Organizational Designs: Traditional and Modern Approaches

UPI Study › Courses › Business Essentials › Free lessons › Lesson 7.3 Free with a free account

Organizational Designs: Traditional and Modern Approaches

Business Essentials · Chapter 7: Organizational Design and BehaviorSection 7.3 · lesson 38 of 10514 min · free with a free account

← Organizational Design and Structure: A Formal OverviewNext lesson: Behavioral Dynamics in Organizational Settings →

Earn 3 college credits for Business EssentialsRecommended for credit by NCCRS · Business 100 · self-paced · one payment, lifetime access
Enroll in Business Essentials · $250 →Download the syllabus (PDF)

In this lesson

6 structural forms, the trade-off in each, and how to choose.

  • Describe the traditional structures
  • Describe the contemporary structural forms
  • Contrast mechanistic and organic structures
  • Select a structure for a described organization

Free study notes

Get this lesson's notes by email

The key points and 4 practice questions with answers, in your inbox. One email, free.

One email. Unsubscribe in one click.

Transcript

Everything said in the video, section by section (1,968 words). Read along, or search it.

Organizational Design and Behavior

Organizational Designs: Traditional and Modern Approaches

In the last section, we took structure apart into its elements. Now we put the elements back together, into recognizable forms. We'll look at three traditional structures, and three contemporary ones. For each, we'll ask what it gains, what it gives up, and when it works. We'll trace one decision through three different structures, to see where conflict lands. Then we'll meet the idea that ties them together, mechanistic versus organic. And we'll finish by choosing a structure for a growing company, step by step. Keep one point in mind throughout. No form is best in general.

From Elements to Forms

Recognizable Combinations of Settings

Section seven point two set out the elements of structure. How narrowly work is divided, how jobs are grouped, and who reports to whom. How many people report to each manager, where decisions are made, and how much rules govern. An organizational form is a recognizable combination of those settings. It shows up repeatedly across many organizations, so it can be given a name. We'll cover six forms. Three are traditional, simple, functional, and divisional. Three are contemporary, the matrix, the team-based structure, and the network. None of them is best in general. Each is a bundle of trade-offs. It suits some circumstances, and harms others. So the skill isn't memorizing forms. It's connecting each one to the conditions where it works.

The Traditional Forms

Simple and Functional Structures

The simple structure concentrates authority in one person, with few levels and minimal rules. A neighborhood bakery, a small consulting practice, or a new startup usually works this way. Its strengths are speed, flexibility, and low cost. The owner sees everything, and can change course in a day. Its limit is one person's capacity. With growth, the owner becomes a bottleneck, and everything rests on one person's judgment and health. The functional structure groups employees by common expertise. All the marketers in one unit, the engineers in another, production in a third, each under a manager who answers to the top. It gains depth of skill, since specialists learn from one another, and are managed by someone who understands their work. And it gains economies, since expensive equipment and expertise are shared, not duplicated. What it sacrifices is coordination across functions, and responsiveness. Its characteristic failure at scale follows from its logic. The only person accountable for a whole product is the person at the top, where the functions meet. So any decision needing two functions to agree must be escalated there. In a small company that's workable. In a large one, it overloads the top, and leaves employees waiting.

Divisional and Hybrid

Accountability, at the Price of Duplication

The divisional structure groups employees by product, geography, or customer. Each division contains the functions it needs, so it operates as a largely self-contained unit. The division head is accountable for the whole outcome, including results in its market. So decisions that would be escalated in a functional structure get made inside the division. The price is duplication. Each division keeps its own marketing, engineering, and production staff, so the organization pays for the same specialties several times. It may lose the economies of shared expertise. And divisions can compete for resources, or drift into inconsistent practices. So the trade-off is duplication cost against coordination gain. A division is worth its duplication when the gain in coordination and accountability exceeds the cost. In practice, most large organizations run a hybrid. Divisions run the operating businesses, supported by central units such as finance, legal services, and information systems. Those are activities where consistency and scale matter more than local responsiveness.

