Mechanistic Organization Structures

Mechanistic Organization Structures

The mechanistic view of an organization began with the industrial revolution. The view is a reflection of society's radical change from a rural agricultural base to one more impersonally based on centralized urban industry employing great numbers of people. The first changes began in the late 1600's and early 1700's with rudimentary machines replacing manual labor or accomplishing things not previously possible because of size, weight, or sheer numbers. The greatest industrial growth was during the 1800's period, which was exponential at its end and the outset of our century.

The view and metaphorical analogy of an organization as a machine was the result of the only frame of reference available at that time, and is anchored in the conditions then prevalent, large numbers of un- or semi-educated people aggregating into centers clustered around factories. When the view is combined with what business organizations are designed to do -- take raw materials and convert them as quickly and efficiently as possible into commercial products that will make a profit -- the comparison of organization to machine is easily made and readily apparent. As in the new machines available during the industrial revolution, organizations can be seen as composed of many "parts" which are the individual people and/or business departments (milling, stamping, forging, assembly, etc.). Any of which can be changed, modified, or replaced individually or totally.

The hierarchical, pyramidal representation also coincides with the machine where one part is crucial (power source), diffusing downward through power shafts which turn various wheels (departments) with many cogs (people) that produce something. The metaphor of the machine is useful and appropriate in bureaucratic organizations where repetition and conformity is useful, and where the output is a standard homogeny.

Mechanistic structures are designed to induce people to behave in predictable, accountable ways. Decision-making authority is centralized, subordinates are closely supervised, and information flows mainly in a vertical direction down a clearly defined hierarchy. In a mechanistic structure the tasks associated with a role are also clearly defined. There is usually a one-to-one correspondence between a person and a task (figure 1 depicts this). Each person is individually specialized and knows exactly what he or she is responsible for, and behavior inappropriate to the role is discouraged or prohibited.

The mechanistic structure is the traditional or classical design, common in many medium- and large-size organizations. Mechanistic organizations are somewhat rigid in that they consist of very clearly delineated jobs, have a well-defined hierarchical structure, and rely heavily on the formal chain of command for control. Bureaucratic organizations, with their emphasis on formalization, are the primary form of mechanistic structures. According to Max Weber, bureaucracy is a form of organization characterized by a rational, goal-directed hierarchy, impersonal decision making, formal controls, and subdivision into managerial positions and specialization of labor. Bureaucratic organizations are tall consisting of hierarchies with many levels of management. In a tall structure, people become relatively confined to their own area of specialization. Bureaucracies are driven by a top-down or command and control approach in which managers provide considerable direction and have considerable control over others. Other features of the bureaucratic organization include functional division of labor and work specialization.

PROS CONS

Conformity Workers have no autonomy

Well trained workers Repetitive work

Centralized authority Inhibits creativity

Clear lines of communication Machines typically control the workers

Rapid standardized output High employee turnover

Conformity Organization have trouble adapting to change

Easily uderstandable segments Can result in dehumanizing effects of workers

Organic Organization Structures

Organic structures are decentralized: that is decision-making authority is distributed throughout the hierarchy, and people assume the authority to make decisions as organizational needs dictate. Roles are loosely defined - people perform various tasks and continually develop skills in new activities. Each person performs all three tasks, and the result is joint specialization and increased productivity. Employees from different functions work together to solve problems and become involved in each other's activities. As a result, a high level of integration is needed so that employees can share information and overcome problems caused by differences in subunit orientation. The integration function is achieved by means of complex mechanisms like task forces and teams. Coordination is achieved through mutual adjustments as people and functions workout role definitions and responsibilities, and as rules and norms emerge from the ongoing interaction of organizational members.

In an organic structure informal norms and values develop that emphasize personal competence, expertise, and the ability to act in innovative ways. Status is conferred by the ability to provide creative leadership, not by any formal position in the hierarchy.

Organic structure is more flexible, more adaptable to a participative form of management, and less concerned with a clearly defined structure. The organic organization is open to the environment in order to capitalize upon new opportunities.

Organic organizations have a flat structure with only one or two levels of management. Flat organizations emphasize a decentralized approach to management that encourages high employee involvement in decisions. The purpose of this structure is to create independent small businesses or enterprises that can rapidly respond to customers' needs or changes in the business environment. The supervisor tends to have a more personal relationship with his or her employees.

The organic form is appropriate to changing conditions which give rise constantly to fresh problems and unforeseen requirements for action which cannot be broken down or distributed automatically arising from the functional roles defined within a hierarchic structure. It is characterized by:

(a)