Fundamental Relevance of Hierarchy in the Modern Day Organization - Essay Example

To What Extent Is the Notion of Hierarchy Relevant To Our Understanding of Management in the Organizations of Today? Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction 3 Thesis Statement 4 The Sustainable/Fundamental Relevance of Hierarchy in the Modern Day Organization 5 Counter Arguments Concerning To the Relevance of the Hierarchy within the Modern Day Organization 7 Relationship Between the Between Hierarchism and Tyranny of the Invisible 8 Difference between the Top down Hierarchy and Hierarchism as a Way of Thinking in the Modern Organizations 10 How Rhizomes Structure (Horizontal Structure) Exists In the Modern Organization 11 Conclusion 12 References 13 Introduction Hierarchy is the structural process that helps in framing a chain work within the authority that is known as chain of authority. Hierarchical organization reflects the structure where a chain of command follows within the authorities. The top level usually consists of the higher authority that ensures the important power beneath them (Chattopadhyay & Malhotra, 1991). The employees within the hierarchical structure follow the formal communication of communicating with the immediate superior and the immediate subordinate. Hierarchy is visualized typically as a pyramid where the ranking of the employees reflects their power within the organization. The hierarchical structure of an organization is usually depicted with the help of a tree diagram (Helium, 2013; Anderson & Brown, 2010). Fig: Tree Diagram of Hierarchy; Source: (Helium, 2013) The objective of the study is to find the relevance of the hierarchy system within the modern day organizations. It can be argued that the need of hierarchy within the organization emanates from and reflects the organized way of the channels of operations within the company that ultimately helps in accomplishment of the desired goals of the company. In the modern day organizations’ context, the employees’ working within the organization need a supervision that facilitates them to have a clear vision with regard to the organizational goals as well as initiates and influences them to attain or accomplish the desired goals. It has been apparently observed that in the modern day organizational context, prompt decision making has become almost synonymous to every day transactions made within the organization, thus a clear focus that is generally present amid the top level hierarchy facilitates to right decisions and the right time without much fault. The study will also include the counter arguments with respect to the relevance of the hierarchy within the organizations. The existence of the flatten organization is quite unmanageable at times. The invisible hierarchy remains within the flatten organizations as well. If the employees are bestowed with the responsibility to take the decisions freely without any supervision, the power- conflict arises within the organizations. Thus, the existence of the flatten structure without any centralized control within the organization can cause both short-term and long-term hindrances within the organizational premises. The relationship between the hierarchy and the “the tyranny of invisible” and the difference between the hierarchy and the hierarchism will also be included within the study. The existence of the rhizomes structure within the organization also forms an objective of this study. Thesis Statement Hierarchy is sustainably/fundamentally relevant in the modern day organization. The Sustainable/Fundamental Relevance of Hierarchy in the Modern Day Organization Modern day organizations have various structural options. The structural options range from the traditional structure towards the better innovative and flexible schemes. The hierarchies differ within the structures and the effectiveness of the different structural scenarios followed within the organization upon the compliance of the structural framework with that of the strategic objective of the company/organization (Nestle, 2011). The various structures comprise the functional structure, the team structure, matrix structure, network structure and the divisional structure (Azcentral, 2013). The bureaucracy comprises the group of officials within the organization that implements the ideas, functions and laws for the organization to run effectively (Holzer & Gabrielian, 2003). Bureaucracy refers to the structure prevailing within the organization that includes formal protocols as well as hierarchy amid the large to small size organizations (IITK, n.d.). There are certain sets of characteristics that the bureaucracy follows within the hierarchical structure within the organization (Lindkvist, 2004). The characteristics that involve within the bureaucratic hierarchy are explained as follows (IITK, n.d.). The hierarchy structure where the information flows downward and the accountability of the employees with respect to the responsibility flows upward reflects the chain of authority from top to bottom management (Romme, n.d.). In this context, the organization comprises levels that include assigned responsibilities within a chain frame (IITK, n.d.). The division with regard to the labors reflects the completion of the specific task in a coordinated way with a vision to achieve the organizational objectives. The written rules and regulations within the organizations help the employees to perform efficiently. In accordance with this, it will increase the effectiveness of the employees towards the attainment of the business goals. In a bureaucratic management, written documents are maintained to review the activities that are being performed by the employees (IITK, n.d.). Coordinating all the efforts of the groups requires leadership which would otherwise result in the ineffectiveness of the organization. In reference to this, the various positions within the organizational structure exhibit the responsibilities to be completed by the employees. The hierarchical structure of the organization is framed to benefit the entity as well as the employees. Accountability, guidance, career path and the communication are the frameworks that increase the efficiency and the effectiveness of the organization. The top level management takes more responsibility in accordance with its position within the hierarchical structure. The control is needed within the organization to make the employees perform their work effectively and efficiently (Magee, 2008). The postmodern view of the organization reflects the environment where the business is centrally becoming the area where the acts are being performed, the adventures are experienced with respect to the task and the creativity as well as competencies are reflected (Kellner, 2001). The presence of the bureaucracy within the modern day organization reflects the organized and a controlled framework within the organization (Kellner, 2001). Counter Arguments Concerning To the Relevance of the Hierarchy within the Modern Day Organization In the modern day scenario, the organizations are implementing flatten management style that reflects the shared responsibilities within the employees working. In accordance with the flatten structure of the organization, it reflects that the levels of the organization are few or there are no levels between the employees and the management. With regard to flatten organizational structure, the employees are involved in the decision making process. The management supervisions are comparatively less (Sisaye, 2005). The application of the flatten structure within the organization accelerates the employees confidence as they receive higher level of responsibilities within the organization. The flatten organizational structure eliminates the extra levels of the hierarchy structures which facilitates to improve as well as increase the coordination among the employees with regard to the management (O’Neill, 1982). The presence of fewer levels of management increases the effectiveness and the efficiency of the decision making process within the employees. The reduction in the levels of management reduces the budget of the organization (Sisaye, 2005). In comparison with the hierarchical structure, the flatten structure creates a lot of confusions within the employees. The absence of a specified supervision or the authority that the employees will report creates confusion whereas the presence of the hierarchical supervision within the chain of authority provides the employees to communicate and thus find solutions to their problems (Sisaye, 2005). In the hierarchical structure, the control over the employees plays a vital role in coordinating the employees towards a particular direction whereas in the flatten structure the presence of responsibilities and the decision making power with the employees creates power struggle within the management. In case of the flatten structure, the specialized function might not be clear with the employee which result in the completion of the work without any supervision that will affect the effectiveness of the employee. In case of the hierarchical structure, the greater responsibilities are taken by the higher authority whereas within the flatten structure the responsibilities are shared amid the employees with which they might not be acquainted with (Colette, 2013). Relationship Between the Between Hierarchism and Tyranny of the Invisible The invisible hierarchy reflects the environment where the employees who occupy the top positions are given preference of taking prior decisions with regard to the organization. The informal organizations incorporate within it certain characteristics (Blaug, 1999). The informal organization is dynamic and responsive, it treats people as individuals, fosters collective decision making, the employees within the informal organization feel motivated and it is distinguished by the trust as well as reciprocity. The management style prevailing within the informal organization is quite essential for the situations that change quickly. The “Tyranny of Invisible” reflects the invisible form of hierarchy within an organization that allows the employees to take decisions but with a centralized control. The informal groups reflect and initiate communication among the employees (Magee, 2008). In accordance with hierarchism, it has been observed that it reflects the strict and authorized control over the employees. In the hierarchism dimension, the employees work under immense pressure that demotivates them. The hierarchism structure affects the enhancement and effectiveness of the employees. In this context, it is determined that the employees’ feel dissatisfied as well as their enhancement with regard to their competencies decreases (Magee, 2008). According to Magee, hierarchism is hidden within the series and actions that prevail inside the organizations. In the absence of supervision, the sustainability of an organization becomes difficult. If the employees working within the organization are imparted with important responsibilities which they are not acquainted with, in such a case completion of the work without any supervision will lead to ineffectiveness of the employee. The use of unpractical ways by the employees to express them by communicating with each other without the supervision of the elites will result in a disorganized network. It is necessary for an organization to follow the hierarchical invisibility when it faces vindictive power as well as overpowering authority. The invisible hierarchy within the organization enhances the employees to show their creativity that ultimately enhances the efficiency and effectiveness of the employees. The tyranny of invisible allows the employees to work freely but limiting them by a centralized control (Magee, 2008). In keeping with the “Tyranny of Invisible”, if the employees are allowed to take the decisions freely with regard to the workings of the organization then the shared power among the employees will give rise to the power conflict among them. An organization must follow a hierarchy structure by incorporating the strategies that allow the employees to increase their competencies (Magee, 2008). Difference between the Top down Hierarchy and Hierarchism as a Way of Thinking in the Modern Organizations Assessments of the decisions are usually driven by taking into account the concern for the organization as well as concern for the individuals working within the organization as during the process of decision making they are going to be affected. The concern for the organizations usually leads to the effectiveness of the decisions that help in achieving the organizational goals. In this context, it can be explained by a set of examples such as a campaign for advertising the products will attract customers into the store, the production process involved will yield quality products at a lower cost and the strategy involved within the business process shows profit margin (Gońda, 2011). The managerial accountability related to the hierarchical structure comprises two factors authority and accountability. These factors related to managers’ accountability result in top down hierarchy structure. A top-down framework of hierarchy within the organization reflects the management structure where the senior officials and the authorities make the powerful decisions. The decisions that are made at the top level hierarchy are passed down to the bottom line employees for execution (Gońda, 2011). The preference for the hierarchism reflects the diversity within the employees that works within the organizations. In this regard, the organization must incorporate executive levels that must include diversity of the rights, values and benefits with respect to the employees. Strive for the equality within the employees originates from the convictions that are vested upon with similar rights which are reflected as an elementary equality within the organizations (Gońda, 2011). How Rhizomes Structure (Horizontal Structure) Exists In the Modern Organization Rhizomatic reflects the theory which allows the multiple as well as the non-hierarchical entry and exists within the organization. The rhizome structure implies that the employees working under this structure need to be more flexible, must tackle the shifting responsibilities and must undergo certain amount of the re-education as well as retraining. The skills that are possessed by the middle level managers that comprise the analytical skills which ensure that the organization’s goals are met and the decision making capabilities are upheld within any organization (Harris, 2010). The existence of the rhizome structure within the organization can be inferred by the case studies of the organizations of Xerox Corporation, The Occupational Safety and The Health Administration and the Ford Motor Company where the rhizome structure has been incorporated (Harris, 2010). Conclusion From the overall study, it is inferred that the hierarchical structure is relevant within the modern day organizations. In accordance with the hierarchical structure, the management keeps a control over the workings of the employees. The hierarchy structure helps the employees to have a better understanding of the work and the organized way of the network increases the effectiveness of the employees. The hierarchy structure also holds certain disadvantages that include the aspect that the strict procedures and the control do not allow the employees to show their creativity. In this context, this rules and regulations affect the competency level of the employees and thus demotivate them. In the modern day organizations, the employees must possess the various required competencies to meet the organizational requirements. An organization without executive control cannot execute properly thus the presence of hierarchy must be such that it allows the employees to show their creativity but the decision making power would lie with the centralized authority. References Azcentral, 2013. Hierarchical Structure Used in a Modern Organization. Operating a Business. [Online] Available at: http://yourbusiness.azcentral.com/hierarchical-structure-used-modern-organization-11196.html [Accessed April 27, 2013]. Anderson, C. & Brown, C. E., 2010. The Functions and Dysfunctions of Hierarchy. Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 27, pp. 1-35. Blaug, R., 1999. The Tyranny of the Visible: Problems in the Evaluation of Anti-Institutional Radicalism. Sage, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 33-56. Colette L. M, 2013. Flat Vs. Hierarchical Organizational Structure. Related Articles. [Online] Available at: http://smallbusiness.chron.com/flat-vs-hierarchical-organizational-structure-724.html [Accessed April 27, 2013]. Chattopadhyay, G.P. & Malhotra, A., 1991. Hierarchy and Modern Organisation: A Paradox Leading To Human Wastage. The Indian Journal of Social Work, pp. 561-584. Gońda, M., 2011. Transnationalism. Old Issues in New Clothes. Journal of Intercultural Management, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 5-16. Helium, 2013. The Role of Organizational Hierarchy in Business. Leadership Strategies. [Online] Available at: http://www.helium.com/items/1682832-the-role-of-organizational-hierarchy-in-business [Accessed April 27, 2013]. Holzer, M. & Gabrielian, V., 2003. Five Great Ideas in American Public Administration. What Is Public Administration, Vol.1 Harris, A., 2010. Cross-Marked: Sudanese Australian Young Women Talk Education. Cross Marked: Acknowledgements and Dedication, pp. 1-194. IITK, No Date. Bureaucracy and Formal Organizations. The Rationalization of Society. [Online] Available at: http://home.iitk.ac.in/~amman/soc474/Resources/bureaucracy.pdf [Accessed April 27, 2013]. Kellner, D., 2001. Restructuring Education for a New Millennium. New Technologies/ New Literacies, pp. 1-23. Lindkvist, L., 2004. Governing Project-based Firms: Promoting Market-like Processes within Hierarchies. Journal of Management and Governance, Vol. 8, pp. 3–25. Magee, J.C., 2008. Social Hierarchy: The Self-Reinforcing Nature of Power and Status. Academy of Management Annals, vol. 2, pp.1-79. Nestle, 2011. The Nestlé Management and Leadership Principles. Principles Mandatory. [Online] Available at: http://www.nestle.com/assetlibrary/Documents/Library/Documents/People/Management-Leadership-Principles-EN.pdf [Accessed April 27, 2013]. O’Neill, B., 1982. Structures for Non- Hierarchical Organizations. Discussion Paper, No. 535, pp. 1-39. Romme, A. G. L., No Date. Work, Authority and Participation: The Scenario of Circular Organizing. Nibor, Vol. 97, No. 1, pp. 1-13. Sisaye, S., 2005. Teams and Management Control Systems: A Synthesis of Three Organizational Development Approaches. Leadership & Organization Development Journal Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 172-185. Read More