Chapter13

Struktur organisasi

McGraw-Hill/Irwin
McShane/Von Glinow OB 5e Copyright © 2010 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
Memilih Struktur Organisasi di
BioWare
Ray Muzyka (kiri) dan Greg
Zeschuk (kanan) merancang
struktur organisasi untuk
perusahaan game elektronik
mereka, Bioware, yang
menyeimbangkan kebutuhan
akan kerja tim dan berbagi
informasi.

13-2
Struktur Organisasi Ditetapkan

Pembagian kerja dan pola

koordinasi, komunikasi, alur
kerja, dan kekuatan formal
yang mengarahkan kegiatan
organisasi.
Berkaitan dengan banyak topik
OB misalnya desain pekerjaan,
tim, kekuasaan, budaya
organisasi, perubahan
organisasi

13-3
Divisi Tenaga Kerja
 Membagi pekerjaan menjadi
pekerjaan terpisah untuk orang
yang berbeda
 Pembagian kerja dibatasi oleh
kemampuan untuk
mengkoordinasikan pekerjaan
 Berpotensi meningkatkan
efisiensi kerja
 Diperlukan seiring
pertumbuhan perusahaan dan
pekerjaan menjadi lebih
kompleks
13-4
Mengkoordinir Kegiatan Kerja

1. Komunikasi informal
• Berbagi informasi, membentuk model mental
umum
• Memungkinkan fleksibilitas
• Penting dalam situasi yang tidak rutin dan ambigu
• Paling mudah di perusahaan kecil
• Diterapkan dalam struktur berbasis tim
• Termasuk peran integrator

13-5
Mengkoordinir Kegiatan Kerja

2. Hirarki formal
• Pengawasan langsung
• Menetapkan kekuatan formal (sah) untuk
mengelola orang lain
• Strategi koordinasi untuk departementalisasi

3. Standardisasi
a) Proses standar (misalnya, deskripsi pekerjaan)
b) Output standar (misalnya, target penjualan)
c) Keterampilan standar (misalnya, pelatihan)

13-6
Elemen Struktur Organisasi

Departemen- Rentang
alisasi kendali

Elemen Struktur Organisasi

Formalisasi Sentralisasi

13-7
Rentang kendali
Jumlah orang yang langsung
melapor ke level berikutnya
• Mengasumsikan koordinasi
melalui pengawasan langsung
Rentang kendali yang lebih
luas dimungkinkan ketika:
• Mekanisme koordinasi lainnya
hadir
• Tugas rutin
• Saling ketergantungan
karyawan yang rendah

13-8
Struktur Tinggi vs Struktur Datar
Ketika perusahaan tumbuh,
mereka :
• Bangun hierarki yang lebih tinggi
• Memperluas rentang, atau
keduanya

Masalah dengan hierarki tinggi

• Biaya overhead
• Informasi ke atas yang lebih
buruk
• Fokuskan kekuatan di sekitar
manajer, sehingga staf kurang
diberdayakan

13-9
Masalah dengan Struktur Tinggi vs
Struktur Datar
 Perusahaan bergerak menuju struktur yang
lebih datar (penundaan) karena hierarki yang
lebih tinggi memiliki:
• Biaya overhead mgt lebih tinggi
• Arus informasi lebih sedikit
• Kurangnya pemberdayaan staf

 Tetapi juga masalah dengan hierarki yang

lebih datar
• Merusak fungsi manajemen
• Meningkatkan beban kerja dan stres
• Membatasi pengembangan karir manajemen
13-10
Sentralisasi dan Desentralisasi

Sentralisasi
Kewenangan pengambilan keputusan
formal dipegang oleh beberapa orang,
biasanya di atas

Otoritas pengambilan keputusan tersebar

di seluruh organisasi

Desentralisasi
13-11
Formalisasi

 Sejauh mana organisasi menstandardisasi perilaku

melalui aturan, prosedur, pelatihan formal, dan
mekanisme terkait.
 Formalisasi meningkat seiring dengan
bertambahnya usia perusahaan, semakin besar,
dan semakin teregulasi
 Masalah dengan formalisasi
• Mengurangi fleksibilitas organisasi
• Menghambat pembelajaran/kreativitas organisasi
• Mengurangi efisiensi kerja
• Meningkatkan ketidakpuasan kerja dan stres kerja

13-12
Growing an Organic Taxi
Award-winning TAXI relies on an
organic structure to maintain its
creative advantage. TAXI cofounder
Paul Lavoie (bottom right in this
New York City office photo) says
that most firms are “so layered that
a great idea was easily crushed…
We needed a flexible infrastructure,
able to move with the pace of
change. TAXI started lean and
nimble, and remains so today.”

