The functional organizational structure is determined. Organizational structure of an enterprise: types and schemes

Organizational management structures

Mechanical organizational management structures

The structure reflects the structure of the system, i.e. composition and relationship of its elements. The elements of the system form a whole due to the connection between them. The following elements are distinguished in the organizational structure: links (divisions, departments, bureaus, etc.), levels (management levels) and connections - horizontal and vertical. Horizontal connections are of the nature of coordination and, as a rule, one-level. Vertical connections are connections of subordination; their necessity arises when there are several levels or levels of management (hierarchy). Relationships in the structure can be linear and functional, formal and informal. Thus, the organizational structure is a set of management units, between which a system of relationships has been established, designed to ensure the implementation of various types of work, functions and processes to achieve certain goals.

Each organization is characterized by a greater or lesser degree of specialization, formalization and centralization. Their combinations significantly affect the performance of individual employees, groups, and the organizations themselves. There are two main models of organization: mechanical and organic.

The essence mechanical approach to building an organization is that the organization is viewed as a system that is similar to a machine. It works according to the established order, accurately and reliably. The work performed at a given time is planned in advance and can be anticipated. The technology for performing the work is quite simple. People perform repetitive, automatic operations, actions and movements. In such an organization there is a high level of standardization, which applies not only to products, technology, raw materials, equipment, but also to people’s behavior. Mechanical organization management has the following characteristics:

– clearly defined formal tasks;

– narrow specialization of work;

– centralized structure;

– strict hierarchy of powers;

– predominance of vertical connections;

– use of formal rules and procedures, impersonality of relationships;

– power is based on the position that the leader occupies in the hierarchy;

– resistance to change;

– strict control system.

Usually an organization that works like a machine is called bureaucratic. The efficiency of its activities is ensured by saving time, high productivity and quality of work based on specialization of labor, division of functions and powers, training, rationalization, control, i.e. due to the high degree of organization of the system. Mechanical organizational management structures include: linear, functional, linear-functional, divisional.

Linear organizational management structure

This is the simplest organizational management structure (OMS). At the head of each production or management unit is a manager who is vested with full powers and exercises sole management of the employees subordinate to him and concentrates all management functions in his hands. Decisions are passed down the chain top down. The head of the lower level of management is subordinate to the head of the higher one.

Rice. 4.1. Scheme of linear organization of the management structure

This is how the subordination of managers at various levels develops vertically (line), who carry out administrative and functional management simultaneously (Fig. 4.1). Moreover, subordinates carry out the orders of only one leader. Every subordinate has a boss. Each boss has several subordinates. The linear management structure is logically more harmonious, but less flexible. Each of the managers has full power, but relatively little ability to solve functional problems that require narrow specialized knowledge.

Let us note the main advantages of linear OSU.

1. Unity, clarity and ease of management.

2. Coordination of actions of performers.

3. Speed ​​in decision making.

4. Personal responsibility of each manager for the final result.

However, this structure has disadvantages.

1. Concentration of power in the upper levels of management.

2. High requirements for the manager, who must have extensive, versatile knowledge and experience in all management functions and areas of activity carried out by employees subordinate to him.

3. Overload of information, a huge flow of papers, many contacts with both subordinates and superiors.

4. Lack of links for planning and preparing decisions.

At present, linear OSU in its pure form is not used anywhere except in the army, where such a structure exists at the lower levels of army organizations or in the management of small and medium-sized firms engaged in simple production in the absence of broad cooperative ties between enterprises. When the scale of production is larger and the range of problems being solved increases, both the technical and organizational level increases. The linear structure turns out to be ineffective because the manager cannot know everything and therefore cannot manage well. At the same time, it is present as an element of the formal structure in all administrative organizations, in which relations between the heads of production departments are built on the basis of the principle of unity of command.

Functional organizational structure of management

Rice. 4.2. Functional organizational structure diagram

AND This OSU is sometimes called traditional or classical because it was the first structure to be studied and developed. Its essence lies in the fact that the performance of certain functions on specific issues is assigned to specialists. Specialists of the same profile are united in structural divisions and make decisions that are mandatory for production divisions. The general task of managing an organization is divided, starting from the middle level, according to functional criteria. Each management body or executive is specialized in performing certain types of activities. Thus, a staff of specialists appears who have high competence in their field and are responsible for a certain area (Fig. 4.2).

The functional structure is based on subordination by areas of management activity. In fact, a particular unit has several senior managers. For example, the head of a workshop with such a structure will have heads of the departments of supply, sales, planning, remuneration, etc. But each of them has the right to influence only in his own field of activity.

This functional specialization of the management apparatus significantly increases the effectiveness of the organization. The line manager has the opportunity to deal more with operational management issues, since functional specialists free him from solving special issues. Functional units receive the right, within the limits of their authority, to give instructions and orders to lower units.

Advantages of a functional OSU:

1) high competence of specialists responsible for the implementation of specific functions;

2) exemption of line managers from resolving special issues;

3) reducing the need for general specialists;

4) standardization and programming of phenomena and processes;

5) eliminating duplication in the performance of management functions.

The functional management structure is aimed at performing constantly recurring routine tasks that do not require prompt decision-making.

