-<2.2 ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE>

--INTRODUCTION--

In brief a business's organizational structure is A SYSTEM THAT DEFINES HOW A COMPANY IS ORGANIZED AND OPERATES, including how TASK ALLOCATION, THE ROLES and RESPONSIBIITIES of the STAFF are defined, and HOW INFORMATION FLOWS. Structures differ tremendously especially in terms of the following key features.

--KEY TERMS/FEATURES--

--DELEGATION--

DELEGATION comes from the verb 'TO DELEGATE' which means to GIVE SUBORDINATES RESPONSIBILITY for certain tasks and MAKING THEM ACCOUNTABLE, such as when a player is awarded the captaincy of the team. MORE RESPONSIBILITIES can lead to GREATER MOTIVATION, and it is very rare for a player to turn down the offer.
This can FREE UP MORE TIME for the manager to FOCUS ON MORE IMPORTANT TASKS.
However as shown below it can both MOTIVATE and DEMOTIVATE.

--TASK--

Explain how a teacher giving responsibility to hand out worksheets to a student isa form of delegation which can be both motivational and possibly demotivational. (Include a definition of 'delegation in your answer).

"When a teacher asks a student to hand out papers it is a form of delegation, because delegation is defined as...., It is useful to the teacher because,....also it can be motivational because, but also demotivational because..."

--SPAN OF CONTROL--

THE SPAN OF CONTROL refers to THE NUMBER OF SUBORDINATES DIRECTLY UNDER THE MANAGER'S SUPERVISION.
The GREATER THE NUMBER OF SUBORDINATES the WIDER the manager's SPAN OF CONTROL and the FEWER THE NUMBER OF SUBORDINATES the NARROWER the manager's SPAN OF CONTROL.
WIDER spans suggest GREATER DELEGATION, as supervision becomes more difficult, while NARROW spans allows for GREATER CLOSE CONTROL.

--LEVELS OF HIERARCHY--

Each LAYER/RANK of AUTHORITY (from SUPERIOR down to SUBORDINATE), is called a 'LEVEL OF HIERARCHY', and this hierarchical structure illustrates the descending levels of command, in other words 'THE CHAIN OF COMMAND'.
A TALL structure has a LARGE number of LEVELS of hierarchy while a FLAT structure has FEW LEVELS.

DISADVANTAGES of TALL structures:

- - - (-) TALL structures with many levels can be problematic due to the potential for SLOWER COMMUNICATION up and down the layers as well as the possibility that the MESSAGE WILL BE DISTORTED ('Chinese whispers')
    - (-) TALL structures also tend to have NARROW SPANS, which LIMITS THE SCOPE FOR DELEGATION and the potential benefits of more motivation.
    - (-) Workers near the foot of TALL structures may FEEL REMOTE which could impact PRODUCTIVITY.

In contrast, a flat organisational structure will have few levels of hierarchy but will tend to have wider spans of control. This will ENCOURAGE DELEGATION more extensively as they cannot effectively control the work of a large number of employees. It will also have a short chain of command and, potentially, better communication between the top of the hierarchy and the lower levels.

--TASK--

Using the info above justify why TES prefers a wide span of control and a short chain of command. In your answer give at least 2 justifications for why wide is better than narrow and short is preferred to tall.

"@TES, the span of control of most managers is relatively wide as this...., furthermore TES prefer a short chain of command because..."

--BUREAUCRACY @TES--

BUREAUCRACY refers to the organized structure and SET OF RULES, PROCEDURES, and POLICIES that GUIDE SCHOOL OPERATIONS. It involves HIERARCHIAL LEVELS OF AUTHOURITY, HOW TASKS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ARE ALLOCATED AMONGST STAFF, which ENSURES THE ORDER, CONSISTENCY and ACCOUNTABILITY in areas such as decision-making, record-keeping, and policy enforcement, BUT IT CAN SOMETIMES LEAD TO RIGID AND TIME CONSUMING PROCESSESS.

--TASK--

Imagine you are the Bus. Mgt. teacher at TES and you would like to organise a field trip for your class. Do you think the school's structure will make this very bureaucratic or not?

"In most schools, the administrative procedures required for approving field trips is highly bureaucratic as it often requires teachers to fill out multiple forms, obtain approvals from various departments in the chain, send out consent forms to parents and wait for their return, as well as ensure an appropriate teacher to student ratio etc...This process ensures that all necessary steps are followed however due to these many phases it often feels slow or overly complex discouraging teachers from actually organising such field trips in the first place"

CENTRALISATION

CENTRALISATION refers to an organizational structure, in which decision-making authority is concentrated at the top levels of management. For example at a school, this might mean the principal makes most decisions about curriculum, policies, and budget, with little input from teachers or departments.
This ensures CONSISTENCY across the business and the chain of command and accountability are clear, however they can be slow to respond to changes in the business environment or local changes near their branches, and a STANDARDISED approach may not work in all business locations.