Same Decision, 3 Routes

Where Does the Conflict Get Resolved?

Here's one fictional company, drawn three ways, with one decision traced through each. The decision is a change to a headphone package. It needs several functions to agree. In the functional form, the decision travels all the way up to the President. That's the only point where the functions meet. In the divisional form, it's settled inside one division head's office. In the matrix form, it becomes a negotiation between two managers. Notice what doesn't change. The need for a cross-functional decision is still there in every version. Structure can't remove that need. What structure decides is where the conflict gets resolved, and who bears the cost of resolving it.

The Matrix Structure

2 Managers, by Design

The matrix structure has each employee report to two managers at once. Typically, a functional manager supervises the employee's specialty, and a product or project manager directs the work. That deliberately violates unity of command. The reasoning is that cross-functional coordination is needed constantly. So rather than escalating every conflict, the matrix puts it inside the structure, where two managers resolve it as ordinary work. The costs are real. Role ambiguity, because the employee may not know whose view prevails. Conflicting priorities, which land on the individual when the managers disagree. And heavy negotiation at every level, since every allocation of someone's time is a joint decision. A matrix suits complex, uncertain work, needing deep expertise and a sustained product focus at once. It also suits cases where scarce specialists must be shared among several projects. It needs managers skilled at negotiation, and systems showing what each person is committed to. Most important, it needs clear decision rights. An explicit statement of which manager decides what. For example, the project manager decides what work is done, and when. The functional manager decides who, and to what standard. Observers report that matrices fail more often from uncooperative managers than from an unsound design.

More Contemporary Forms

Teams, Networks, and Distance

The team-based structure builds the organization from teams, rather than individual jobs in a hierarchy. Teams get authority for a whole piece of work, and often manage themselves. The manager becomes a facilitator, helping the team reach its own decisions. And a boundary manager, securing resources, protecting the team from interference, and linking it to the rest of the organization. It gains speed and commitment, because those who do the work decide how it's done. But it needs broadly skilled people, clear goals, and explicit decision rights. And it creates coordination problems among teams. The network structure, also called modular, keeps a small core and contracts out the rest. A fictional company, Ferrin Home Goods, might design and market products, and contract out production, delivery, and customer service. It gains flexibility and low fixed cost. But quality now depends on others' decisions. And over time, it may lose the ability to do the outsourced work, which is hard to reverse. Virtual and distributed arrangements aren't really a separate form. They're a condition that can combine with any form. Their problem is distance. Fewer chance conversations, time zones, harder trust, and problems that stay hidden until they're large. So organizations make explicit what sharing a building gives for free. Written decisions, response norms, structured meetings, and attention to relationships.

The Integrating Idea

Mechanistic and Organic

One pair of contrasting types ties all these forms together. A mechanistic structure has a rigid hierarchy, narrow jobs, high formalization, and centralized decisions. Its communication flows mainly up and down the chain of command. An organic structure has flexible roles, low formalization, and decentralized decisions. Its communication flows freely across levels and units. The contrast comes from a nineteen sixty-one study of British firms, by Tom Burns and G. M. Stalker. Firms in stable conditions leaned mechanistic. Firms facing rapid change leaned organic. So mechanistic forms suit stable environments and routine work. Organic forms suit change, and non-routine work. Now a mistake to correct. Organic is not simply modern, and therefore better. In stable, high-consequence work, like dispensing medication or maintaining aircraft, improvisation produces errors. And a mechanistic structure in fast change produces slow decisions, and walls between departments. Fashion isn't a reason for either. Many large organizations contain both, side by side.