The disadvantages of functional structures include:

1) the difficulty of maintaining constant relationships between various functional services;

2) lengthy decision-making procedure;

3) lack of mutual understanding and unity between employees of functional services of different production departments of the company;

4) reducing the responsibility of performers for work as a result of depersonalization in the performance of their duties, since each performer receives instructions from several managers;

5) duplication and inconsistency of instructions and orders received by employees “from above”, since each functional manager and specialized department puts their issues first;

6) violation of the principles of unity of command and unity of management.

Functional organization aims to stimulate quality and creativity, as well as to strive for economies of scale in the production of goods or services. However, the implementation of different functions involves different time frames, goals and principles, which makes coordination and planning difficult. The logic of this organization is centrally coordinated specialization.

The functional organizational chart is still used in mid-sized companies. It is advisable to use such a structure in those organizations that produce a relatively limited range of products, operate in stable external conditions and require standard management tasks to ensure their functioning. However, the functional structure is practically never used in its pure form. It is used in close limited combination with a linear structure operating along the top-down management hierarchy and is based on the strict subordination of the lower management level to the higher one.

From this article you will learn:

• What are the main types of organizational structures of an enterprise
• What are the disadvantages and advantages of different types of organizational structures of an enterprise?
• What type of enterprise organizational structure to choose

The distribution of managerial responsibilities and powers in an enterprise is called the organizational structure of the management apparatus. All structural units and positions within them are designed to carry out a certain set of functions and perform various types of work. Officials are endowed with a number of rights and opportunities to manage resources and are responsible for ensuring that their services perform their assigned duties. Let's take a closer look at the different types of enterprise organizational structures.

Main types of organizational structures for enterprise management

The main structures existing in the company are:

• production;
• managerial;
• organizational.

The organizational structure of an enterprise is a set of departments that work in close interrelation to ensure the normal functioning of the company and the achievement of its goals regarding business development.

The organizational structure of any company consists of:

• management structures;
• production structures.

The management structure includes positions that are interconnected and the management bodies of the enterprise. It must be recorded in the company's charter and special regulations, which list all divisions, services, departments and divisions and provide their job descriptions.

Management structures of an enterprise are divided into several types: they can be low horizontal and high hierarchical.

High hierarchical structures are characterized by the presence of many levels of management (hierarchical levels) and a limited area of ​​responsibility of any of the managers. Their advantage is that they save on production costs.

Low horizontal structures, on the contrary, have the minimum possible number of management levels, while the area of ​​responsibility of each manager is relatively large. The competitive advantage of this type is the ability to save on lost profits.

There are several main types of organizational structures for enterprise management:

• linear;
• functional;
• linear-functional;
• design;
• divisional;
• matrix and some others.

Types of organizational structures of an enterprise: advantages and disadvantages

Hierarchy remains a traditional form of organizational structure for many enterprises, although experts tend to consider it outdated and ineffective. New models - flat and matrix (oriented not at the vertical of subordination, but at the horizontal), on the contrary, are more progressive and, in a sense, fashionable.

When creating your own business or solving the problem of restructuring an existing enterprise, take into account all the features of various types of organizational structures. After analyzing their pros and cons, you can choose exactly the option that will be optimal in your case.

1. Linear management structure.

This is a simple and clear hierarchy, where vertical connections are strongly expressed (from managers to subordinates) and horizontal connections (contacts between departments) are practically undeveloped.

The advantages of the linear type of organizational structure of an enterprise include:

• clear boundaries of responsibility, powers and competencies of everyone;
• ease of control;
• the ability to make and implement decisions quickly and at minimal cost;
• simplicity and hierarchy of communications;
• responsibility falls on specific persons, it is personal in nature;
• full embodiment of the principle of unity of command.

Of course, this model also has its disadvantages:

• increased professional requirements are imposed on managers at all levels;
• at the same time, they do not need narrow specialization and a deep understanding of the specifics of the work;
• management style is strictly authoritarian;
• Managers are always overloaded with work.

1. Functional structure.

The functional approach to company management has given rise to a special type of organizational structure, where all performers are subordinate to the main manager, who gives orders and assigns them tasks within the framework of his own professional competence.

It has significant advantages:

• all managers must be highly qualified and experienced specialists in their field;
• communications are carried out quickly;
• senior management is not overloaded;
• The decisions made by managers are always accurate, specific and professional.

The functional organizational structure also has a number of disadvantages:

• the principle of unity of command is not always observed;
• It can be difficult to prepare and coordinate decisions;
• communications and orders may be repeated;
• It is quite difficult to control such a system.

1. Functional-linear organizational structure.

This model is suitable for a business that operates as a hierarchy, in which employees report to their immediate superiors, but specific functions are performed by separate vertical subsystems.

For example, a director in charge of the entire process of production and sales of men's shoes has several managers under his management - product design, production, sales, etc. Each of these specialists has a staff of employees, including cleaners and assembly line workers. These vertical branches are in no way connected and do not communicate with each other.

Enterprises of this type began to appear in the 20s of the 20th century, when the market was stable and needed a rather narrow range of homogeneous products. Manufacturers of industrial goods reigned in the market without competing with each other. This period is perfectly characterized by Henry Ford's statement that a car can be any color, but only on the condition that this color is black.

The main advantage of enterprises with this type of organizational structure is the stable level of quality of manufactured goods (provided that all production and management processes have been correctly configured and debugged).

The linear-functional model also has its typical problems: inflexibility, loss of some information when passing through the entire vertical, and a drawn-out decision-making process.

Nowadays, such structures are considered outdated and ineffective. They remain only in giant companies like Gazprom and Apatit, which do not compete with anyone and produce a unique product.

1. Divisional structure of the organization.

Somewhat later, in the 50s of the 20th century, at some enterprises in Western countries another type of organizational structure was formed - divisional.

This was a time of active government stimulation of demand for consumer goods and the emergence of the advertising industry. By analyzing the history of old corporations that have been in business for more than a century, you can clearly see how their range has expanded every decade. The reasons for this are increased demand and increased market competition. Companies that previously produced homogeneous products (only men's and women's shoes, for example), are beginning to offer products of related types (children's shoes, leather accessories).

Units with independence (divisions) are managed from headquarters. They can be formed according to geographical, product, client (mass, corporate) principles. In Russia, many companies use a divisional system.

The advantages of this type of organizational structure are high management flexibility, high-quality product and service. The negative point is the large financial burden on the enterprise: it is necessary to support many directors. In addition, monitoring the work of each division is very complex and requires high qualifications.

1. Project organizational structure.

This model is one of the most progressive and modern. Enterprises working within the framework of the project approach began to appear in the middle of the 20th century, when the construction market was experiencing a period of extreme instability. Businesses had to focus on producing not just one type of product, but a variety of unrelated products in order to adapt to the situation and meet constantly changing demand.

In fact, at such enterprises, a new separate organizational structure is formed to serve each client (with its own project manager and all the necessary subordinates located at different hierarchical levels).

The advantage of the project model is its flexibility and high adaptability to market conditions. The disadvantage is the need to pay highly for the work of all managers.

1. Matrix structure.

This is one of the most fashionable types of organizational structures for an enterprise, but is rarely used. It appeared at General Electric when, from 1961 and for 12 years, its managers tried to create a synthesis of linear-functional and project approaches to management. The result is a matrix organizational structure, where each element not only reports to an immediate superior, but is also part of a group that performs a specific function.

The advantages of the matrix model include its flexibility and the ability to transmit information without loss (which linear-functional structures lack).

However, there is also a significant disadvantage: the likelihood of a conflict of interest in the enterprise. When one employee accepts tasks from several bosses at once, it is not always clear whose assignment has higher priority.

1. Network company.

Network enterprises (consisting of many individual subsidiaries) emerged as an independent type of organizational structure relatively recently. The formation of such a model was caused by the need to adapt to an unstable economic situation. In particular, General Motors separated everything related to production from the parent company, creating a network of suppliers of various components and tying them together with long-term contracts, in order to thus protect itself from competitors.

The advantages of a network organizational structure are a high ability to respond to external changes and savings, sometimes quite significant, on the maintenance of a staff of managers.

The structure of an organization is a way of building a relationship between management levels and functional areas, ensuring optimal achievement of the organization's goals under given conditions.

A functional area is a list of work performed by a specific department of an organization. This concept is related to the category “management function”, but is not identical to it. For example, in performing such a function as planning, both the planning department and other divisions of the organization, in particular, line managers of production departments, take part.

The main factors influencing the structure of an organization are its scale, the nature of the work (narrow specialization or conglomerate), position in the market (leader or outsider), products produced (knowledge-intensive, traditional, etc.). Taking these factors into account, departmentalization is carried out, i.e. allocation in the structure of the main parts, departments and blocks, divisions and divisions, services, bureaus.

Functional organizational structure:

Traditionally, the functions of direct production, circulation (supply of resources and sale of finished products and services), financial and investment spheres are highlighted here. This approach was also acceptable for the structure of territorial government bodies.

Depending on the scale of the organization, further allocation of elements is carried out. A large factory, university, or hospital has a large number of specialized departments. Comparatively small organizations of the same profile have fewer divisions, and the functions they perform are more complex.

The advantages of the functional structure are: specificity of departmental responsibilities; stimulating business activity and professional growth of performers; reduction of duplication, and therefore rational use of resources, improved coordination.

The advantages of a functional structure are clearly manifested when the number of functions is limited. As their range expands, the chain of command lengthens and the likelihood of conflicts increases. With the increasing concentration of production, its inversification and internationalization, the need for other bases for constructing the structure increases.

The functional structure presupposes the specialization of units for individual management functions at all levels. Such an organization significantly improves the quality of management due to the specialization of managers; instead of universal managers, specialists competent in their fields appear.

The activities of an enterprise can be viewed as a combination of different functional areas. The activity of these areas is reflected in functional processes. Table 1 presents the functional areas of the enterprise, identified by functional characteristics and the processes occurring in them.

Table 1: Functional areas of management and processes occurring in them

Introduction

The organizational structure of management is the internal structure of any production and economic system, that is, the way of organizing elements into a system, a set of stable connections and relationships between them. The management structure is the form within which changes occur, and prerequisites appear for the transition of the system as a whole to a new quality.

Management structures are constantly being supplemented with new varieties, allowing any enterprise to choose for itself the most effective structure or combination of them.

The problem of choosing and applying management structures is particularly relevant at present for the Republic of Belarus. This is due to several reasons. Firstly, most domestic enterprises need significant restructuring or, at least, improvement and improvement of management.

Secondly, the Belarusian economy has long been isolated from Western experience in the field of management, and now it is difficult for companies to switch to new management standards and introduce the latest type of management structures due to their lack of preparedness and lack of access to modern information and communication technologies.

Thirdly, a serious problem for Belarus is the lack of qualified managers who are able to best manage the enterprise and maximize the efficiency of management structures.

The purpose of this test is to study the functional structures of management activities and determine the principles of their formation. To achieve this goal, the following tasks will be solved:

Determine the significance of functional management structures in the organizational building system;

Study the features of functional structures;

Identify the disadvantages and advantages of functional structures;

Determine the scope of application of functional structures;

Outline the principles of formation of functional structures.

The set goals and objectives determined the structure of the test, which consists of an introduction, three sections and a conclusion. The work is completed with a list of used sources.

To write the test, such scientific research methods as dialectical, systemic analysis, synthesis and historical method, survey method, document analysis, and comparative analysis were used.

To fully disclose the topic of the work, textbooks, general and specialized literature on management and economics, as well as periodicals were used. It should be noted that the topic of the test work is covered in the literature in sufficient volume.

1. Functional organizational structures of management activities

The organizational structure of management is the internal structure of any production and economic system, that is, the way of organizing elements into a system, a set of stable connections and relationships between them.

Hierarchical (bureaucratic) management structures are the first systematically developed models of organizational structures and remain the main and dominant forms. The bureaucratic organizational structure is characterized by a high degree of division of labor, a developed management hierarchy, a chain of command, the presence of numerous rules and norms of personnel behavior, and selection of personnel based on their business and professional qualities. Bureaucracy is often referred to as a classical or traditional organizational structure. Most modern organizations are variations of hierarchical structures. The reason the bureaucratic structure has been used for such a long time and on a large scale is that its characteristics are still quite well suited to most industrial firms, service organizations and all types of government agencies. The objectivity of decisions made allows an effectively managed bureaucracy to adapt to ongoing changes. Promotion of employees based on their competence allows for a constant flow of highly qualified and talented technical specialists and administrative workers into such an organization.

Hierarchical management structures come in many varieties. During their formation, the main attention was paid to the division of labor into individual functions. Hierarchical ones include linear and functional organizational management structures.

Let's take a closer look at functional structures.

A functional management structure is characterized by the creation of structural divisions, each of which has its own clearly defined, specific task and responsibilities. Consequently, under the conditions of this structure, each management body, as well as the performer, is specialized in performing certain types of management activities (functions). A staff of specialists is created who are responsible only for a certain area of ​​work.

The functional management structure is based on the principle of complete management: compliance with the instructions of the functional body within its competence is mandatory for departments. Functional management is carried out by a certain set of departments specialized in performing specific types of work necessary for making decisions in the line management system.

The idea of ​​functional structures is that the performance of individual functions on specific issues is assigned to specialists, i.e. Each management body (or executive) is specialized in performing certain types of activities.

In an organization, as a rule, specialists of the same profile are united in specialized structural units (departments), for example, a marketing department, a planning department, an accounting department, etc. Thus, the overall task of managing an organization is divided, starting from the middle level, according to functional criteria. Hence the name - functional management structure.

Functional management exists alongside linear management, which creates double subordination for performers.

As can be seen from Fig. 1.1., instead of universal managers (with a linear management structure) who must understand and perform all management functions, a staff of specialists appears who have high competence in their field and are responsible for a certain direction (for example, planning and forecasting). This functional specialization of the management apparatus significantly increases the effectiveness of the organization.

For functional management structure characterized by the creation of structural units, each of which has its own clearly defined, specific task and responsibilities (Fig. 2.5). In this structure, each management body, as well as the executive, is specialized in performing certain types of management activities (functions). A staff of specialists is created who are responsible only for a certain area of ​​work.

Rice. 2.5. Functional structure of organization management

The functional management structure is based on the principle of complete management: compliance with the instructions of the functional body within its competence is mandatory for departments.

Advantages of a functional management structure:

High competence of specialists responsible for performing specific functions;

Specialization of departments in performing a certain type of management activity, eliminating duplication, performing management tasks for individual services.

Disadvantages of this type of organizational structure:

Violation of the principle of full management, the principle of unity of command;

Lengthy procedure for making management decisions;

Difficulties in maintaining constant relationships between various functional services;

Reducing the responsibility of performers for work, since each performer receives instructions from several managers;

Inconsistency and duplication of instructions and orders received by performers;

Each functional manager and functional unit considers their tasks to be paramount, poorly coordinating them with the overall goals set for the organization.

So, for example, in OJSC AVTOVAZ, the functional management structure is used in the generalized structure, auxiliary production, and machine tool building. An example of a functional organizational structure is presented in Fig. 2.6.

Rice. 2.6. Example of a functional organizational structure

To a certain extent, the so-called linear-staff and linear-functional management structures, which provide for the functional division of managerial labor in departments of different levels with a combination of linear and functional management principles, help eliminate the shortcomings of linear and functional organizational structures. In this case, functional units can carry out their decisions through line managers (in a linear-staff structure) or, within the limits of delegated special powers, communicate them to specialized services or individual performers at a lower level (in a linear-functional management structure).

At the core line-staff management structure There is a linear structure, but under line managers special units (headquarters services) are created that specialize in performing certain management functions (Fig. 2.7). These services do not have the right to make decisions, but only provide, through their specialists, a more qualified performance by the line manager of his duties. The activities of functional specialists in these conditions come down to searching for the most rational options for solving problems. The final decision-making and transfer of it to subordinates for execution is carried out by the line manager. In conditions of this type of management structure, the principle of unity of command is preserved. An important task of line managers in this case becomes coordinating the actions of functional services (units) and directing them towards the general interests of the organization.

Rice. 2.7. Line-staff structure of organization management

Unlike the line-staff linear-functional structure, the most common structure of the hierarchical type, still widely used throughout the world, is based on functional units that can themselves give orders to lower levels, but not on all, but on a limited range of issues determined by their functional specialization.

In addition to the linear principles of management, the basis of linear-functional structures is formed by the specialization of management activities by functional subsystems of the organization (marketing, research and development, production, finance and economics, personnel, etc.).

Organizations designed according to a linear-functional principle, while maintaining the rigidity and simplicity of linear structures, acquired highly productive, specialized management potential. Freeing line departments from solving general organizational management tasks made it possible to sharply increase the scale of their activities and thereby realize the resulting positive effect. The implementation of management functions on the basis of delineation and specialization of management ensured an increase in the quality of management of the entire organization, an increase in the efficiency of control of linear units and the achievement of general organizational goals.

The transfer of current management to the heads of line departments and the functional division of the management activities of the organization as a whole allow top management to focus on solving strategic problems of enterprise development and ensure the most rational interaction with the external environment. For the first time, the organizational structure acquires some strategic potential, and management acquires the conditions for its implementation.

The undoubted advantage of the organizational structures under consideration is their flexibility. The linear-functional organization provides sufficient opportunities for restructuring linear units as the organization develops, technology changes and the separation of related industries. With the expansion of the enterprise, both the “set” of functional departments and the content of the tasks performed change. Thus, in the recent past, HR departments interacted relatively weakly with the departments of labor organization and wages; nowadays, these departments are increasingly merging into a single personnel management service of the company.

Thus, the main advantages of linear-functional structures include:

Stimulating business and professional specialization under this management structure;

High production response of the organization, since it is built on the narrow specialization of production and the qualifications of specialists;

Reduce duplication of efforts in functional areas;

Improved coordination of activities in functional areas.

Despite the widest distribution of linear-functional management structures, we note at the same time their significant disadvantages:

Erosion of the developed development strategy of the organization: divisions may be interested in realizing their local goals and objectives to a greater extent than the entire organization as a whole, that is, setting their own goals above the goals of the entire organization;

Lack of close relationships and interaction at the horizontal level between departments;

A sharp increase in the workload of the head of the organization and his deputies due to the need to coordinate the actions of different functional services;

An overly developed vertical interaction system;

Loss of flexibility in the relationships between management staff due to the use of formal rules and procedures;

Weak innovative and entrepreneurial response of an organization with such an organizational management structure;

Inadequate response to environmental demands;

Difficulty and slowdown in the transfer of information, which affects the speed and timeliness of management decisions; the chain of commands from the manager to the executor becomes too long, which complicates communication.

The figurative name of the positions of a hierarchical type structure - “fox holes of managers” - implies that the internal interests of individual divisions often run counter to corporate interests and it is very difficult to understand what is being done in each of the individual management divisions, and each head of such a division, as a rule, carefully hides what is happening in his “kitchen”.

One of the disadvantages of linear-functional management structures is the “bottleneck effect”. Its essence is the development of predominantly vertical connections within the framework of a functional approach, which raises the solution of problems arising at various levels of the organization to its main leader. As a result, managers' attempts to concentrate on solving strategic problems are drowned in operational work and routine. And this is not the fault of the manager, but the flaw of the organizational system used.

Considering all the above disadvantages, it is important to find out under what conditions they are smoothed out:

Linear-functional management structures are most effective where the management apparatus performs routine, frequently repeated and rarely changing tasks and functions, that is, in organizations operating in conditions of solving standard management problems;

The advantages of these structures are manifested in the management of organizations with a mass or large-scale type of production, in organizations that produce a relatively limited range of products;

They are most effective under a cost-based economic mechanism, when production is least susceptible to progress in the field of science and technology;

Linear-functional structures are successfully used in organizations operating in a stable external environment.

For the conditions for the effective functioning of an organization with a linear-functional management structure, it is important to have normative and regulatory documents that determine the correspondence between the responsibilities and powers of managers at different levels and divisions; compliance with controllability standards, especially among first managers and their deputies, who form rational information flows, decentralize operational production management, and take into account the specifics of the work of various divisions.

At OJSC AVTOVAZ, the basic type of management structure, according to which most structural divisions are organized, remains linear-functional. An example of a linear-functional management structure is presented in Fig. 2.8.

Rice. 2.8. An example of a linear-functional management structure

Historically and logically, the importance of linear-functional structures in the development of an economic system cannot be overestimated. It is in this case that the enterprise tests its capabilities in establishing mass production, and the “superior-subordinate” relationship is brought to a level adequate to the requirements of the external environment.

The American corporation General Motors was one of the first organizations that managed to overcome the limitations of a linear-functional structure. In the conditions of diversified production, it was decided to significantly expand the independence of large divisions and give them the right to respond to market conditions themselves, turning them into “profit centers.” This bold management decision was proposed and implemented by company president A. Sloan, who called the new structure “coordinated decentralization.” Subsequently, this organizational structure was called divisional.

Divisional (departmental) structures- the most advanced types of organizational structures of a hierarchical type, sometimes they are even considered something between bureaucratic (mechanistic) and adaptive structures. In some cases, these structures can be found in the literature under the name “fractional structures”.

Divisional structures arose as a reaction to the shortcomings of linear-functional structures. The need for their reorganization was caused by a sharp increase in the size of organizations, the complication of technological processes, diversification and internationalization of activities. In a dynamically changing external environment, it is impossible to manage dissimilar or geographically distant divisions of an organization from a single center.

Divisional structures- these are structures based on the allocation of large autonomous production and economic units (departments, divisions) and the corresponding levels of management with the provision of operational and production independence to the units, with the transfer of responsibility for making a profit to this level.

A department (division) is an organizational commodity-market unit that has the necessary functional units of its own.

The department is given responsibility for the production and marketing of certain products and generating profits, as a result of which the management personnel of the upper echelon of the organization are freed up to solve strategic problems. The operational level of management concentrates on the production of a specific product or on the implementation of activities in a certain territory and is separated from the strategic level, which is responsible for the growth and development of the organization as a whole. As a rule, the top management of the organization has no more than 4-6 centralized functional units. The highest governing body of the organization reserves the right to exercise strict control over corporate-wide issues of development strategy, research and development, finance, investment, etc. Consequently, divisional structures are characterized by a combination of centralized strategic planning in the upper echelons of management and decentralized activities of departments, at the level at which operational management is carried out and which are responsible for generating profit. In connection with the transfer of responsibility for profit to the level of departments (divisions), they began to be considered as “profit centers”, actively using the freedom given to them to increase operational efficiency. In connection with the above, divisional structures of the board are usually understood as a combination of centralized coordination with decentralized management (decentralization while maintaining coordination and control) or, in accordance with the statement of A. Sloan, as “coordinated decentralization.”

The divisional approach ensures a closer connection between production and consumers, significantly accelerating its response to changes occurring in the external environment.

Divisional structures are characterized by full responsibility of department heads for the results of the activities of the units they head. In this regard, the most important place in the management of organizations with a divisional structure is occupied not by the heads of functional departments, but by the managers heading production departments.

The structuring of the organization into departments is carried out according to three principles:

Product - taking into account the characteristics of the products manufactured or services provided;

By targeting a specific consumer;

Regional - depending on the territories served.

There are three types of divisional structures:

Divisional productive structures;

Customer-oriented organizational structures;

Divisional-regional structures.

With a divisional product structure, the authority to manage the production and sales of any product or service is transferred to one manager, who is responsible for this type of product (Fig. 2.9).

Rice. 2.9. Product divisional structure

Heads of functional services (production, procurement, technical, accounting, marketing, etc.) must report to the manager for this product.

Organizations with such a structure are able to quickly respond to changes in competitive conditions, technology and consumer demand. Activities for the production of a certain type of product are under the leadership of one person, which improves coordination of work.

A possible disadvantage of the product structure is an increase in costs due to duplication of the same types of work for different types of products. Each product department has its own functional divisions.

An example of a product divisional structure in OJSC AVTOVAZ is the service of the vice president for technical development, which includes: a scientific and technical center (STC), which ensures the creation and production of new and modernized car models; production of technological equipment (PTO), manufacturing machine tool products; production of molds and dies (PPSh), which produces technological equipment (Fig. 2.10).

Rice. 2.10. Example of a product divisional structure

When creating consumer-oriented organizational structures, units are grouped around a certain number of consumers (for example, the army and civilian industries, industrial, technical and cultural products). The goal of such an organizational structure is to serve the needs of specific customers as well as an organization that serves just one group. An example of an organization that uses consumer-oriented management structures is commercial banks. The main groups of service consumers in this case will be: individual clients, organizations, other banks, international financial organizations.

If the organization’s activities are extended to a number of regions in which it is necessary to use different strategies, then it is advisable to form a divisional management structure on a territorial basis, i.e. use divisional-regional structure(Fig. 2.11). All activities of the organization in a particular region must be subordinate to the appropriate manager responsible to the highest governing body of the organization. The divisional-regional structure facilitates the solution of problems associated with local customs, peculiarities of legislation and the socio-economic environment of the region. Territorial division creates conditions for training management personnel of departments (divisions) directly on site.

Rice. 2.11. Divisional-regional structure

An example of a specific regional divisional structure implemented at JSC AVTOVAZ in the supply management system for the domestic market is presented in Fig. 2.12.

Rice. 2.12. An example of the regional divisional structure of JSC AVTOVAZ

As organizations develop and enter international markets, the gradual transformation of national corporations into transnational ones, the achievement of these corporations at the highest level of their development leads to the creation of global corporations, where divisional structures are transformed into international and transnational ones. In this case, the organization stops relying on activities within the country and is restructured structurally in such a way that international operations have a predominant importance in the national market.

We can identify the most common types of international divisional structures, the construction of which is based on a global approach.

Globally oriented product (commodity) a structure based on a divisional structure with divisions based on product characteristics, each of which independently operates on the entire world market, is shown in Fig. 2.13. This structure is used by organizations with highly diversified products and products that differ significantly in their production technology, marketing methods, sales channels, etc. It is applicable in organizations where the differences between the types of products produced are more significant than the differences between geographical regions, in which these products are sold. This type of structure contributes to the international orientation of the organization, however, they are characterized (though, like any other type of divisional structure) by weakening coordination between the individual divisions of the organization and increasing duplication of their activities.

Rice. 2.13. Globally oriented product (commodity) structure

Globally oriented regional structure is also based on a divisional structure using the geographical principle of construction (Fig. 2.14), and the national market is also considered as one of the segments of the regional division. It is most advisable to use this type of structure by organizations in which regional differences are of fundamental importance. Often, globally oriented regional organizational structures are used in industries with technologically slowly changing products (beverages, cosmetics, food, petroleum products). The advantage of such a structure is the close interrelation of geographical regions and coordination of activities within their boundaries, and the disadvantages are the weak coordination of the work of individual units and the high degree of duplication of their activities.

Rice. 2.14. Globally oriented regional structure

Mixed (hybrid) structure It is characterized by the fact that, along with an emphasis on a specific product (geographical region, functions), structural connections of the territorial and functional (product and functional or territorial and product) type are built into it. This type of structure arose due to the fact that each of the above structures can have strengths and weaknesses. There is no single organizational structure that could be considered ideal. The organizational structure of management must correspond to the specific operating conditions of the organization, and for large economic entities they are quite complex and varied and cannot be adequate to any organizational structure in its pure form. The mixed structure is currently very popular among American multinational corporations (especially those with highly diversified activities).

Summarizing the consideration of divisional structures, it should be noted their advantages, disadvantages and conditions for the most effective use. The advantages of these types of structures are:

The use of divisional structures allows an organization to pay as much attention to a specific product, consumer or geographic region as a small specialized organization does, as a result of which it is possible to respond more quickly to changes occurring in the external environment and adapt to changing conditions;

This type of management structure focuses on achieving the final results of the organization’s activities (production of specific types of products, meeting the needs of a specific consumer, saturation of a specific regional market with goods);

Reducing the management complexity faced by senior managers;

Separation of operational management from strategic management, as a result of which the organization's top management concentrates on strategic planning and management;

Transfer of responsibility for profit to the division level, decentralization of operational management decisions;

Improved communications;

Development of breadth of thinking, flexibility of perception and entrepreneurship of heads of departments (divisions).

At the same time, the disadvantages of this type of organizational structure should be emphasized:

Divisional management structures have led to an increase in hierarchy, i.e., vertical management. They demanded the formation of intermediate levels of management to coordinate the work of departments, groups, etc.;

Contrasting the goals of departments with the general goals of the organization’s development, the discrepancy between the interests of the “tops” and “bottoms” in a multi-level hierarchy;

The possibility of conflicts between departments, in particular in the event of a shortage of centrally distributed key resources;

Low coordination of the activities of departments (divisions), headquarters services are disunited, horizontal connections are weakened;

Inefficient use of resources, inability to use them fully due to the assignment of resources to a specific department;

Increased costs for maintaining the management staff due to duplication of the same functions in departments and a corresponding increase in the number of personnel;

Difficulty in exercising control from top to bottom;

Multi-level hierarchy and within the departments (divisions) themselves, the effect of all the shortcomings of linear functional structures;

A possible limitation in the professional development of department specialists, since their teams are not as large as in the case of using linear-functional structures at the organizational level.

It should be noted that the most effective use of divisional management structures is in large-sized organizations, when expanding production and economic operations, in organizations with a wide range of products, in organizations with highly diversified production, in organizations in which production is weakly susceptible to fluctuations in market conditions, with intensive penetration of organizations into foreign markets.

The existence of many varieties of divisional structures is due to the many possible states of an economic object under different input and output production conditions and the presence of business restrictions.

It is extremely rare to encounter a situation in which an organizational structure of the required type is immediately formed. This is possible when organizing a completely new enterprise or with a clearly modeled process of reorganizing the production and organizational structure.

However, we note that reorganization of the structure occurs when management problems create a “critical mass” and must be resolved by any means. This is the impetus for the beginning of the evolutionary development of a new structure through soft change or through hard reorganizations.

The accumulated experience in the theory and practice of reorganizing the management structure shows that the feasibility of moving to a divisional organization is determined by the potential of the enterprise and presupposes the presence of several markets with different specifics. The transition process occurs when the previous structure accumulates a sufficient number of unresolved problems, and another reorganization is inevitable. Divisional structures are also subject to transformation. Thus, improving the organizational structure is a natural, necessary and constant process for all enterprises, where everything is determined by the specific situation, goals, values, experience, and knowledge of managers. Familiarity with theoretical models gives an idea of ​​the organizational structure system in which each company finds the most convenient starting scheme for itself.

As indicated in the work, there is no doubt that the basis for the construction and development of any systems is a linear model with a functional distribution of relationships. However, in management theory there is a dependence - the more structurally complex the management system, the easier it is to organize and regulate management flows. In this regard, distinguishing between schemes for organizing relationships between a set of system elements (schemes such as linear, linear-functional, divisional, functional, etc.), it should be noted that there are new trends in the formation of structures that correspond to the changing principles of the effective functioning of economic systems.

Since linear-functional and divisional organizational structures are most common in the modern economy, including the Russian one, we will conduct a comparative analysis of their main economic parameters. This will make it possible not only to clarify the strengths and weaknesses of these structures, but also to formulate their general assessment and role in the effective development of enterprises (Table 2.4).

Table 2.4 Comparative analysis of economic characteristics of organizational structures

Thus, the widespread use of linear-functional and divisional structures of organizations is quite justified. These structures are quite adaptive, moderately rigid and stable, allow the use of management personnel of diverse quality and create conditions for professional growth.

It is important that such organizations inherently assume the possibility of restructuring both in the event of changes in the external environment and in the event of a change in the management team or goals.

Let us consider the process of evolution from the simplest (linear) structure to a divisional one from the point of view of the influence of external and internal factors and identifying patterns of structural changes.

As we have already determined earlier, one of the features of the divisional structure of product orientation is the duplication of functions against the backdrop of expanded powers of the heads of sales departments. This structure makes it possible to improve the system’s response to local minor market changes by reducing the chain of command and concentrating operational information in decision-making centers. The chain of changes in the organizational structure during the transition from a conventional (functional structure) to a divisional structure can be described by the initial, for example functional, and final divisional structures (Fig. 2.15-2.17).

Rice. 2.15. Functional structure of the enterprise

Rice. 2.16. Divisional structure of the enterprise

Rice. 2.17. Matrix structure model

Sales divisions must undergo reorganization, to which warehouse and transport groups, as well as marketing groups, have been transferred. At the same time, the headquarters marketing department is retained, which in the divisional structure no longer deals with local markets, but with market technologies, company-wide strategy and problems of internal interaction. Issues of economic planning are distributed between divisions and headquarters, the system-analytical and software complex (ACS) remains common. Duplication of functions across departments allows for improved management efficiency and coordination of decisions. However, such a system must have an appropriate level of authority and management resources without unnecessary duplication of functions, which at certain levels can become a negative factor.

In Russian practice, a typical divisional structure is often called an “internal holding” and acts as a transitional step to an external holding. It can be stated that it really eliminates many contradictions, since it breaks up a complex, clumsy organization into separate blocks, in which “local” problems are solved in their own way.

Currently, there are many structures that are essentially a type of divisional structure, in which, for example, the differentiation of divisions is carried out not according to a functional, but according to a design principle, or organizations in which independent business units (having legal status) act as elements of the structure. In this case, it is believed that we are talking about a network, cooperative structure. This does not entirely correspond to the concept of a division, but reflects its more advanced structure. On the other hand, domestic practice of management consulting shows that it was impossible to maintain and even increase production volumes at some enterprises in the first half of the 1990s. allowed the transition to a divisional management structure (delegation of powers and responsibilities to middle managers, transition to internal cost accounting, etc.). Although such a transition for the manager personally is fraught with the transfer of “administrative resources,” which was considered the main factor, into “the wrong hands,” which could pose a threat for the manager to be relegated to the background and become unnecessary.

Further development of the economic system moves the structure into the area of ​​flexible systems, based either on integrated structures in the form of business units, or on adaptation to changes (matrix structures or their analogues). At the same time, the matrix organizational structure involves the formation of a flexible system through the distribution of main functions and dual management. Creating such interaction (dual management) requires careful coordination of the balance of interests with maximum commonality of goals and high corporate culture. The features of such structures will be discussed further.

The most developed type of divisional management structures can be called organizational structures based on strategic business units (strategic economic centers). They are used in organizations if they have a large number of independent departments with a similar profile of activity. In this case, to coordinate their work, special intermediate management bodies are created, located between the departments and senior management. These bodies are headed by deputies of the organization's senior management (usually vice presidents), and they are given the status of strategic business units.

Strategic business units are responsible for developing the organization's strategic positions in one or more areas of business. They are responsible for choosing areas of activity, developing competitive products and marketing strategies. Once the product range is developed, responsibility for implementing the program falls on the divisions of ongoing business activities, i.e., divisions.

The analysis of the varieties of hierarchical organizational structures showed that the transition to more flexible, adaptive management structures, better adapted to dynamic changes and production requirements, was objectively necessary and natural.

(Materials are based on: Fundamentals of Management. Edited by A. I. Afonichkin. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2007)