DECENTRALISATION

DECENTRALIZATION refers to a structure where decision-making authority is distributed across various levels of the organization. Lower-level managers or individual branches have the autonomy to make decisions relevant to their operations. This allows for greater flexibility and responsiveness to local market conditions or customer needs.

--PROS/CONS OF CENTRALISATION--

--TASK--

Given the example above think of another well known product that is consistently the same regardless of what country you go to. Refer directly to the benefits listed above and apply them to your chosen product. Also add two disadvantages that could be solved by a more decentralised structure
"[Company name here] uses a centralised structure which is beneficial because..., however...."

--DELAYERING--

DELAYERING as the name suggests involves removing one or more levels of hierarchy from an organizational structure, often involving REMOVING MIDDLE MANAGERS. This is a traditional way to CREATE A FLATTER organizational structure and a WIDER SPAN of control.
ADVANTAGES
- - REDUCES COSTS and SHORTENS THE CHAIN OF COMMAND
  - This shorter chain IMPROVES COMMUNICATION through the organisation.
  - INCREASES the SPAN OF CONTROL and OPPORTUNITIES FOR DELEGATION and may INCREASE WORKFORCE MOTIVATION.
DISADVANTAGES
- - Could be HIGH REDUNDANCY PAYMENTS.
  - INCREASED WORKLOADS FOR REMAINING MANAGERS – this could lead to OVERWORK and STRESS.
  - Fear that redundancies might be used to cut costs could REDUCE THE SENSE OF JOB SECURITY for the whole workforce.

--TASK--

Convert the delayering definition and pros and cons into the context of TES delayering its Head of Subjects department. How would this imact the school's staff etc...
"If TES conducted a round of delayering by removing the subject leaders this would have the following impact, in terms of benefits clearly...."

--THE MATRIX STRUCTURE--

THE MATRIX STRUCTURE refers to a business structure that emphasizes CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMWORK. rather than staff working in specific functional departments, such as HR, or finance, they often collaborate with members of other functional departments on 'PROJECTS', in other words, this structure is 'PROJECT-BASED'.
As a result workers REPORT TO MORE THAN ONE BOSS. For example, an employee might report to their department head (like marketing) and also to the leader of a specific project they're working on. It's a bit like being part of two teams at the same time.
So, a matrix structure is more ABOUT COLLABORATION ACROSS DIFFERENT AREAS.

--PROS--

IMPROVED COLLABORATION & COMMUNICATION: Employees from different functional areas work together on projects, fostering collaboration and a more integrated approach to problem-solving.
EFFICIENT RESOURCE UTILIZATION: By drawing on resources from various departments, the matrix structure can help optimize resources

--CONS--

There is LESS DIRECT CONTROL FROM THE TOP, as the teams may be empowered to undertake and complete a project. This passing down of authority to more junior employees could be difficult for some managers to come to terms with.
The benefit of faster reaction to new situations is, therefore, at the expense of REDUCED BUREAUCRATIC CONTROL, and this trend may be RESISTED BY SENIOR MANAGERS.
In effect, team members may have TWO LEADERS if the business retains levels of hierarchy for departments but allows cross departmental teams to be created. This could cause a CONFLICT OF INTERESTS.

--TASK--

If we consider subject departments such as DESIGN and BUSINESS MANAGEMENT as functional departments can you give an example of how the matrix structure is/can be used at TES? Think MYP and inter disciplinary units.

"@TES the matrix structure is often used to enhance collaboration and flexibility across departments. A prime example is when..., this is beneficial as it (Include the two contextualised pros from above)..., however it can led to problems such as....(Include two contextualised pros from above)"

--ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS--

--FLAT & TALL--

--PRODUCT-BASED--

--PROS--

TAILORED FOCUS: Each program can focus on its specific student needs. For example, British high school staff can prioritize IBDP, while French staff can focus on teaching the diplôme national du brevet (DNB).
BETTER DECISION MAKING: Decisions can be made more effectively for each program because staff members understand the unique challenges and goals of their "product." This reduces one-size-fits-all solutions.
IMPROVED ACCOUNTABILITY: Staff within each program are accountable for the success of their division. For example, the British High School team is responsible for the British High School performance, making accountability clearer.
FLEXIBILITY IN MANAGEMENT: Each program can experiment with new teaching methods or policies that suit its students. The High school German programs can try new tech tools appropriate to its curriculum, while British programs may focus on inquiry-based learning, or concept based methods.
SPECIALIZED EXPERTISE: Staff can specialize in their area, becoming experts in the needs of French speaking high school students. This improves the quality of education and support.

