialists and is characterized by high stability and immutability of technology. Linear structures are ineffective in conditions of competition and constant changes in the market situation, as well as when using creative labor;

The presence of only vertical communication links and a multi-level management structure determines the absence of collective, coordinated decisions at the level of department management. Approvals are possible through the immediate supervisor, who, by the very definition of the structure, cannot communicate with managers at his level. Because of this, resolving issues that require coordination of efforts and coordinated actions of several departments is delayed, while momentum is lost and management efficiency decreases.

Thus, linear organizational structures are effective only in a very limited number of cases of organizational functioning, in particular in the presence of simple goals and a constant external environment. In the case of a real complex market environment, the creative nature of work or goals related to the need to adapt to the external environment, such structures are not effective and their actual use should be abandoned.

3.5 Line-staff organnational management structure

To free the head of the operations service from routine work and provide him with the opportunity to focus on strategic directions, the linear-staff organizational structure of management contributes to a certain extent (Fig. 8). This is a linear structure, which additionally includes specialized units (headquarters) that assist the relevant manager in performing individual functions, primarily the functions of strategic planning and analysis. The main task of line managers here is to coordinate the actions of functional services (units) and direct them towards the general interests of the organization.

Such a structure also ensures minimal production costs and minimal cost of operational activities with great opportunities for the development of the operating enterprise. Therefore, it can be recommended for small and medium-sized enterprises.

Zconclusion

Summarizing all of the above, we can draw the following conclusions:

The organization consists from persons who have a certain goal in front of them; work in one team, group; use certain knowledge and technical techniques; act as a single and integral organism.

Organizational structure- this is an integral system aimed, first of all, at establishing clear relationships between individual divisions of the company, distributing rights and responsibilities between them. It implements various requirements for improving management systems, expressed in certain principles.

Depending on the nature of the connections between the divisions of the organization, there are several types of organizational structures, one of them is linear.

In a linear management structure- the distribution of job responsibilities is carried out in such a way that each employee is maximally focused on fulfilling the production tasks of the organization.

In modern conditions, the disadvantages of the structure outweigh its advantages: inflexibility, rigidity, inability to further growth of the organization. The loss (resignation, death) of a manager can lead to more serious consequences than with a flexible organizational structure. The management method can be bureaucratic, dictatorial, which reduces potential opportunities and restrains the initiative of young managers; managers can be overloaded with duties and responsibilities, which can lead to stress and poor management, and the advantages are just: responsibility, established obligations, clear distribution of responsibilities and powers; operational decision-making process; ease of understanding and use, the ability to maintain the necessary discipline.

This structure is poorly compatible with modern quality philosophy.

WITHlist of used literature

1. Gerchikova, I.N. Management: workshop: textbook. manual / Gerchikova I.N. - M.: UNITI, 2006. - 190 p.

2. Gerchikova, I.N. Management: textbook - 3rd ed., revised. and additional / I.N. Gerchikova - M.: UNITY, 2007 - 190 p.

3. Glushchenko, E.V. Control Theory: training course/ E.V. Glushchenko, E.V.

4. Milner, B.Z. Organization theory: textbook / B.Z. Milner. - M.: INFRA-M, 2006. - 312 p.

5. Mukhin, V.I. Control theory: textbook / Mukhin V.I. - M.: Center, 2002. - 310 p.

6. Parakhina, V.N. Organization theory: textbook. allowance. / V.N. Parakhina - M.: Unity, 2004. - 418 p.

7. Porshneva, A.G. Organization management: textbook / A.G. Porshneva, Z.P. Rumyantseva, N.A. Salomatina. - M.: Statute, 2006. - 366 p.

8. Ukolov, V.F. Control theory: textbook / V.F. Ukolov, A.M. Mass, I.K. Bystryakov. - M.: Economics, 2008. - 183 p.

Posted on Allbest.ru

...

Advantages of a linear organizational structure. Characteristics of the linear management structure

Security questions

Matrix (program-target) management structure

Project management structure

Hierarchical type of management structures

Linear organizational structure

Line-staff organizational structure

Divisional management structure

Organic type of management structures

Brigade (cross-functional) management structure

Project management structure

Matrix (program-target) management structure

Multidimensional organizational structure

Submitting your good work to the knowledge base is easy. Use the form below

INSTITUTE OF DISTANCE EDUCATION

SPECIALTY “State and municipal management”

TEST

Subject: Organization Theory

On the topic: “Linear structure of an organization”

WITHpossession

Introduction

1. Determination of the organizational management structure

1.1. Basic concepts of management structure

2. Hierarchical type of management structures

3. Linear management structure

3.1. The essence of linear structure

3.2. Tectonic features of the linear control structure

3.3. Principles for constructing a linear management structure

3.4. Advantages and disadvantages of linear management structures

3.5. Linear-staff organizational structure.

Conclusion

List of used literature

INconducting

With the increasing role of organizational management structures, including small enterprises, in modern economic science, the importance of theoretical generalization of accumulated experience is clearly underestimated. That is why the study of this issue is relevant.

The objects of work are enterprises and organizations. The subject of the study is the relationships that develop when building organizational structures for enterprise management.

1. Determination of organizational management structure.

Management structure is understood as an ordered set of stably interconnected elements that are in stable relationships with each other, ensuring their development and functioning as a single whole.

The elements of the management structure are:

- Management employee - a person performing a specific management function;

- Management body - a group of employees connected by certain relationships, consisting of certain groups;

- The primary group is a group of management workers who have a common leader, but no subordinates.

The relationships between the elements of the management structure are maintained through connections, which are usually divided into horizontal And vertical.

The first ones are of the nature of coordination and are single-level. The second is the relationship of subordination. The need for them arises when the management system is structured hierarchically, that is, when there are different levels of management, each of which pursues its own goals.

Goals of creation:

- Division of labor and distribution of official responsibilities among individual employees and groups;

- Determination of the sphere of control of managers and subordination in the organization;

- Coordination of all functions - a single whole.

Criteria for selecting an organizationnoh structure:

- Size of activity (small, medium, large company);

- Production profile of the company (production of one type of product or a wide range);

- The nature of the products and the technology of their production;

- Field of activity (orientation to local, national or foreign markets).

The management structure should reflect the goals and objectives of the company, be subordinate to production and change with it, reflect the functional division of labor and the scope of authority of management employees.

There are many requirements for the management structure that reflect its key importance for management. They are taken into account in the principles of formation of the general management system. The main of these principles can be formulated as follows.

1. The organizational structure of management must first of all reflect the goals and objectives of the organization, and therefore be subordinate to production and its needs.

2. An optimal division of labor should be provided between management bodies and individual workers, ensuring the creative nature of the work and normal workload, as well as proper specialization.

3. The formation of a management structure should be associated with the determination of the powers and responsibilities of each employee and management body, with the establishment of a system of vertical and horizontal connections between them.

4. Between functions and responsibilities, on the one hand, and powers and responsibilities, on the other, it is necessary to maintain consistency, the violation of which leads to dysfunction of the management system as a whole.

1. 1 Basic concepts of management structure

The management structure is usually depicted as a graphical diagram consisting of three key elements: link, link and level.

Link - a graphic representation of an employee’s position, the name of the unit or function performed.

Communication is a graphical representation of the trajectory of workers. They can be linear and functional.

Level - the vertical location of a link relative to the highest management body or official for a given organization. There are upper, middle and lower levels of management.

There is the following scheme of management structures:

Basic schemes of management structures:

1. Basic diagrams of management structures - diagrams that implement the main types of organizational relationships: linear and functional connections.

Linear connection - characterized by the transfer of management influence from the subject of management to the object in the form of a set of specific functions or procedures, including administrative functions.

Functional connection - characterized by the transfer of management influence in the form of a set of specific functions that does not include administrative functions.

These include:

Similar documents