Job Design
(Note: This Chapter Outline corresponds to Chapter 12 within Management: Comprehension,
Analysis, and Application, Gatewood, Taylor & Ferrell, 1st edition, 1995. Numbers at right are the
corresponding page numbers for your use in referencing.)
Executive Summary: I'll do this summary a little later in the term......
"Classical" Approach to Job Design
(338)
... under the Classical School of Management Thought
Workers viewed as 'machines', ie, as a smaller machine inside the
big factory machine, as a "cog in the works." (see picture on p. 35)
... under scientific management per Fredrick Taylor
focus on labor productivity and efficiency
(36)
(37)
Specialization (same as "division of labor")
(33-34,338-340)
Advantages
Results in economies of scale, efficient
(337, 338)
Exemplified by pin factory within Wealth (34, 338)
of Nations, Adam Smith, 1776
Available labor pool in the marketplace is larger (338)
Overall training costs are reduced
(338)
worker's skills more easily improve over time
(338)
Disadvantages
Laborers are easily replaced, resulting in worker (338)
insecurity
Laborers become bored and careless with
repetitive tasks, resulting in lower product quality
(34, 338)
Greater distance is placed between producer and
consumer, resulting in lower product quality
(337)
Example: Richard Gere & the cobbler
in Sommersby
Harbor captains strike for $200K/yr., an example of what
happens when labor is NOT divided
"Behavioral" Approach to Job Design
(340)
MAN 351 / Polito
0351967413
Views workers as 'people' and embraces the use of sociological &
psychological techniques
Exam 3
(43)
Advocates
Job enlargement
(340)
Increasing the number of tasks incorporated within
a particular job
Intended to defeat boredom of "classical" jobs
Job rotation
(340)
(341)
Moving workers "from job to job" on a regular basis
Intended to defeat boredom of "classical" jobs
(341)
Aids workers in understanding how "other parts
of the organization work, and how thier work impacts
other jobs, as well
Example: Peterbilt mini-line
Job enrichment
(341)
Increasing the number of similar tasks in a job that
require information process and decision making
Intended to defeat boredom of "classical" jobs
(341)
Captures the vast and "untapped" mental faculties of
workers (our greatest competitive disadvantage) as well
Four Major Methods of Departmentalizing Jobs
(342)
Functional Departmentalization
(343)
The "traditional"
Customer Departmentalization
(344)
Example: Government contracts are just different!
Product Departmentalization
(344-345)
Example: Auto insurance by state
Example: The Disney diagram on p. 362 is also a nice example. Disney may
well be one of the most successful large corporations of the 21st century. Disney
has recently succeeded in designing and operating an entire town (Celebration,
FA), a Broadway theater, an educational institution (Disney University), a
Caribbean cruise line. Building successful towns, profitably regentrifying old
theaters, and running universities that people actually enjoy attending are
accomplishments that have eluded the much of modern society; perhaps this is
why managers from around the world pay to take Disney courses about how to
manage "the Disney way." A student of management might learn something very
important if he/she could "figure out" what Disney's core/distinctive competencies
"really" are.
Geographic Departmentalization
(346)
2
MAN 351 / Polito
0351967413
Exam 3
Example: Ford Europe
My take: First, few organizations are "purely" departmentalized as described above; rather
they are "hybrids," containing elements of more than one method. Second, the four
methods listed in the text all assume hierarchy. A lot of people "raised" on such thinking
keep forgetting that many of the world's best and largest corporations of the mid-20th
century (eg, IBM, General Motors, ATT), corporations that employed pure verticality,
bureaucracy, and hierarchy, "choked," "almost choked," or "are choking" on that structure
at the end of the 20th century. (JFYI, the original models for this kind of structure were
the armed forces and the Catholic Church; models Sloan relied upon in structuring
General Motors in the early part of the century.) There are lots of other ways to
"departmentalize" a organization; for example, in a matrix organization (p. 367), a
department may "report up" to both a functional and product line. Third, and most
important, many "forward-thinking" companies find the rigidity of such departmentalization
within a world of rapid, constant change far too restrictive and use structures that are
more flexible and less clearly defined. See Thriving on Chaos, for a discussion, or you
can catch short articles of example companies in Fast Company magazine on a regular
basis. The concept of departments may well become archaic during the 21st century.
Authority and Formal Power
Authority is the use of formal (or legitimate) power
(347)
This is the authority that Max Weber was talking about (see p. 42); authority
vested in the office, rather than the individual. (Example: President by vote vs.