--CONS--

DUPLICATION OF EFFORTS: The different programs may duplicate resources or activities. For example, each program might have its own football coach, and book the limited training resources separately, leading to inefficiency or wasted resources.
LACK OF CONSISTENCY: Programs might have different rules, teaching styles, or expectations, making it harder for students transitioning between programs (like moving from French to British school).
LIMITED COLLABORATION: Staff from different programs may not collaborate as much. For example, French and German high school teachers might not share ideas, missing out on potential improvements for the whole school.
RESOURCE IMBALANCE: One program might receive more funding or resources than another. If the British high school needs expensive science labs, the German program might suffer from fewer resources, leading to resentment.
COMPLEX MANAGEMENT: Managing multiple programs with different needs can be complex. School leadership has to balance priorities across all programs, which can be time-consuming, and in the case of TES with such a multi-cultural and language diverse set-up lead to conflict.

--TASK--

In a product structure, the school organizes itself based on distinct "products" or services it offers. For example as we know, TES is quite unique in that it offers three language-based programs, within the British, German and French sections. If we consider these separate products evaluate the pros and cons of this structure. (Min of two pros and cons each)
"@TES the teaching staff are organised by product, with teachers either working to deliver the British, German or French programs. This is beneficial because...,however there are also cons such as..."

--FUNCTIONAL-BASED--

--PROS--

Grouping employees by functional skills, e.g., marketing, finance etc... can IMPROVE EFFICIENCY. Specialists are clustered together, which PROMOTES COLLABORATION.
Employees can capitalise on their specialised skills as a means to progress in a given department.
As each department specialises in a specific function, managers train and develop employees within their unit to be proficient in their given role.

--CONS--

• Such a structure tends to suggest that one-way (top downwards) communication is the norm – this is rarely the most efficient form.

• There are few horizontal links between the departments, and this can lead to lack of coordination between them.

• Managers are often accused of tunnel vision because they are not encouraged to look at problems in any way other than through the eyes of their own department. They can become too focused on departmental objectives and not overall corporate aims.

• This type of structure is very inflexible and often leads to change resistance. This is because all managers tend to be defending both their own position in the hierarchy and the importance of their own department.

--TASK--

Most schools, including TES use a functional based structure, with departments divided by function, for example the HR and the Finance departments.
These departments can be further subdivided by function as is the case with operations which includes the maintenance and teaching staff.
The teaching staff can be further subdivided by function in terms of the subject they specialise in.
With reference to at least two of the advantages and disadvantages listed above evaluate TES' decision to organise the teaching staff by function.
"@TES the teaching staff in each section are organised by function such as the I & S department. This is beneficial because it means subject specialists in business, economics, geography and history work together which means they can..., however there are also cons such as..."

--REGIONAL STRUCTURE--

--PROS--

Communication between representatives can be very direct and personal in a geographical organisational structure – rather than having to establish working relationships with people on the other side of the world via email and telephone.

• Grouping employees into regional sections can encourage the formation of strong, collaborative teams that work effectively together and engage in planning and decision-making together.

• The ability to recruit local management offers companies the advantage of having leaders who are completely familiar with the local business environment, culture and legal climate.

• Better decisions can result from relying on the knowledge and experience of regional managers who are aware of specific cultural factors. Recruiting a mix of local and head-office managers to lead a geographical unit has the advantage of linking local culture with company culture. Customers can feel more at ease when speaking with local representatives who fully understand their language and forms of expression.

• Tracking the performance of individual regional markets is simplified under this structure, as measures such as revenues, profit margins, costs and performance improvements can be tracked to specific regions.

Disadvantages:

• Some disadvantages of the regional/geographical structure

may include the duplication of personnel between head office

and regional offices.

• There may be conflict and unhealthy competition between

different regional divisions of the business.

• It could make it more difficult to be consistent in core company

beliefs, e.g., applying the same ethical code of practice from

one region to the next.

• Inconsistent company strategies might be adopted in different

regions as a result of poor coordination between regional

offices.

--CHANGES: EXTERNAL FACTORS-

--'ECONOMIC CHANGES'--

A long-term DOWNTURN or RECESSION in the economy of the country or countries in which a business operates could make the following changes to structure appropriate:

DELAYERING OF THE ORGANISATION: – perhaps as part of a larger retrenchment programme – would take out one or more levels of hierarchy and would reduce overhead salary and other labour-related costs. This revised and ‘leaner’ structure would give the business a better chance of remaining profitable during a period of difficult trading conditions.
ADOPTING A REGIONAL STRUCTURE TO ALLOW FOR EXPANSION IN OTHER COUNTRIES that might be less affected by an economic recession. This revised structure might allow the business to revise its marketing mix quickly to successfully exploit foreign markets which might still be expanding.