13-13
Mechanistic vs. Organic Structures

 Organic Structure
• Wide span of control
• Little formalization
• Decentralized decisions

 Mechanistic Structure
• Narrow span of control
• High formalization
• High centralization

13-14
Departmentalization

Specifies how employees and their activities

are grouped together
Three functions of departmentalization
1. Establishes chain of command
2. Creates common mental models, measures of
performance, etc
3. Encourages coordination through informal
communication

13-15
Functional Organizational Structure

Organizes employees around specific knowledge

or other resources (e.g., marketing, production)

CEO

Finance Production Marketing

13-16
Evaluating Functional Structures

 Benefits
• Economy of scale
• Supports professional identity and career paths
• Easier supervision

 Limitations
• More emphasis on subunit than organizational
goals
• Higher dysfunctional conflict
• Poorer coordination -- requires more controls

13-17
Divisional Structure

Organizes employees around outputs,

clients, or geographic areas

CEO

Lighting Consumer
Healthcare
Products Lifestyle

13-18
Divisional Structure

 Different forms of divisional structure

• Geographic structure
• Product structure
• Client structure
 Best form depends on environmental diversity
or uncertainty
 Movement away from geographic form
• Less need for local representation
• Reduced geographic variation
• More global clients

13-19
Evaluating Divisional Structures

 Benefits
• Building block structure -- accommodates growth
• Focuses on markets/products/clients

 Limitations
• Duplication, inefficient use of resources
• Specializations are dispersed--silos of knowledge
• Politics/conflict when two forms of equal value

13-20
Team-Based Structure

 Self-directed work teams

 Teams organized around work processes
 Typically organic structure
• Wide span of control – many employees work
without close supervision
• Decentralized with moderate/little formalization

 Usually found within divisionalized structure

13-21
Evaluating Team-Based Structures

 Benefits
• Responsive, flexible
• Lower admin costs
• Quicker, more informed decisions
 Limitations
• Interpersonal training costs
• Slower during team development
• Role ambiguity increases stress
• Problems with supervisor role changes
• Duplication of resources

13-22
Bioware’s Matrix Structure

Ray Muzyka (left) and Greg

Zeschuk (right) adopted a
matrix organizational
structure for their electronic
games company, Bioware,
because it balances the need
for teamwork and information
sharing.

13-23
Matrix Structure (Project-based)
Employees ( ) are temporarily assigned to a specific
project team and have a permanent functional unit

CEO

Game1 Game2 Game3

Project Leader Project Leader Project Leader

Art Dept
Leader

Software
Dept Leader

Audio Dept
Leader

13-24
Evaluating Matrix Structures

 Benefits
• Uses resources and expertise effectively
• Improves communication, flexibility, innovation
• Focuses specialists on clients and products
• Supports knowledge sharing within specialty
• Solution when two divisions have equal importance
 Limitations
• Increases goal conflict and ambiguity
• Two bosses dilutes accountability
• More conflict, organizational politics, and stress

13-25
Network Organizational Structure

Product Callcenter
development partner
partner (Philippines)
(U.S.A.)
Alliance of firms
creating a product or
Core
service
Firm
Package
Supporting firms Accounting
design
partner
beehived around a (U.S.A.)
partner
(UK)
“hub” or “core” firm
Assembly
partner
(Mexico)

13-26
Evaluating Network Structures

 Benefits
• Highly flexible
• Potentially better use of skills and technology
• Not saddled with same resources for all products

 Limitations
• Exposed to market forces
• Less control over subcontractors than in-house

13-27
External Environment & Structure

Dynamic Stable
• High rate of change • Steady conditions,
• Use team-based, network, or predictable change
other organic structure • Use mechanistic structure

Complex Simple
• Many elements (such as
• Few environmental elements
stakeholders)
• Less need to decentralize
• Decentralize

13-28
External Environment & Structure (con’t)

Diverse Integrated
• Several products, clients,
• Single product, client, place
regions
• Use functional structure, or
• Use divisional form aligned
geographic division if global
with the diversity

Hostile Munificent
• Competition and resource • Plenty of resources and
scarcity product demand
• Use organic structure for • Less need for organic
responsiveness structure

13-29
Effects of Organizational Size

As organizations grow, they have:

 More division of labor (job specialization)
 Greater use of standardization
 More hierarchy and formalization
 More decentralization

13-30
Technology and Structure

 Technology refers to mechanisms or

processes by which an organization turns out
its product or service
 Two contingencies:
• Variability -- the number of exceptions to standard
procedure that tend to occur.
• Analyzability -- the predictability or difficulty of the
required work

13-31
Organizational Strategy
 Structure follows strategy
• Strategy points to the environments in which the
organization will operate
• Leaders decide which structure to apply

 Differentiation strategy
• Providing unique products or attracting clients who
want customization
 Cost leadership strategy
• Maximize productivity in order to offer competitive
pricing

13-32
 Chapter13

Organizational
Structure

McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2010 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.13-33
McShane/Von Glinow OB 5e