King by birthright). It is legitimate because the holder of the office is (legally,
officially or formally) "entitled" to it.
There are other kinds of power for "enforcement." A dentist tells you that you
must have a root canal. But is he telling the whole truth or just "making work" for
him/herself? Unless you go to another dentist, you may just have to do what he
says; he is not your "boss" and has no "authority" over you, but he/she has expert
power "over you." Though much is said in the next few pages about
authority and formal power, remember that legitimate/formal power
comprises only the most minute portion of power actually encountered and
exerted in organizations. More will be said about types of power at p. 493.
Vertical (scaler, scalar chain) organizations
(41, 346-347, 349)
Organizations where authority relationships flow downward (or "top-down")
(We just mentioned "verticality" a few paragraphs above)
Don't forget the "acceptance theory of authority" (p. 48) and the "how to smoke a
cigarette" example. The acceptance theory of authority says just the opposite;
that authority in organizations really flows upwards (or bottom-up"). What do you
think?
Span of Control
(348)
The actual number of subordinates or "reports" that a manager "has."
3
MAN 351 / Polito
0351967413
Exam 3
Early theorists believed that the appropriate span of control was five
to seven people for upper-level managers; up to thirty for lower-level
managers
(I have heard the magic number "7" bandied about by many managers)
Fewer "reports" makes for a "narrower, taller pyramid."
Organizations that operate with a narrow span of control are
usually referred to as "tall" organizations.
(348)
Many "reports" makes for a "wider, flatter pyramid."
Organizations that operate with a wider span of control are
usually referred to as "flat" organizations.
(348)
Unity of Command
Principle that a subordinate should report to exactly one immediate (349)
superior
Said another way, "one and only one" boss
Many of us would have difficulty imaging any other kind of "bossing" arrangement
Yet most people spend a major portion of their life "working" for two bosses -Mom and Dad -- did they really need "unity of command" to prevent conflicting
orders and such? How about students with several instructors per term? Matrix
organizations (p. 367) also defy the "unity of command" principle.
Has been ignored by some organizations in order to effectively operate(349)
in dynamic environments. (You bet, the recent emphasis on teams (see
Chapter 15) being yet another example.)
Delegation
Delegation is an attempt to create efficiencies; leverage
(349)
The idea is that if a manager controls seven people that, though the
expertise of the manager's delegation (and organizing of work and such)
they can "get more done" than eight individuals acting alone.
Delegation is a critical success factor for managers
(att)
A manager cannot do, approve, or supervise all of the work him/herself.
At some point a manager has to stop learning how to do their own work
well (which may likely be why they were made a manager in the first
place) and begin to learn how to get other people to do work well.
Managers who do not "learn to let go" will eventually fail. Its a common
plight for entrepreneurs who have succesfully guided a start-up until it
"grows beyond" them, but they try to still "keep their hands on everything."
Delegation does not relieve managers of responsibility
(350)
Example: Who do they fire ("where does the buck stop")
when the football team has several losing seasons?
Reasons managers avoid delegation
The manager fears the subordinate will do a better job and gain notice
from other parts of the organization. (Some managers, acting in their
own best interest instead of the company's best interest, actually prefer
less competent subordinates so "their own job won't be threatened!")
(351)
4
MAN 351 / Polito
0351967413
Exam 3
The manager fears that delegation will effect a loss of control and power.
(If he/sfe delegates everything, and it "all works out," why is he/she
needed?" Again, self-interest is in play.) (351)
The manager lacks the managerial skill to organize and monitor
delegated tasks to successful completion. (Think of our "cigarette"
example. Getting people to perform takes a lot more skill than simply
"dealing out the work" and "holding their paycheck over their heads.")
(351)
The manager is hesitant to be responsible for any tasks not completed
personally. (... as discussed above. Since the manager likely has done
higher quality work than his/her peers in the past, should we be surprised
that the work of his/her former peers work does not meet his standards?
So he/she insists on doing the work him/herself. Such a manager must
learn that his/her job is not to to produce the highest quality work, but to
produce the highest quality work possible of subordinates).
Centralized (and decentralized) Organizations
organization that concentrates authority in a relatively few,
high-level positions
(351)
This is not a "fixed thing." Companies may "reel in authority"
(eg, more signatures required for purchasing) or "spool authority
out" depending on current conditions.
End of "Authority and Formal Power" (I wonder why the Chapter about how to design and
organize the jobs and departments of a company talks so much about authority and formal power,
do you?)
Relevant Readings
Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith, 1776. (ties to GTF at p. 338)
5