The concept of organizational structure in one form or another is known to every manager.

But how many of those who create their own business think about it seriously and put the principles of building such a structure into practice? IN large companies the existence of an organizational structure is a necessity, because without it it is impossible to streamline and coordinate all the company’s processes. Whereas for medium- and small-level enterprises, the internal structure is often chaotic and spontaneous, which causes a lot of trouble, especially in emergency situations.

Organizational structure - this is a diagram of the internal structure of the company, which spells out the duties and rights, distribution of responsibilities and powers, and a decision-making plan. Usually this is a schematic diagram that shows the departments and divisions of the company and all the relationships between them. There can be vertical and horizontal, linear and functional interactions between structural elements. Linear connections are based on administrative subordination; functional connections are united by one function.

Often, the establishment of an organizational structure becomes the start for the active growth and development of a company.

Main types of organizational structures and their scope

There are several types of organizational structures. When choosing a scheme for your enterprise, you must rely on the scope of its activities and the size of the organization.

1. Linear. Based on the principle of vertical unity of command. The simplest and most understandable model in which responsibilities and powers are clearly distributed. This scheme works well in small manufacturing enterprises. As the company grows, there is a need to expand the structure with functional departments, which this scheme cannot provide.
2. Linear-functional. Functional compartments are added to linear compartments. One function - one compartment. In this case, administrative responsibility lies with the line manager. This model is best suited for mid-level companies and not very large manufacturing enterprises.

An example of a linear-functional structure

1. Line-staff. This is the same linear functional structure, supplemented by headquarters. The need for headquarters offices is associated with any specific functions not included in the existing structure. When expanding an enterprise, mastering new technologies, eliminating the consequences of an accident - when the company requires qualified assistance from specialists not involved in the direct production of goods or services.
2. Divisional. It is an addition to an existing structure. Divisions are created either for a specific purpose (customer, product), or for branches of the company. These departments have a large degree of independence. The model is well suited for large companies with a developed network of branches, as well as for developing new market sectors and expanding production.
3. Matrix (project, team). Organized on the basis of a linear-functional structure with the addition dual leadership vertically and horizontally. One performer has two bosses - administrative and functional. The activities of functional units can be formed according to different principles: one project, one client, one specialization, etc. The model is suitable for large and very large enterprises with several areas of activity.

So, the organizational structure of the company is, of course, not the first necessity, and it will not be useful if you do not have suppliers or you have not rented premises. However, an internally unorganized enterprise can bring you a lot of trouble and - what is important - losses. Organizational structure is the foundation and prospect of a successful business; it is your golden key.

Let's consider the main types of organizational structures.

Linear organizational structure. The simplest organizational structure is linear. 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. Scheme linear structure

This structure is simple and economical, ensures ultimate responsibility, and makes it possible to maintain a balance of power and responsibility. All responsibilities and powers are clearly distributed here, and therefore conditions are created for an operational decision-making process and maintaining the necessary discipline.

However, the linear structure has a major drawback: no manager can be a universal specialist and cover all aspects of the enterprise’s activities.

This structure is focused only on the implementation of current tasks, it is characterized by a lack of flexibility, a tendency towards bureaucracy, and the possibility of distortion of information when transferred from one level of management to another.

Functional structure. With a functional structure, heads of functional departments specialize in a certain area

activities and are responsible for the implementation of relevant functions, directly give orders to production units on issues within their competence. The main advantages of the functional structure are the direct influence of specialists on production, a high level of management specialization, in-depth development and justification of decisions made. The main disadvantage is complexity and inefficiency (many divisions, and therefore management channels).

Rice. 2. Functional structure diagram.

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

Linear-staff organizational structure. The growth of complexity and scale of production, differentiation of management functions led to the emergence of a linear-staff organizational structure.

Under managers, “headquarters” are created, i.e. management units of specialists who perform certain functions (accounting, control, etc.) and are not directly responsible for decision-making and production results.

The line-staff structure allows for more qualified solutions to management problems, but creates the danger of replacing line managers in the decision-making process.

Diversification of production and specialization of management led to the emergence of combined structures, the most common of which was linear-functional. It combines the main advantages of both linear and functional systems and ensures the development

specialization of management activities, while maintaining the authority of line managers responsible for production results.