Table 7.3.1

No Form Is Strongest Everywhere

This table compares all six forms. The simple form coordinates directly through one person, and stays responsive while it's small. The functional form coordinates strongly within functions, but weakly across them. It has high scale economies within each function, but only the top owns the whole outcome. The divisional form puts the whole outcome at division level, and responds well to its market. But duplication cuts its scale economies. The matrix builds coordination in through dual reporting, and shares specialists across projects. Its accountability is shared between two managers, and can blur. The team-based form coordinates directly within teams, with accountability at team level, but low scale economies. And the network coordinates through contracts, using its partners' scale. It's highly flexible, with less control. So each row pairs a strength with a weakness. Selecting a structure means deciding which dimension the organization can least afford to lose.

Choosing a Structure

Size, Strategy, and Environment

Three considerations guide the choice. First, size. One person's capacity, and one unit's coordination, run out at different scales. A small organization manages with a simple structure. Growth pushes it toward functions, and variety pushes it toward divisions. Second, strategy. What the organization is trying to do decides what it can least afford to lose. Efficient production of a narrow range leans on functional depth. Serving distinct markets with different needs leans on divisions, or a matrix. The idea that structure should follow strategy is one of the oldest in the field. Third, environment. Stability decides how much the organization must adapt. That's mechanistic versus organic again. So ask three questions of any organization. What does it most need to coordinate? What decision must it make fastest? And what can it afford to pay, in duplication, ambiguity, or loss of control?

Worked Application

Solano Trail Gear (Fictional)

Here's the reasoning in sequence. Solano Trail Gear is a fictional company, with a few hundred employees. It began with one backpack, run by a founder who approved nearly every purchase and design change. Now it sells backpacks, tents, and cold-weather clothing, to retail chains and directly online. The symptoms are familiar. The founder's calendar is full, and tent designers wait days for answers about fabric. The clothing line has different suppliers and a different season, yet it's run on the backpack calendar. First question. What does the company most need to coordinate? Not the separate specialties anymore. It's everything needed to bring one product line to market. That points away from a purely functional structure, toward accountability around product lines. Second question. What can it afford? Three full sets of staff would be expensive, and a matrix needs negotiation skills it lacks. So a defensible choice is a hybrid. Three product divisions, with shared finance, information systems, and warehousing. It costs some purchasing economies, and the founder must give up decisions she has always made. It should state what stays central, like brand standards, and what moves to divisions, like seasonal pricing. And if the lines later converge, run the reasoning again. A structure responds to conditions. It isn't permanent.

Case Vignette (Composite)

2 Managers, 1 Week

In this composite case, Lena is a software developer at Orrin Systems, a fictional firm with a matrix. A product manager directs which features she builds. An engineering manager directs her standards and maintenance work. On Monday, the product manager asks her to spend the whole week finishing a feature promised to a customer. On Tuesday, the engineering manager asks for half the week, to review code and repair a fault in a shared component. Neither manager knows what the other has asked. And both needs are real. Lena could pick one request. But that makes her the referee of a conflict that isn't hers to settle. She could ask both managers to meet. That's the correct escalation, but it takes time. Or the organization could settle the real question. Who decides how a developer's time is divided? The matrix had two reporting lines, but no agreed rule. That rule could be a standing time split, reviewed each quarter. Or a statement that the product manager decides what's built, and the engineering manager decides how. Without it, every conflict is resolved by the person with the least power to resolve it. The sound decision is to write the rule, even though the managers give up some latitude.

About Business Essentials at UPI Study

Business Essentials (Business 100) is a self-paced online course of 105 video lessons in 24 chapters, from the business environment, economics and global markets to ownership, management, leadership, operations, people, marketing, accounting, finance and banking. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.

Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Business courses Every course with PRO →

Compare: Business Essentials vs Principles of Management

Why take it here

Why students take Business Essentials with UPI Study

How a business works, end to endBusiness Essentials is a survey of how companies work: economic systems, global trade, forms of ownership, management and leadership, operations, human resources, marketing, accounting, finance and the banking system. It is a common first course in business, management and accounting degrees.
Credit at a fraction of the priceThe same 3 credits can cost $750 or more at a US college. Here it is one payment, self-paced, with lifetime access.
Finish your degree soonerTransfer credits reduce the courses you still owe, so you can graduate earlier or lighten a heavy semester.
Strengthen an applicationA completed college-level course on an official transcript shows admissions and scholarship committees you can do the work.
Study on your own scheduleNo start dates, no deadlines. Watch the lessons, practice, and take the final when you are ready.
130,000+students helped with college creditsACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Where the credit goes

Universities that work with NCCRS

Business Essentials carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Thomas Edison State UniversityThomas Edison State UniversitySigned partnerUniversity of the PeopleUniversity of the PeopleSigned partnerCharter Oak State CollegeCharter Oak State CollegeSigned partnerStrayer UniversityStrayer UniversitySigned partnerColumbia Southern UniversityColumbia Southern UniversitySigned partnerIndiana TechIndiana TechSigned partnerPenn StatePenn StateWorks with NCCRSSouthern New Hampshire UniversitySouthern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRSSUNYSUNYWorks with NCCRS +many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →

Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.

FAQ

Questions students ask us

About Organizational Designs: Traditional and Modern Approaches

What is the difference between a functional and a divisional structure?
A functional structure groups people by expertise, such as marketing, engineering, and production, gaining depth of skill and shared resources but coordinating weakly across functions, since only the top owns a whole product. A divisional structure groups people by product, geography, or customer, with each division holding the functions it needs. It gains accountability and responsiveness at the cost of duplicated specialists. Many large organizations run a hybrid with central finance and legal units.
What is a matrix organizational structure?
A matrix structure has employees report to two managers at once, typically a functional manager for their specialty and a product or project manager for their work. It deliberately breaks unity of command so cross-functional conflicts get resolved as ordinary work. Costs include role ambiguity, conflicting priorities, and heavy negotiation. It needs clear decision rights, such as the project manager deciding what work is done and when, and the functional manager deciding who and to what standard.
What is the difference between mechanistic and organic structures?
A mechanistic structure has a rigid hierarchy, narrow jobs, high formalization, centralized decisions, and mainly vertical communication; an organic structure has flexible roles, low formalization, decentralized decisions, and free communication across levels. Tom Burns and G. M. Stalker's 1961 study of British firms found firms in stable conditions leaned mechanistic and those facing rapid change leaned organic. Organic isn't automatically better; high-consequence routine work such as aircraft maintenance suits mechanistic discipline.
How do you choose the right organizational structure?
Choose by weighing size, strategy, and environment, and by asking what the organization can least afford to lose. Growth pushes a simple structure toward functions, and product variety pushes it toward divisions. Strategy matters because structure should follow strategy, an idea associated with Alfred Chandler. Stable environments favor mechanistic forms. Then ask what most needs coordinating, which decision must be fastest, and what you can pay in duplication, ambiguity, or lost control.

About the Business Essentials course

How many college credits is Business Essentials?
Business Essentials (Business 100) carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
How much does Business Essentials cost and what is included?
$250, paid once, with lifetime access: all 105 video lessons, a practice quiz after each, the graded work and final exam, and an official transcript when you finish. Students who want several courses choose UPI Study PRO instead.
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
UPI Study has signed partner agreements with universities such as Thomas Edison State University, University of the People and Charter Oak State College, and works with universities such as Penn State, SNHU and SUNY. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities. Use "Find my college" on this page to check yours.
How long does Business Essentials take?
It is self-paced with no deadlines. The 105 lessons total about 24 hours of video; most students add reading and practice time and finish in a few weeks to a few months, on their own schedule.
How are the exams done?
Quizzes and assignments are online in the course. The final exam is taken online with proctoring; a person on the UPI Study team checks assignments, usually within two days.
How do my credits reach my college?
When the course shows 100% complete, request the official transcript from your dashboard. It is sent to the college you name, and you can send it to more than one. Check your college first with "Find my college" on this page, or ask Athena.

Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Business Essentials.

105 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.

Enroll in Business Essentials →Download the syllabusEvery course with PRO →
Business Essentials
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →