Organizational Structure and Transformation - Essay Example

Critically Discuss the Extent to Which an Organisation’s Structure Not Only Shapes Its Culture, But Also Its Ability to Transform Itself By of Student] [Name of Institution] 2091 Words [Date] Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Structure and its influence on organisational culture III. Importance of strong structures IV. Organisational structure and transformation V. Changes influenced by structure VI. Organisational structure, leadership and values VII. Conclusion VIII. References Introduction A thorough literature review on the subjects of organizational structure, transformation and culture reveals a great wealth of information on the two subjects. Handled individually, it is evident that organisational structure and culture are quite important in the realization of an organisation’s goals and objectives. Unfortunately, little has been done in covering and unearthing the relationship between structure and culture in an organisation. Similarly, the relationship between an organisation’s structure and its ability to transform and manage change has not been exhaustively discussed or debated (Pugh, 1990). Notwithstanding the fact that the influence of organisational structure on culture and transformation has been overlooked in many studies and practical management of businesses, there exists a rather important interconnection between these aspects of an organisation (Strandgaard & Sorensen, 1990). However, it may be quite a difficult task to distinguish an organisation’s structure and culture since structure always operates within business culture, implying culture and structure are quite intertwined. Therefore, this paper explores the assertion that the structure of an organisation not only influences its culture but also its ability to incorporate and manage changes. Structure and Its Influence on Organisational Culture While culture refers to the umbrella issues and manner/patterns in which an organisation operates, structure refers to the infrastructures, methods, and practices therein. The structure of an organisation thus helps ensure that its culture is practised and run efficiently and consistently. Given this important role of structure in shaping an organisation’s culture and ensuring cultural consistency and efficacy, establishing good structures should be the hallmark of every organisation (Newman, 1996). Structure therefore not only influences and shapes organisational culture but it is also an integral part of the culture. The culture of an organisation is also a responsibility of its structure, which relates and deals directly with the settings of an organisation’s culture (Strandgaard & Sorensen, 1990). For instance, cultural issues in an organisation such as the workings of the management, employees’ responsibilities and the handling of disputes and complaints are all directly tied to its structures and how they work. The main way in which structure affects organisational culture is through the role of structure in interconnecting the different groups/teams in an organisation hence enabling them to work smoothly to realise organisational and personal objectives and progress (Lim et al., 2010). In this regard, the elements of structure most important in shaping an organisation’s culture and its smooth operations include effective communication and coordination among employees and departments (Newman, 1996). Several theories have been developed to highlight the role of structure in influencing the culture of an organisation. The first among these theories is the pre-bureaucratic structure. In this structure, an organisation lacks the standardisation of tasks and is mostly applicable in small businesses, which are adaptive and have no repeat scenario (Heckscher & Donnellon, 1994). The second structural theory is the bureaucratic structure in which larger organisations establish certain processes and procedures to help in meeting their objectives. Although structures that promote bureaucracy in business have a lot of negative connotation, small doses of such structures have been described as good for addressing certain recurring issues in large business (Heckscher & Donnellon, 1994). The structure of an organisation also has a number of influences on its culture in respect to its business concepts, strategies, policies, planning and situations. These relationships between structure and culture have been identified to be real not only in companies but also in small/personal businesses, corporations, governments, and charitable organisations and sports organisations. In all these types of organisations, culture and structure, both of which partially define the entirety of an organisation imply the behind-the-scenes machinery that organises and runs organisations, bringing out their strengths (Robbins & Judge, 2007). The role of structure in bringing out an organisation’s strengths and opportunities while eliminating its weaknesses is particularly important in establishing a business environment that promotes not only organisational success but also professional and personal growth for employees (Gummesson, 2002). Importance of Strong Structures The importance of structure to an organisation’s culture and success cannot therefore be overemphasized. In fact, it has been ascertained that ineffective structures often translate into weakening and diminishing organisational culture (Butler, 1986). With strong structures, an organisation’s positive and economically viable cultures become quite difficult to weaken. However, strong and effective leadership skills are still needed for good organisational cultures even if stable structures have been established. Otherwise, weak structures simply imply a high likelihood of the collapse of an organisation’s culture (Robbins & Judge, 2007). To remain competitive and relevant therefore, it is imperative that an organisation establishes strong structures and culture that promote good leadership, effective vertical/horizontal communication and coordination. Although a big or powerful organisation may withstand certain market forces and remain viable for quite some time, with a structure prone to erosion, the culture of such an organisation eventually collapses. Generally, excellent organizational structures, coupled with good leadership and personnel relations promotes goal-oriented or focused organisations whose cultures are best placed to withstand erosion (Kotter, 2011). Besides culture, structure also affects an organisation’s capacity to transform and manage change. Organisational Structure and Transformation The other aspect of an organisation that its structure influences and shapes apart from its culture is its ability to transform or accept and manage change. The sizes, industry, nationality and market segment notwithstanding, an organisation’s transformation depends on and is defined by certain common factors. These factors include business redefinition, customer-focus, non-hierarchical structures, and strong and shared leadership/values (Grey & Garsten, 2001). The role of an effective organisational structure is quite apparent in all these factors. In redefining business, an organisation should structure itself so that more emphasis is directed at working with customers’ needs. The structures of an organisation should therefore promote customer-focused practices so that it easily transforms with any changes in customer tastes, lifestyles, expectations and preferences (Mohr, 1982). Therefore, to transform quickly with changes in customer needs, the most appropriate structures should be established, otherwise such an organisation could be rendered irrelevant, nonproductive and eventually collapse. The second way in which an organisation’s structure shapes its transformation is through the structure’s capacity to support teamwork and nonhierarchical tendencies and practices. Teaming, supported by strong structures and departments has been identified as a core element of transformation for many organisations (Mohr, 1982). In fact, through the abolition of the traditional structural boundaries and barriers to teamwork, the inculcation of change management in organisations has become rather vital practice for managers. Examples of these traditional barriers to teamwork-structures include departmental obstacles, physical barriers such as (office walls and partitions) and job tides (Heckscher & Donnellon, 1994). Instead, project teams built on skills, abilities, interests and competencies have been accorded more weight in recent times. In these teams are certain main players who are of equal importance including sponsors, owners, managers, leaders and project coworkers. The other type of structure that supports transformation in an organisation is that in which all employees and stakeholders participate in all the aspects of a project, but concentrate on their areas of interest or specialization. This kind of structure not only allows employees to adapt to changes or transform/sharpen their skills but also makes them feel appreciated and competent in other job areas. A structure that promotes project-and goal-focused teamwork also comes highly recommended for an organisation that would want to stay abreast with the ever-changing markets and customer needs and tastes. Importantly, an organisation’s structure influences its knowledge-base by building networks through which information, knowledge, skills and expertise is transferred from one individual or department to another (Raymond et al., 1992). This type of structure thus arms all employees with the right information and knowledge to tackle any situation that may come up in the day-to-day operations of an organisation. The role of the administrative structures in influencing an organisation’s transformation cannot also be overemphasized as they offer the necessary links to all the teams and departments of an organisation (Raymond et al., 1992). In case a change is initiated, it would be the role of the administrative staffs/structures to ensure that the change is communicated and effected in the entire organisation. The administrative structures thus play an important role in covering the gaps between the various units/teams, ensuring that all departments and employees are informed of any changes. Changes Influenced by Structure The major aspects of an organisation affected by change include its products, customers, and employees. For this reason therefore, it is important that structures support these aspects of an organisation to easily conform to and adopt changes in customer tastes and preferences about its products (Phillips, 1983). In this regard, product quality and performance structures, customer-focus structures and performance service structures should be established. Important for these structures would be their reorganisation and redesign to address any changes. These structures should not only be fluid but also dynamic enough form, reform and change as needs may arise. In other terms, there should be no rigid structures that would support central hierarchical controls in an organisation (Schein, 2010). Instead, the establishment of self-regulating project and departmental teams should be promoted. It is however not only the internal structures of an organisation that should be fluid and dynamic; even the external structures and environment with which an organisation relates should be fluid and permeable so that interaction and teamwork is promoted between an organisation and its customers, competitors, suppliers and regulators. Although a transformation-oriented structure is quite fluid, it is still cohesively held together by its components being aligned with one another by shared leadership, goals, objectives, beliefs, aspirations, visions, missions and values (Jacobides, 2007). Organisational Structure, Leadership and Values The nurturing and the efficient sharing of organisational values is one of the ways in which transformation may be achieved and embraced in an organisation. Therefore, it is imperative that structures that promote the sharing and communication of values, principles, norms and beliefs be established. Such structures would ensure that outside and unwanted factors do not influence an organisation’s abilities and capacity to initiate, embrace and manage changes for its growth and development (Anderson & Anderson, 2001). Organisational structures therefore have a role in shaping an organisation’s and individual employees’ behaviours, perceptions and aspirations. There are certain principles upon which an organisation’s structures and leadership should be based if it has to embrace transformation. The first among these principles is the freedom principle according to which structures should enable an organisation’s leadership, employees and other stakeholders to change and grow in skills, knowledge and the scope of their roles and responsibilities (Anderson & Anderson, 2001). The second principle, referred to as the waterline principle requires that organisational structures accommodate mistakes even as it embraces transformation. These would also allow for consultations between leaders and subordinates before a change is effected or embraced (Schein, 2010). Third, the principle of commitment requires that organisational structures promote leadership commitment to employees by providing the necessary incentives and other supporting structures. Unfortunately, there are certain types of structures that weaken individual responsibilities and powers to transform and accept changes due to their rigid, hierarchical and segmented nature. These structures prevent employees from responding to clients’ concerns and needs, thus increasing inefficiency costs (Marshak, 2005). Inefficiencies also occur due to increased control costs that rigid and unresponsive structures impart on organisations. Consequently, organisations fail to meet not only their goals but also the expectations of their clients. The need to change the structures of organisations has consistently met a lot of barriers and resistance both from within and outside. First among these barriers are individuals and organisations that feel insecure about any structural changes that they perceive as threats to their job security and authority/powers (Repenning, 2002). Second, structural changes in many organisations are blocked by both internal and external rules and regulations. For example, internal job classifications may construct individual performance and compartmentalise responsibilities and roles so that it becomes difficult to achieve teamwork in some organisations. Conclusion Though not extensively researched, the relationship between organisational structure, culture and transformation is quite important for the productivity and relevance of an organisation. To remina viable and vibrant in the ever-changing and increasingly competitive business environment, a business entity must establish structures that positively shape and influence its culture. In other terms, a culture that promotes change and change management are only supported by flexible, fluid and non-bureaucratic structures that promote organisational, personal and professional growth and satisfaction among all the stakeholders of an organisation. An organisation’s structure thus has a considerable level of influence not only on its cultures but also its capacity to transform and to manage change. References Anderson, D., and Anderson, L. A. (2001) Beyond Change Management: Advanced Strategies for Today’s Transformational Leaders. Retrieved on February 17, 2012 from http://books.google.com/books?id=WbpH7p5qQ88C&printsec=frontcover&dq=beyond+change+management&hl=en&sa=X&ei=kEfzTpewMYKpiQLGz5S8Dg&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=beyond%20change%20management&f=false Butler, J. K. (1986) A Global View of Informal Organization. Academy of Management Journal, 51(3): 39. Grey, C., and Garsten, C. (2001) Trust, control and post-bureaucracy. Sage Publishing. Gummesson, E. (2002) Total marketing control. Butterworth-Heinemann. Heckscher, C., and Donnellon, A. (1994) The post-bureaucratic organization: new perspectives on organizational change. Sage Publications. Jacobides, M. G. (2007) The Inherent Limits of Organizational Structure and the Unfulfilled Role of Hierarchy: Lessons From a Near-War. Organization Science, 18(3): 477. Kotter, J. (2011) Change Management versus Change Leadership -- Whats the Difference? Retrieved on February 17, 2012 from http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkotter/2011/07/12/change-management-vs-change-leadership-whats-the-difference/ Lim, M., G. Griffiths, and S. Sambrook. (2010) Organizational structure for the twenty-first century. The Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences. Marshak, R. J. (2005) Contemporary challenges to the philosophy and practice of organizational development. In David L. Bradford and W. Warner Burke (Eds.) Re-inventing organizational development: New approaches to change in organizations. Pfeiffer Publishers. Mohr, L. B. (1982) Explaining organizational behavior. Jossey-Bass Publishers. Newman, J. (1996) Shaping organisational cultures (managing local government). Financial Times Prentice Hall. Phillips, J. R. (1983) Enhancing the Effectiveness of Organizational Change Management. Human Resource Management, 22(1/2), 183-199. Retrieved on February 17, 2012 from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hrm.3930220125/abstract Pugh, D. S. (1990) Organization theory: selected readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Raymond, E., Miles, C., and Snow, C. (1992) Causes of Failure in Network Organizations. Management Review, Summer 1992. Repenning, N. (2002) A Simulation-Based Approach to Understanding the Dynamics of Innovation implementation. Organization Science, 13(2): 109-127. Robbins, S. F., and Judge, T. A. (2007) Organizational behaviour, twelfth edition. Pearson Education Inc. Schein, E. H. (2009) The corporate culture survival guide (J-B Warren Bennis Series), revised edition. Jossey-Bass. Schein, E. H. (2010) Organizational culture and leadership (the Jossey-Bass business & management series), fourth edition. Jossey-Bass. Strandgaard, J. P., and Sorensen, J. S. (1990) Organisational cultures in theory and practice. Gower Publishing Company. Read More