--'TECH CHANGES'--

When rapid and significant technological change occurs – such as in electric vehicle production or mobile phone capabilities – senior management could consider the following changes to organisation structure:

GREATER USE OF R&D requiring, perhaps, the creation of a separate department for the scientific research and technical development of new products which would help to restore business competitiveness.
EMPLOYMENT OF MORE SPECIALIST EMPLOYEES experienced in IT and other developments to advise senior management on how the business could respond to technological changes. These specialists might report directly to senior management, in which case they become ‘staff managers’ and will not be assigned to the existing functional departments.
A MATRIX OR PROJECT-BASED STRUCTURE to focus teams of specialists from different functional areas tasked with developing new products which embrace the latest technology. The aim of this change to structure would be to make the business more flexible and fluid in response to technological change and to speed up the organisation’s response to it.

--'LEGAL CHANGES'--

Most governments are making legal changes that impact on how businesses operate. Many of these legal changes AFFECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF BUSINESSES and their RESPONSIBILITY TO THEIR EMPLOYEES on matters of EQUALITY and INCLUSION. Appropriate changes to the organisation could include:

The CREATION OF A COMPLIANCE UNIT to monitor and oversee whether all departments and employees of the business are aware of their legal responsibilities. The work of a typical compliance unit is to identify risks that an organisation faces resulting from legal regulations and advise on how to avoid or address these risks. Compliance officers provide an in-house service that effectively supports other business departments in their duty to comply with relevant laws and regulations and internal procedures.

--'COMPETITORS CHANGES'--

In HIGHLY COMPETITIVE AND QUICK CHANGING MARKETS such as consumer electronics etc... the need for RAPID DECISION MAKING may necessitate DECENTRALISED STRUCTURES where decisions to diversify product lines are done at a level of the organisation closer to the market and the customers.
In contrast, businesses that do not often need to diversify their operations could justify the use of a centralised organisational structure.

--'GLOBALISATION'--

To become a successful global business operating in several national or regional markets, the organisational structure needs to be flexible enough to ALLOW FOR DECISIONS TO BE TAKEN LOCALLY THAT REFLECT MARKET CONDISTIONS AND LOCAL CULTURES. Many multinational companies have adopted a regional structure with decentralised decision-making. This should allow local differences in market conditions, culture and consumer preferences to be accurately reflected in the marketing mix adopted by the business.

--CHANGES (HL)--

--HANDY'S SHAMROCK ORGANISATION (hL)--

Handy’s Shamrock Organisation differs from traditional hierarchical structures because it replaces rigid job layers with flexible work roles. Instead of a tall pyramid with many levels of authority, Handy suggests three "leaves":
- - - Core staff – permanent, skilled workers central to the business.
    - Contractual workers – specialists hired for specific projects.
    - Flexible/part-time workers – temporary or part-time staff.
This model emphasizes FLEXIBILITY, OUTSOURCING, and COST-EFFICIENCY, unlike hierarchical models that focus on control, clear chains of command, and fixed roles.

--HANDY'S SHAMROCK ORGANISA TION (hL)--

Project-based organisation

Some businesses have always adopted a project-based structure.

For example, advertising agencies will use a team of creative employees for each major promotion campaign contract, and events-organising firms will use a group of people to organise and manage a major event such as an international conference. The project-based organisation (PBO) has become a more widely adopted form of structure as an alternative to traditional organisational structures.

It is claimed that it better allows businesses to deal with demands that are often quite short term and one-off, within a dynamic market. As a consequence of the trend towards increased globalisation, application of new technologies, rapid changes in the economic environment and unstable markets, organisations must be flexible enough to adapt to continual transformational process.

Project-based structures often use a matrix organisation with several distinct project teams, but essential company functions are maintained by a central core of managers. As was noted when discussing matrix structures, an employee can have one manager for project-related work but another for issues such as pay and working conditions. Senior managers could have several project

groups reporting to them on specific tasks, such as a strategy to

enter a new market or a plan to reduce operating costs by 10%. At

the same time, the business would maintain core functions (such

as human resources) outside the project groups.

One of the key benefits of a project-based organisation is its flexibility. Employees best suited to a particular project are assigned to it and there will be a mix of people from different functional areas. Within each project team there is likely to be a hierarchical structure but, typically, with very few levels of hierarchy.

Another benefit is that the focus of the organisation changes compared to traditional structures. Instead of being concerned with

department responsibilities, projects are focused on solving

problems and devising new strategies. It is argued that solution

and strategies are arrived at more quickly using a project manager

and a team of people most suited to each job.

Critics of the project-based organisation suggest that each project

team might feel isolated from others. They become task focused

and do not concentrate of coordinating with other teams or the rest

of the organisation. Continuity and loyalty to the company could

become a problem too. Employees might change project teams

quite frequently as their role ends, reporting to different managers

all the time. In addition, specialist employees might be more loyal

to their team than the overall business organisation, and when their

project ends they could look for challenges in other organisations.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse