Organizational structure refers to the way that an organization arranges people and jobs so
that its work can be performed and its goals can be met. When a work group is very small and
face-to-face communication is frequent, formal structure may be unnecessary, but in a larger
organization decisions have to be made about the delegation of various tasks. Thus,
procedures are established that assign responsibilities for various functions. It is these
decisions that determine the organizational structure.
Thesis statement
Pejabatanan atau departmentalization melibatkan aktivti membahagikan sesuatu organisasi
kepada beberapa jabatan lain yang lebih kecil. Jabatan-jabatan ini menjalankan tugas-tugas
yang telah diberikan kepada mereka mengikut keperluan dan juga kepakaran kepada
sesebuah organisasi. Kedua-dua sektor, swasta mahupun kerajaan mengunakan cara ini untuk
mengoptimumkan struktur organisasi mereka. Pejabatanan
organisasi untuk membolehkan sesebuah jabatan diurus dan ditadbir dengan baik, dan juga
mengoptimumkan kepakaran. Kebarangkalian untuk sesuatu organisasi, syarikat untuk
berkembang adalah tinggi jikalau aktivti, dan juga ahli diletakkan didalam sesuatu kumpulan
atau jabatan mengikut kepakaran masing-masing. Ini boleh mengelakkan pertindihan
perkerjaan berlaku.
Content
Answer
a.
finance, human resources) performed. This approach can be used in all types of
organizations, although the functions change to reflect the organizations objectives and work
activities.
b.
major product area is placed under the authority of a manager whos a specialist in, and is
responsible for, everything having to do with that product line.
c.
d.
customer flow. In this approach, work activities follow a natural processing flow of product
or even customers.
e.
who have common needs or problems that can best be met by having specialists for each.
http://myllurmanagement.blogspot.my/2012/12/organizational-design-list-and-discuss.html
Chain of Command
Chain of command departmentalization works when the restaurant is large enough to require
more than one management division. For example, if a management role for one or more
people exists on the same level as another management role that oversees different staff or
customer groups, such as the operations and the finance, then these can be said to be
departmentalized by chain of command.
Customer
Customer departmentalization works by dividing the organization around the different types
of customers. In a restaurant environment, this could take the form of individual customers
versus catering for corporate clients and group events. One group of staff may handle the
day-to-day operations of the restaurant, while a separate group manages the catering arm of
the company, whether on the premises or outside. Departmentalization like this would
effectively also be functional and possibly chain-of-command departmentalization at the
same time.
Combined Departmentalization
Depending on the size of a restaurant, it may use two or more types of departmentalization. A
chain may split its operation along the lines of both product and chain of command by having
a food department and a beverage department, with food reporting to the chef while beverage
reports to the licensee. A smaller restaurant may use functional departmentalization, such as
kitchen
operations
versus
customer
service,
and
combine
this
with
process
Types of Departmentalization
Departmentalization by function
This is common and popular basis of departmentalization of an enterprise. Under this form,
various departments are created on the basis of nature of functions to be performed like
production, marketing, finance, personnel etc. A departmental head or manager is appointed
to supervise and control the activities of the concerned department. All departmental heads
are specialists and experts in their own area of business. When workload of a particular
department becomes more, a department may again be classified into sub departments. Since
the members working in a department have similar background and interest, it gives rise to
specialization which makes manpower more efficient and skilled.
Advantages of Departmentalization by Function
It facilitates delegation of authority and therefore, reduces the work burden of top
manager.
Departmentalization by Product/Service
This method of departmentalization is used specially by those manufacturing firms that
involve in large scale and various lines of products or services. A separate department is
created for a single product or product line and all functions like production, finance,
marketing, personnel etc. of one department are brought together under the concerned
department. Each department is independent and responsible to improve and expand its
business performance. The department manager is responsible for its expenses, revenue,
profits, failure and success. Therefore, it facilitates to measure the managerial as well as
operational result and contribution of each product line to whole organization.
Advantages of Departmentalization by Product/Services
It is suitable for the organization having various lines of products or services. It brings
about specialization in a product or service which makes optimum utilization of
human resources.
There may be under utilization of plant capacity if the demand of the product/service
is not sufficient.
It creates the problem of effective control over production divisions by the top
management.
Departmentalization by Customers
This type of departmentalization is applied by those organization which deal differently with
different types of customers. Types of customers are the key basis of departmentalization of
the enterprise. Banking organization create departments on the basis of customer service like
deposit, cash withdrawal, letter of credit, loan etc. Similarly, a business organization may be
divided into industrial product buyers and consumers product buyers. Likewise, consumer
product buyers again may be sub classified into wholesaler buyers, retailer and final
consumers.
Advantages of Departmentalization by Customer
There may be under utilization of facilities especially during the period of low
demand.
Departmentalization by Territory
This form of departmentalization is applied specially in those organization that involve in
business activities in different geographical locations. It is also appropriate for large scale
enterprise which are geographically spread out in many locations like insurance company,
bank, transport company, chain store or a product which is distributed throughout the nation.
All activities of specified territory are assigned to a particular department or regional
managers. Activities are grouped into regions, zones, district, branches etc. In such
departmentalization, the local customers are served by the divisional manager while the plans
and policies are formulated at the head offices.
There may be lack of skilled and efficient persons to take charge of regional
departments.
Departmentalization by Process
This method of departmentalization is applicable to those organizations where production
activities need some distinct process. Specially, this method is used in large scale
manufacturing concerns such as textile, cement, chemical, medicine etc. The activities are
grouped on the basis of process. The activities of each process are assigned to a departmental
head who is responsible for all the functions of concerned department. This is made to
maintain working efficiency of each process and to economize productivity. For instance,
department of a textile industry may be formed into ginning, spinning, weaving, dyeing and
finishing department.
Advantages of Departmentalization by Process
The technical problem is one process may create problem for the whole process.
Departmentalization by Time
Time is also a basis of departmentalization in may organization, especially, those that involve
in public utility, production or service. Generally, hospitals, hotels, telecommunication and
other public utility organization which work around the clock from departments on the basis
of time shift such as day, evening and night shifts. Therefore, a separate department is created
on the basis of shift and a departmental head of appointed for each shift to maintain control
the activities of concerned shift.
Advantages of Departmentalization By Time
It provides full responsibility to the shift head to complete activities which improves
product/service efficiency.
It is appropriate only for public utility enterprise where the work is round the clock.
The technical problem is one shift may create problems for the entire shift.
http://www.wisenepali.com/2015/01/departmentalization-importance.html
http://www.openlearningworld.com/books/Organisation/Organizations/Types%20of
%20Departmentation.html
Under each of these five managers, there will be subordinate managers and under them, the
subordinate staff.
The advantages of this type of structure are as follows:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(ii)
(iii)
unsuitable.
(iv)
(v)
(ii)
(iii)
(v)
New department may be added without difficulty. Permits growth and diversity of
(vii)
(viii)
A customer has to deal with different salesmen or managers for different products of
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(iii)
Places emphasis on local markets and problems. Local conditions might warrant
(v)
(vi)
(ii)
(iii)
Unsuitable for departments like Finance, where no gains are possible by specialisation
on local factors.
(iv)
Departmentation by Customers
Some advantages of this type of structure are:
(i)
(ii)
Where marketing channels are considerably different for various types of customers,
May not be enough work for certain types of customers. Hence, under employment of
(iii)
Discussion
he Importance of Organizational Design and Structure
RECOMMENDED
The Authentic Leadership Collection: Learn What It Takes to Master Your Leadership
Presence
LEADERSHIP & MANAGING PEOPLE BUNDLES
o
SAVE
SHARE
HBR's 10 Must Reads on Managing Yourself (with bonus article "How Will You
Measure Your Life?" by Clayton M. Christensen)
LEADERSHIP & MANAGING PEOPLE BOOK
SAVE
SHARE
SAVE
SHARE
One of the wonderful things about being a coach is that I meet hundreds of executives who
freely share their business and leadership challenges with me. As well as helping me
understand how hard it is to run an organization, they show me how they are managing to
adapt or not to changing organizational structures.
A constant theme during meetings over the last three years has been how globalisation and
the economic crisis have forced organizations to rethink their strategies and change they way
they operate. From what I can gather, much of this has been on the hoof, with companies
switching their focus from markets to products or competitors, rather than looking at the big
picture. This can result in lots of piecemeal change initiatives rather than looking at the
overall organizational design.
I rarely come across leaders who advocate wholesale organizational redesign or use it as a
way to support their people and business. When organizational strategy changes, structures,
roles, and functions should be realigned with the new objectives. This doesnt always happen,
with the result that responsibilities can be overlooked, staffing can be inappropriate, and
people and even functions can work against each other.
Often, I see little more than a traditional hierarchy flattening out, perhaps broadening into
a matrix structure in parts of the organization. More often than not, though, the hierarchy
remains embedded in the new structure, which can cut across its effectiveness and leave
people confused. Worse, organizations rarely show people how to operate in a new structure,
which can also undermine effectiveness.
Many of my clients tell me that they find it increasingly difficult to operate within outdated or
dysfunctional structures. My prevailing impression is that organizations either overlook the
importance of organizational design or simply dont know what to do.
This isnt surprising since the subject is complex and often poorly explained by academics
and consultants, finding a practical approach to organizational design can be difficult,
although some business schools are attempting to simplify things (pdf).
It is also a pity since structure dictates the relationship of roles in an organization, and
therefore, how people function. An outdated structure can result in unnecessary ambiguity
and confusion and often a lack of accountability. Structures can be complicated: one British
bank where I coach has a clear hierarchy at the top but a complex matrix structure further
down which, according to my clients, allows some managers to dodge their responsibilities
while others can move troublesome staff around or exit them easily.
Poor organizational design and structure results in a bewildering morass of contradictions:
confusion within roles, a lack of co-ordination among functions, failure to share ideas, and
slow decision-making bring managers unnecessary complexity, stress, and conflict. Often
those at the top of an organization are oblivious to these problems or, worse, pass them off as
or challenges to overcome or opportunities to develop.
Here are some of the stories I have come across recently if you have experienced anything
similar or have different insights, it would be useful to hear them in the coming week. Any
suggestions for pushing back or reshaping unnecessarily complex or outdated organizational
structures are also welcome!
The unworkable job: a Swiss engineer told me that his boss had bolted on so many parts
to his original role that it was becoming impossible to do his work as one part of his role
contradicted the other. Moreover, he was stretched beyond his limits by the scope of the role
and the fact that he had to operate across several time zones.
Politics: a Hong Kong retail executive said his role was schizophrenic because he was
required to influence a group of internal stakeholders who had been instructed by their boss
not to co-operate with him. The anomaly was the result of historical turf wars between his
boss and his boss peer: the latter had used his influence to restructure the department and
bring it under his control.
Over-regulation: a British banker explained how he was required to get approval from so
many people for a major project that he wasted six months trying to get it off the ground,
severely limiting his ability to compete in the market.
Applying for your own job: a French executive of an international food company explained
how a new chief executive wanted to make his mark by restructuring the group. The exec
made people apply for their own jobs, and determine who was redundant.
Cultural clashes: I once worked in a consultancy firm where a sizeable group of people still
defined themselves by the organizational culture of a company that was taken over 20 years
before. This group made a point of working against the new culture and subverted the
company in small and far-reaching ways.
https://hbr.org/2011/02/the-importance-of-organization
http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/gettingorganizational-redesign-right
http://www.strategy-business.com/article/00318?gko=c7329
https://maximumchange.wordpress.com/2011/05/19/considering-five-emerging-globaltrends-and-their-impact-on-organizational-strategic-leadership/