Scott Ch. 10
Angela Lewis
Question #1
Organizational size is the organization as a whole, whereas the administrative side
consists of a part of the organization. There has been concern that the administrative
category is growing too large in proportion with the administrative employees. However,
research finds that this is because the administrative area is made up of several groups
such as managerial, professional and technical, and clerical. Organizations show
consistent and positive associations between an organization’s size and measures of
differentiation. Larger organizations tend to have a more complex structure. In contrast
size is also positively associated with the use of more activities of the same type. Size
includes an increase in the scale of operations but not an increase in the kinds of
operations. These two aspects of organizational size have different effects on the size of
the administrative component. Large size is associated with structural differentiation,
therefore, creating a variety of work. The administrative component expands to assume
the responsibilities of integration and coordination of the new task areas. Although in a
different perspective organizational size is concerned with increases in the size of units.
This increases the amount of similar work tasks. The more people doing similar work the
less administrative people needed to supervise them.
Formalization is the rules and procedures that govern an organization’s activities.
The larger the size of the organization the more formalized structure it needs. The
bureaucratic model also claims that larger organizations will have more centralized
decision-making. However, it was found that size was not correlated with indicators of
centralization, and centralization is negatively associated with most measures of
formalization. Centralization and formalization can be considered control mechanisms in
that the more formalized arrangements permit a more decentralized decision-making
system.
The study of Hall in 1968 factors in the relationship between worker competence
and organizational structure. Hall examined six structural features: hierarchy of
authority, division of labor, presence of rules, extent of procedural specification,
impersonality, and technical competence. There were positive correlations among all of
these elements except technical competence. This variable was negatively correlated
with all the other aspects. This study found that more highly qualified workers were
found in organizations with lower level task specialization, formalization, and
standardization.
Question #2
There are several different mechanisms used to connect organizational structure
with its environment. When using these mechanisms there are fundamental changes in
the structure of the organization. An organization may use the buffering technique to
connect units that deal with input and output environments of the organization. This
technique changes organizational structure by recruiting new personnel with different
skills than those in the technical core of an organization.
Another reaction an organization may have to the environment uses the bridging
technique. This adaptation occurs in response to technical and institutional
environments. When the task environment becomes more differentiated and active with
the development of segmented labor, technological advances, subcontractors, and
competitors, the organization needs new types of specialists to deal with each
environmental sector. There are structural changes at the institutional level also that
incorporate these new areas on the board of directors. This is necessary to connect the
organization with the sectors important in their environment.
Companies can integrate their organization through using liaison roles. Liaison
roles are specifically used to integrate different sectors of a company and resolve
conflicts among them. Conflicts within different environmental sectors can also be
resolved through structural redesign, third party consultation, and reeducating
participants.
Question # 3
Macro structural adaptations are large changes in the scale of an organization.
Examples of this include mergers and divestures. Business enterprises went through
several structural adaptations before finally developing into a structure called the M-form
or multidivisional. Change in structure follows a change in strategy. Firms change their
structure in order to increase the size of their markets and to incorporate more phases of
production. As corporations expand their scope multidivisional forms are necessary.
Companies should use the M-form to keep higher officials from having to deal with
operational decisions and allow them to concentrate on the organization, it’s
environment, it’s resources, and it’s product lines. While some companies adopted a
multidivisional structure to benefit the corporation, other corporations adopted this
structure because it was the “norm.” Another macro structural adaptation is divesting and
downsizing. Conglomerate firms were not performing as well as their component units.
Changes in policies and “innovative practices in financing” were reasons that investors
bought out corporations in order to break them up and sell off the different sectors.
Corporations also started reducing the number of full-time employees and contracting out
the jobs of these employees. Alliances are another form of structural change for
companies. Smaller businesses found that by joining together they could compete with
larger companies. These arrangements encourage cooperative behavior and create longterm relationships with related companies. Organizations may form networks because
they are more likely to survive than organizations relying simply on market-based
relationships.
Question # 4
Core components are demands made by technology on the structure. The
peripheral structures are those that respond to demands posed by the size or scale of the
organization and by the task and institutional environments. The peripheral components
seem to be the outer aspects of an organization, where the technical components are the
inner, operational aspects. There are several strategies used to connect the technical core
with the peripheral components. For example, a corporation may use tight coupling.
This strategy emphasizes a strong connection between managers and a performers’
behavior, essentially, whatever the manger says the performer does. Organizations that
use this strategy have a more divided and routine work environment. Decentralization,
delegation, and professionalization ensure some coordination and control between the
technical and peripheral components. These ideas encourage workers in the technical
core and reduce the dependence on the higher officials. Loose coupling is another
strategy used to smooth the connection between different components. This suggests an
organization will decouple their formal structures from the activities in the technical core.
Organizations will conform more closely to the environment and not implement as much
at the operational level. This idea says that formal structures have importance regardless
of whether they affect the technical core. Organizations can also restructure or
reengineer at the institutional or managerial level. They may create systems that will
allow employees to interact more across functional boundaries. Companies need to work
across units as well as up and down between levels of hierarchy, the organization, and the
environment.