Due to its advantages, the linear-functional management structure has become widespread, turning out to be practically the only option for organizing enterprises in our country. It was fully consistent with command-administrative principles and management methods. Its advantages are realized in conditions of stable technology, mass and large-scale production.

In conditions of macroeconomic instability, rapidly changing consumer preferences and values, competition, and with the predominance of economic management methods, the advantages of a linear-functional structure are not so obvious, and the disadvantages become more noticeable. These include: slow movement of information and, accordingly, decision making; conflict of interests between line and functional managers, which affects not only the speed, but also the quality of decisions made; narrow specialization of middle managers, limiting their horizons and rejecting innovations; the desire of managers to reduce risk and not take on greater responsibility when making management decisions.

The functional structure is not suitable for enterprises with a wide or frequently changing range of products, as well as for enterprises operating on a broad international scale, simultaneously in several markets in countries with different socio-economic systems and legislation.

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

Among large companies, the divisional type of organizational structure predominates. The factors that determined the transition to this type of organizational structure include: increased diversification of business activities, specialization of management, international division of labor, increased awareness, self-esteem and expectations of middle managers, etc.

Rice. 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 divisional structure differs from the linear-functional structure by greater flexibility, which ensures speed of decision-making and is the main advantage in conditions of rapidly changing market conditions and technological innovations.

1. Stability (most effective in a stable environment) 2. Savings on management costs 3. Specialization and competence 4. Quick solution to simple problems within the competence of one functional service 5. Orientation towards stable technology and an established market 6. Orientation towards price competition1. Flexibility (most effective in a dynamic environment) 2. Efficiency of decision making 3. Interdisciplinary approach 4. Quick solution of complex cross-functional problems 5. Orientation to new markets and technologies 6. Orientation to non-price competition

The structuring of an organization into departments is usually carried out according to one of three criteria: by products produced or services provided (product specialization); by orientation towards the consumer (consumer specialization); by territories served (regional specialization).

Organization of divisions along product lines (Figure 4) is one of the main forms of divisional structure, and currently most of the largest consumer goods manufacturers with diversified products use a product organization structure.

Rice. 4. Scheme of the product management structure

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

Some businesses produce a wide range of products or services that meet the needs of several large consumer groups or markets. Each group or market has clearly defined specific needs. If two or more of these elements become particularly important to an enterprise, it may use a customer-oriented organizational structure in which all departments are grouped around specific customer groups.

Rice. 5. Customer-centric organizational structure diagram

This type of organizational structure is used in quite specific areas, for example in the field of education, where recently, along with traditional general education programs, special departments have emerged for adult education, advanced training, etc. An example of the active use of a consumer-oriented organizational structure is commercial banks.

The main groups of consumers using their services are individual clients (private individuals), pension funds, trust firms, international financial organizations. Buyer-oriented organizational structures are equally characteristic of trading firms selling wholesale and retail.

If the activities of an enterprise cover large geographical areas, especially on an international scale, then it may be advisable to build an organizational structure on a territorial basis, that is, according to the location of its divisions (Fig. 6). A regional structure makes it easier to resolve problems related to local laws, customs and consumer needs. This approach simplifies both the connection between the enterprise and its customers and the communication between the divisions of the enterprise.

Rice. 6. Diagram of regional organizational structure

A well-known example of regional organizational structures is the sales divisions of large enterprises. Among them you can often find divisions whose activities cover very large geographical areas. In turn, they are divided into smaller units, and those into even smaller blocks.

The divisional structure also has very significant disadvantages. Among them are conflicting interests of individual divisions and the entire enterprise, duplication of management functions and, consequently, the growth of the administrative apparatus and the uneconomical structure. As the enterprise grows, these shortcomings can lead to loss of controllability.

Matrix organizational structure. Matrix organizational

the structure arises in conditions of diversified production, when an enterprise develops and produces several different types of products, implements several investment or innovation projects, etc. It is a synthesis of linear-functional and divisional structures.

Rice. 7. Matrix diagram of the organizational structure of the enterprise

General instructions to performers are given by line managers, and specific instructions are given by project managers. The latter are decision makers, vested with special powers, accumulate and interpret information coming from functional units, and exercise control over the progress of the project. The orders of line managers regarding work on this project are agreed upon in writing with them. The advantages of such a structure are flexibility, dynamism, guarantees of maintaining and expanding technological capital and innovative activity.

