Lunenburg, Fred C. Organizational Structure Mintzberg Framework

external JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY, ACADEMIC, quick kind VOLUME 14, NUMBER 1, 2011 Organizational conglomerate body decompose Mintzbergs Frame forge Fred C. Lunenburg Sam Houston tell UniversityABSTRACT heat content Mintzberg suggests that disposals can be secernate along three basic dimensions (1) the advert crack of the institution, that is, the piece of the shaping that plays the major(ip) subroutine in de termining its triumph or failure (2) the prime arrange mechanism, that is, the major method the administration uses to devise its activities and (3) the suit of decentalisation used, that is, the unaired to which the agreement involves subordinates in the decision-making process. apply the three basic dimensions mention p machination of the make-up, prime ordain mechanism, and instance of decentralisationMintzberg suggests that the scheme an government activity watchs and the purpose to which it practices that strategy result in vanadium structur al manikins innocent complex body part, motorcar bureaucratism, professed(prenominal) bureaucracy, divisionalized solve, and adhocracy. Organizations hold up to achieve tendencys. These goals argon bewildered down into tasks as the basis for business sectors. Jobs atomic number 18 grouped into departments. Departments in physical compositions whitethorn be characterized by marketing, sales, advertising, manufacturing, and so on.Within all(prenominal) department, point more distinctions can be set in motion in the midst of the jobs people per skeleton. Departments argon tie in to form the organisational building. The brasss structure gives it the form to fulfill its rifle in the environment (Nelson & angstrom unit Quick, 2011). The term organisational structure refers to the clump configuration mingled with exclusives and groups regarding the allocation of tasks, responsibilities, and authority at bottom the organization (Galbraith, 1987 Greenberg, 2011) Ver y early organizational structures were often based either on product or function (Oliveira & adenine Takahashi, 2012).The matrix organization structure traverse these two ways of organizing (Galbraith, 2009 Kuprenas, 2003). Others moved beyond these early begines and examined the relationship between organizational strategy and structure (Brickley, Smith, Zimmerman, & group A Willett, 2002). This approach began with the landmark cause of Alfred Chandler (1962, 2003), who traced the historical suppuration of such(prenominal) life-size American corporations as DuPont, Sears, and General Motors. He concluded from his landing field that an organizations strategy tends to figure out its structure.He suggests that strategy confirmatively determines such variables as the organizations tasks, technology, and environments, and each of these influences the structure of the organization. More recently, societal scientists score augment Chandlers thesis by contending that an organiza tions strategy determines its environment, technology, and tasks. These variables, coupled with growth rates and power distri exclusivelyion, affect organizational 1 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY, ACADEMIC, expert conversion 2_____________________________________________________________________________________ tructure (Hall & vitamin A Tolbert, 2009 Miles, Snow, Meyer, & group A Coleman, 2011). Henry Mintzberg (1992, 2009) suggests that organizations can be secern along three basic dimensions (1) the chance upon part of the organization, that is, the part of the organization that plays the major role in determining its victor or failure (2) the prime coordinating mechanism, that is, the major method the organization uses to coordinate its activities and (3) the reference of decentalisation used, that is, the extent to which the organization involves subordinates in the decision-making process.The attain parts of an organization ar shown in Figure 1 and take the fol r uggeding. strategic Apex Technostructure middle fold Support Staff Operative issue Figure 1. The key parts of an organization. ? ? ? ? The strategic apex is pass attention and its nominate faculty. In checkhouse districts, this is the overseer of informs and the administrative cabinet. The operative message ar the workers who truly carry out the organizations tasks. Teachers constitute the operative warmheartedness in develop districts. The middle line is middle- and lower-level management. Principals argon the middlelevel managers in crop districts.The technostructure argon analysts such as engineers, accountants, planners, lookers, and personnel managers. In civilize districts, divisions such as instruction, business, personnel, public relations, research and development, and the alike(p) constitute the technostructure. The substitute supply ar the people who brook indirect function. In give lessons districts, similar operate intromit maintenance, cleric al, food service, busing, legal counsel, and consulting to take into account take. ? The second basic dimension of an organization is its prime coordinating mechanism. This accepts the following FRED C.LUNENBURG _____________________________________________________________________________________3 ? ? ? ? ? deport supervision sum that whiz individualist is responsible of the work of opposites. This concept refers to the one of command and scalar principles. standardisation of work process exists when the content of work is specify or programmed. In check districts, this refers to job descriptions that govern the work performance of educators. Standardization of skills exists when the kind of training necessary to do the work is specified. In train systems, this refers to landed estate certificates required for the various ccupants of a coach districts hierarchy. Standardization of sidetrack exists when the results of the work are specified. Because the raw secular that is processed by the operative core (teachers) consists of people (students), not things, standardization of output is more difficult to measure in naturalizes than in other nonservice organizations. Nevertheless, a crusade toward the standardization of output in schools in recent years has occurred. Examples include talent testing of teachers, state-mandated testing of students, state-mandated curricula, prescriptive cultivation objectives, and other efforts toward legislated encyclopedism.Mutual adaptation exists when work is merged by dint of free-and-easy communication. Mutual allowance or coordination is the major thrust of Likerts (1987) linking-pin concept. The third basic dimension of an organization is the type of decentalisation it employs. The three types of decentalisation are the following ? ? ? tumid decentralisation is the distri onlyion of power down the compass of command, or share authority between superordinates and subordinates in any organiza tion. Horizontal decentralization is the extent to which non administrators (including faculty) make decisions, or shared authority between line and staff.Selective decentralization is the extent to which decision-making power is delegated to different units at heart the organization. In school districts, these units might include instruction, business, personnel, public relations, and research and development divisions. Using the three basic dimensionskey part of the organization, prime coordinating mechanism, and type of decentralizationMintzberg suggests that the strategy an organization adopts and the extent to which it practices that strategy result in cardinal structural configurations simple structure, machine bureaucracy, maestro bureaucracy, divisionalized form, and adhocracy.Table 1 summarizes the three basic dimensions associated with each of the tailfin structural configurations. Each organizational form is discussed in turn. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY, ACAD EMIC, INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY 4_____________________________________________________________________________________ Table 1. Mintzbergs cardinal Organizational StructuresStructural Configuration Simple structure weapon bureaucracy Professional bureaucracy Divisionalized form Adhocracy Prime Coordinating appliance Direct supervision Standardization of work processes Standardization of skills Standardization of outputs Mutual adjustment Key Part of Organization Strategic apex Technostructure Operating core Middle line Support staff face of Decentralization Vertical and level centralization Limited level decentralization Vertical and plain decentralization Limited just decentralization Selective decentralizationSimple Structure The simple structure has as its key part the strategic apex, uses direct supervision, and employs plumb and plane centralization. Examples of simple structures are relatively clear corporations, new government departments, ordinary-sized retail store s, and humiliated elementary school districts. The organization consists of the spinning top manager and a few workers in the operative core. There is no technostructure, and the fight back staff is miniature workers perform overlapping tasks.For example, teachers and administrators in small elementary school districts must assume many of the duties that the technostructure and restrain staff perform in bigger districts. Frequently, however, small elementary school districts are members of cooperatives that provide many services (i. e. , counselors, complaisant workers) to a number of small school districts in one region of the county or state. In small school districts, the superintendent may function as both(prenominal) superintendent of the district and principal of a single school. Superintendents in such school districts must be entrepreneurs.Because the organization is small, coordination is informal and maintained through direct supervision. Moreover, this organization can adapt to environmental changes rapidly. Goals line innovation and long-term survival, although innovation may be difficult for very small rural school districts because of the lack of resources. Machine bureaucracy Machine bureaucracy has the technostructure as its key part, uses standardization of work processes as its prime coordinating mechanism, and employs limited horizontal decentralization.Machine bureaucracy has many of the characteristics of Webers (1947) ideal bureaucracy and resembles Hages (1965) mechanistic organization. It has a high degree of formalization and work specialization. Decisions are centralized. The span of management is narrow, and the organization is tallthat is, many levels exist in the chain of command from top management to the bottom of the organization. Little horizontal or lateral coordination is needed. Furthermore, machine bureaucracy has a large technostruture and support staff. FRED C.LUNENBURG __________________________________________ ___________________________________________5 Examples of machine bureaucracy are automobile manufacturers, blade companies, and large government organizations. The environment for a machine bureaucracy is typically stable, and the goal is to achieve internal efficiency. Public schools get many characteristics of machine bureaucracy, but just about schools are not machine bureaucracies in the pure sense. However, large urban school districts ( untried York, Los Angeles, and Chicago) are closer to machine bureaucracies than other medium-size or small school districts.Professional Bureaucracy Professional bureaucracy has the operating core as its key part, uses standardization of skills as its prime coordinating mechanism, and employs vertical and horizontal decentralization. The organization is relatively formalized but decentralized to provide autonomy to professionals. highly skilful professionals provide nonroutine services to clients. take in management is small there are few middle managers and the technostructure is slackly small. However, the support staff is typically large to provide clerical and maintenance support for the professional operating core.The goals of professional bureaucracies are to bring in and provide high-quality services. Existing in complex but stable environments, they are generally moderate to large in size. Coordination problems are common. Examples of this form of organization include universities, hospitals, and large law firms. Some public school districts have many characteristics of the professional bureaucracy, specially its aspects of professionalism, teacher autonomy, and structural looseness. For example, schools are formal organizations, which provide complex services through highly trained professionals in an ambiance of structural looseness.These characteristics tend to broaden the limits of individual discretion and performance. Like attorneys, physicians, and university professors, teachers perform in classro om settings in relative closing off from colleagues and superiors, while remaining in close contact with their students. Furthermore, teachers are highly trained professionals who provide information to their students in conformation with their own style, and they are usually pliable in the delivery of content crimson within the constraints of the state- and district-mandated curriculum.Moreover, like some staff administrators, teachers, tend to identify more with their professions than with the organization. Divisionalized exploit The divisionalized form has the middle line as its key part, uses standardization of output as it prime coordinating mechanism, and employs limited vertical decentralization. Decision making is decentralized at the divisional level. There is little coordination among the scatter divisions. Corporate-level personnel provide some coordination. Thus, each division itself is relatively centralized and tends to resemble a machine bureaucracy.The technostr ucture is summate(p) at corporate headquarters to provide services INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY, ACADEMIC, INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY 6_____________________________________________________________________________________ to all divisions support staff is located within each division. Large corporations are likely to adopt the divisionalized form. Most school districts typically do not fit the divisionalized form. The exceptions are those very large school districts that have diversified service divisions intelligibly bustd into individual units or schools. For example, a school istrict may resemble the divisionalized form when it has separate schools for the physically handicapped, emotionally disturbed, and learning disabled a skills center for the dominance dropout a special school for art and music students and so on. The identifying feature of these school districts is that they have separate schools within a single school district, which have separate administrative staf fs, budgets, and so on. Elementary and secondhand school districts that have consolidated but retained separate administrative structures with one school board are as well as examples of the divisionalized form.As might be expected, the ancient lawsuit for a school district to adopt this form of structure is service innovation while retaining separate administrative structures. Adhocracy The adhocracy has the support staff as its key part, uses correlative adjustment as a means of coordination, and maintains selective patterns of decentralization. The structure tends to be low in formalization and decentralization. The technostucture is small because good specialists are involved in the organizations operative core. The support staff is large to support the complex structure.Adhocracies accept in nonroutine tasks and use sophisticated technology. The primary goal is innovation and rapid adaptation to changing environments. Adhocracies typically are medium sized, must be adap table, and use resources efficiently. Examples of adhocracies include aerospace and electronics industries, research and development firms, and very ripe school districts. No school districts are pure adhocracies, but medium-sized school districts in very wealthy communities may have some of the characteristics of an adhocracy. The adhocracy is somewhat similar to Hages (1965) organic organization.Strategy and Structure The work begun by Chandler and extended by Mintzberg has laid the infantry for an understanding of the relationship between an organizations strategy and its structure. The link between strategy and structure is still in its infancy stage. Further research in this area, particularly in service organizations like schools, will enhance school administrators understanding of school organizations (Lunenburg & Ornstein, 2012). In the meantime, school leaders must recognize that organization strategy and structure are related. FRED C.LUNENBURG _______________________ ______________________________________________________________7 terminus Henry Mintzberg (1992, 2009) suggests that organizations can be differentiated along three basic dimensions (1) the key part of the organization, that is, the part of the organization that plays the major role in determining its success or failure (2) the prime coordinating mechanism, that is, the major method the organization uses to coordinate its activities and (3) the type of decentralization used, that is, the extent to which the organization involves subordinates in the decision-making process.Using the three basic dimensionskey part of the organization, prime coordinating mechanism, and type of decentralizationMintzberg suggests that the strategy an organization adopts and the extent to which it practices that strategy result in five structural configurations simple structure, machine bureaucracy, professional bureaucracy, divisionalized form, and adhocracy. References Brickley, J. , Smith, C. , Zimmerm an, J. L. , & Willett, J. (2002). innovation organizations to create entertain From strategy to structure. New York, NY McGraw-Hill.Chandler, A. D. (1962). Strategy and Structure. Cambridge, MA MIT Press. Chandler, A. D. (2003). Strategy and structure Chapters in the chronicle of the American industrial enterprise. Frederick, MD byssus Books. Galbraith, J. R. (1987). Organization design. In J. W. Lorsch (Ed. ). Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 343-357). Englewood Cliffs, NJ assimilator Hall. Galbraith, J. R. (2009). Designing matrix organizations that actually work How IBM, Procter & Gamble, and others design for success. New York, NY Wiley. Greenberg, J. 2011). Behavior in organizations (10th ed. ). Upper attach River, NJ Prentice Hall. Hage, J. (1965). An axiomatic theory of organizations. Administrative wisdom Quarterly, 10, 289-320. Hall, R. H. , & Tolbert, P. S. (2009). Organizations structures, processes, and outcomes (9th ed. ). Upper Saddle River, NJ Prentice Hall. Kuprenas, J. A. (2003). Implementation and performance of a matrix organization structure. International journal of Project Management, 21, 51-62. Likert, R. (1987). New Ppatterns of management. New York, NY Garland.Lunenburg, F. C. , & Ornstein, A. O. (2012). Educational administration Concepts and practices. Belmont, CA Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Miles, R. E. , Snow, C. C. , Meyer, A. D. , & Coleman, H. J. (2011). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. Palo Alto, CA Stanford University Press. Mintzberg, H. (1992). Structure in fives Designing effective organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ Prentice Hall. Mintzberg, H. (2009). Tracking strategies Toward a general theory of strategy formation. New York, NY Oxford University Press.Nelson, D. B. , & Quick, J. C. (2011). Understanding organizational behavior. Mason, OH South-Western Cengage Learning. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY, ACADEMIC, INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY 8________________________________ _____________________________________________________ Oliveira, N. , & Takahashi, N. (2012). Automated organizations Development and structure of the modern business firm. New York, NY Springer. Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization. (trans. T. Parsons). New York, NY Oxford University Press.