The personal interest of the project manager in his success, due to such motives as the desire for professional growth and identification of goals, stimulates interactivity, i.e., team cohesion.

Principles of intrapreneurship (internal venture). A unique flexible organizational structure arises on the principles of intrapreneurship. The essence of intrapreneurship is that a group of people who are confident in the future success of a promising project are given relative autonomy in working on it. Conditions are created within the enterprise that imitate entrepreneurial activity in a small business: independence in organizing work, selecting a group of project participants and entering the market. This also means the transfer of ownership (or control) of certain resources, the creation of prerequisites for a high level of remuneration if the project is successful, the possibility of using employees’ own funds in the labor process, and complete freedom from formal organizational and bureaucratic procedures for a predetermined period of time.

Depending on the risk intrapreneurs take, the following reward schemes may be used.

The intrapreneur continues to receive a salary plus bonuses for developing the idea.

The intrapreneur's salary is frozen at the level that existed before the internal venture was organized until the project begins to generate profit. Then, in addition to the salary, the intrapreneur begins to receive bonuses (in practice, up to 150% of the salary).

The intrapreneur participates in investments in his enterprise through deductions from his own wages or other sources and subsequently receives a large share of the profits from the project if it is successful.

In addition to the enterprise's funds, internal ventures can also attract external sources of financing and issue “securities” that are circulated within the enterprise (so-called “imaginary” shares).

Intrapreneurship as a form of organizing the activities of an enterprise is attractive because it allows you to apply the principles of risk financing to increase the company's innovative activity.

The obvious disadvantage of such a structure is its uneconomical nature: internal ventures require significant expenditure of resources with significant risk. In addition, the number of semi-autonomous operations allowed within the enterprise is limited - otherwise there is a threat of loss of controllability - just as the number of employees capable of becoming venture managers is limited.

The structure and staffing level of the organization (document provided by OKUD, code 0252211), as well as the wage fund, are usually determined at the stage of business planning during formation, reorganization legal entity or when expanding or developing a new type of activity, that is, resolving these issues initially, and subsequently, is the prerogative of the founders.

The structure and staffing of the enterprise can be fixed in statutory documents(Charter, Regulations). With the exception of state-owned enterprises located in budget financing, or branches (representative offices) of commercial enterprises, such strict regulation is extremely rare. In the conditions of market relations, it is vital for any business entity in any field of activity to quickly respond to changes occurring in the market. If the structure and staffing levels are fixed in constituent documents, then changes are possible after initial appropriate changes to these documents and the necessary state registration such changes (the whole procedure).

The dynamics of market relations require the highest flexibility and efficiency, therefore, in most commercial organizations, the issue of forming and changing the structure, as well as the number of personnel, falls within the competence of the general director. It is he who must determine the structure, build official relationships, regulate the number of personnel, based on the current situation on the market in general, the areas of activity and the financial situation of the enterprise he heads. He is responsible to the founders for the final financial results, and should not ask permission from anyone to carry out the necessary organizational measures, moreover, in medium and especially small enterprises CEO he himself is a founder (co-founder).

In practice, in the vast majority of medium and small enterprises, a document that normatively establishes the structure and staffing levels is either absent altogether or has the form of a diagram defining the hierarchy of service connections between or their production relationship (flows of information and reporting).

This diagram is an inverted two-dimensional tree and describes the linear-functional type of organizational structure of the organization. However, other more complex types of organizational structure are known from management theory, such as matrix and project, which are multidimensional. Accordingly, a schematic representation of the multidimensional structure of an organization on paper (document) is practically unrealistic.

Based on the fact that the presence of such a document as “Structure and staffing” is not mandatory for an organization, as advice, we will give several situations where the creation of such a document can only harm the business. You should not document the internal structure of the organization if:

• the organization is truly a small enterprise and it is enough to develop complete ones for employees;
• all management (decision making) is concentrated in one hand;
• the organization is engaged in one type of activity and there is no need to divide employees into separate work groups;
• the organization is built on a multidimensional system.

If the manager decides that the document “Structure and Staffing” is necessary for the organization, then when drawing it up the following rules should be followed.

There is no standard or unified form, so the rules for its design are subject to: general requirements GOST, that is, it can have a content part in the form of text, tables or diagrams.

Developing the structure of the enterprise and determining the staffing level, at best, should be the responsibility of the director (manager) of personnel, who has the necessary knowledge and experience, as well as, probably most importantly, information about the market, the state of the company and development prospects. This document must be agreed upon with the heads of areas (structural divisions).

Based on the approved structure and staffing levels, the HR department prepares for approval

We have consistently examined the structures of the managed (production) system and the control one, which from the point of view of cybernetics are parts of the enterprise as a management system. Now it is necessary to combine both structures (organizational-production and organizational management structure) into a single whole (Fig. 7.6.1.):

Rice. 7.6.1.

Organizational structure of the enterprise – this is a synthesis of the production structure and management structure.

The production system has several structures that are formed at the levels (stages) of production and have their own distinctive features. For example, the organizational and production structure of a workshop consists of production sections, and the organizational and production structure of sections consists of workplaces for performers of the labor process.

The control system, reflecting the structuring of production, is also characterized by a multiplicity of structures that ensure the management of objects at various levels of the hierarchical system. So the workshop (and moreover, each workshop separately) has its own organizational management structure, which is not at all similar to the management structure that the production site has.

Organizational structure diagram. The structure of an organization and its parts (elements) is described by a “scheme language” that serves visual aid reflection on paper of all structural cells (units, divisions), levels of the hierarchy of production (and management) and relationships of subordination.

There are two types of such connections:

Linear connection;

Functional connection.

The linear communication channel serves line managers (director, his deputies, shop managers, production foremen, foremen). Direct and feedback communication is carried out through this channel (line). The functional communication channel serves functional managers (heads of services, departments, sectors, etc.) and specialists (technologists, designers, economists, lawyers, etc.).

The construction of an organizational structure diagram is still not strictly regulated and therefore there are various diagram figures in both vertical (more compact) and horizontal (stretched) images. However, the structure diagram should clearly reflect the stages (levels) of production and management with the links (cells) located on them. In most cases, the organizational structure of an enterprise has a three-level structure (Fig. 7.6.2.):

Rice. 7.6.2.

To provide a schematic representation of the organizational structure of an enterprise, you can propose a kind of layout consisting of lines on which links, divisions, and cells are located:

Developing a diagram of the organizational structure of an enterprise is a creative process that has certain technical difficulties if we are talking about a large enterprise with hundreds of divisions and links that must be placed on the diagram in compliance with the designated rules. Most often, in this case, the diagram shows the management structure at the highest level (director, his deputies, chief specialist services, departments, bureaus) and indicates the line of workshops without developing their structure, the diagram of which is drawn up in each workshop.

For a small enterprise, developing an organizational chart is not technically difficult. Such a diagram usually shows all, without exception, divisions, units, cells that exist in the enterprise, in compliance with the rules for their presentation on the organizational structure diagram (structural lines, steps, linear and functional connections). The diagram of the organizational structure of an enterprise not only provides a clear picture of its structure, but also serves as the most important object of study, analysis and rationalization of the current structure.

In Fig. 7.6.3 and 7.6.4 are given as an example of a diagram of the organizational structures of an enterprise and a workshop. The vertical presentation of the structures in this case is explained solely by the author’s technical considerations (placing the diagram on one sheet). With this image, the levels of production and its management are clearly visible.

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 interconnected - 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 organizational 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 representation of 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 united in this 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 adopted in architecture, we can say that this abstract sets out the basic ideas on the basis of which various options for solving the problem of organizational structure can be developed without the restrictions 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 management process by 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: V 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 links strategic planning. 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.

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.

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 the 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.

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.

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 a 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, distribution of resources, leadership style, methods of motivating staff, and do not support the desire of employees 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 high level qualifications of specialists with 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 basic principle of construction project structure is the concept of a project, which refers to 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 end. 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 into new project or quit (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 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 large number 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.

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 vested 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 organization 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 focal point for 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 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 organization structuring, 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, settlement department labor conflicts, financial department, human resources department, legal services.

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(Fig. 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, but 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 this information simultaneously from all regional representatives, the manager can gain a complete picture of the effectiveness of his program throughout the service territory and in each region. This allows him to more rationally distribute available resources across regions.

However geographical position 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 the specifics of organizational structure and does not affect its 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 work 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, the multidimensional organizational structure, although devoid of some significant disadvantages inherent in organizations regular type, however, 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.