A company size may at times not require a stringent organization or workers or jobs, especially when it is a small one. However, for a business to grow, it demands an order of activities. The direction of tasks and employees in the company leads to organization culture. The structure of any business has a direct effect on the behavior of employees and performance (Hatch, 2018). Furthermore, it provides a synopsis of how the hierarchy of the levels are arranged, the authorities, roles and responsibilities, and communication channels, among other elements. Thus, it is imperative to understand the definition of organizational structure and what type is evident in the organization as it impacts the behavior of workers and the overall performance of the company. This concept is understood to as a process involving the responsibilities and authority allocated to the members and how the work is conducted among them (Hatch, 2018). This paper will identify two types of organizational structure and provide a comparison of the same. It will talk about mechanistic organizational structure and organic organizational structure.
Definitions
Mechanistic structure describes an order where the environment is strict and exhibits an extremely hierarchical and bureaucratic nature ( Donaldson, 2015) . The roles, processes, and structure are seen as a machine which has all parts doing what is intended of them. This organizational structure exhibits three elements including specialized functions, formalized procedures, and a highly centralized authority. In this regard, a mechanistic organization has a fine division of labor, vertical chain of command, high management control, and well-defined procedures of exercising power. This type of structure has an objective to achieve efficiency through specialization, formalization, and standardization.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
An organic structure, on the other hand, is an informal representation of an organization. It exhibits flexibility and is ready for the changes occurring in its environment and embraces them. In this type of organization, the power and authority are not centralized and external knowledge are entertained. Organic structure promotes the employees to initiate change and adapt adeptly to the dynamic environments. In this organization, the workers are able to carry out any kind of task.
Mechanistic Structure
In the mechanistic structure, the chain of command is vertical and follows the top-down approach ( Donaldson, 2015) . This makes it be shaped like a pyramid, with the top end representing the management. The sharing of information happens between the managers and supervisors and goes up to the executives. Mechanistic structure employs simple integrating mechanisms, where it exhibits a well-defined hierarchy of authority. The centralization of power makes the organization have entrenched bureaucracy. The person having the right to exercise power is the highest authority figure ( Donaldson, 2015) . In this type, the high individual specialization in the structure makes every employee work separately and concentrate on one task independently.
These everyday duties are handed down through the chain of command. The mechanistic organizational structure is characterized by a set of formal, strict, and straightforward processes, functions, and procedures. This leads to a standardization that shows extensive use of the made rules and the standard operating procedures (SOPs). Decision making in the company is left for the high profile employees at the summit of the hierarchical chain and this is passed to the other employees vertically. In such an organization, communication is mainly done through writing. In this organization, the structure is made of a network of positions that can be drawn in charts based on the tasks an individual has on the company ( Kalay & Lynn, 2016) . In most cases, a person corresponds to a single duty. The mechanistic organizational structure is best suited for the manufacturing companies.
Organic Structure
The organic organizational structure is directly the opposite of mechanistic one. In this case, the structure is flat and allows for horizontal communications. It has a decentralized power and authority and the chain of command is horizontal as the employees can interact regardless of the level ( Kalay & Lynn, 2016) . The sharing of information happens between any person in the organization. It encourages people to come up with new ideas and then shared to the rest. Organic organizational structure employs complex integrating mechanisms, where the teams and task forces are the basis of integration in the company. Power, in this case, is decentralized as the authority to control processes is delegated even to the lower levels of management. This organization does not follow a hierarchy of command and thus making the control to be a wide span.
This makes it lack bureaucracy. Work in organic structure is divided into general duties where there is no specialization or if there is, it is joint. In this case, the employees work together to complete tasks through coordination hence offering expertise on a wide range of functions. The organization works in the form of mutual adjustment, where face-to-face contact is important for coordination. The process of carrying out work here is unpredictable and not clearly defined. Much of the communication happens verbally and informally ( Kalay & Lynn, 2016) . The network of this structure is based on people and teams that work together in varying capabilities to attain organizational goals. This kind of structure is best suited for creative businesses.
Impact of Change in Environment
The change in environment can define the type of resultant structure. When the change is gradual with minimal uncertainty, it is possible for one organization to stay the same for a long period of time. Such a stable and predictable environment leads to the development of the mechanistic organizational structure ( Donaldson, 2015) . This is because it does not require rapid solutions as the environment is calm. The authority can thus read factors and make decisions that will make the company be afloat. When the environment is calm, tasks are also relatively stable and garners easier control, thus there is no need for much differentiation. In addition, the stability makes the urgency to have no need for complex decision-making that involves individuals at the subordinate levels. Therefore, centralization occurs, hence giving rise to a mechanistic structure.
However, a dynamic and unpredictable business environment leads to the formation of an organic organizational structure. An unstable environment requires a rapid solution because of the changes ( Kalay & Lynn, 2016) . In such environments, communication and sharing of information should be rapid in nature. Therefore, the departments and other areas become highly integrated. Complex decision-making is imperative in such situations and thus it is essential to involve people even in the lower levels. This makes the power to make company-wide decisions to be shared across all ranks. The tasks in a turbulent environment are difficult to control because they are often changing. Therefore, there is no need for differentiation. When there is a rapid change in tasks and responsibilities, it is unreasonable to formulate standard procedures and formal processes. There is a great need for adjustment thus creating an organic organizational structure.
How the Current Environment is Changing.
The current business environment is changing, thanks to the development of information technology. The internet has revolutionized the way business is conducted, and nobody knows what tomorrow might bring ( Hickman & Silva, 2018) . Technology has increased its presence and became an integral part of organizations. There is improved efficiency, productivity, and relationships in the environment. There is opening up of existing and emergence of new markets. This has increased competition and also made companies enter the zones formerly considered forbidden. All these means that the businesses have to come up with ways of adapting to these changes after recognizing them. They have to extend their target markets and introduce new, superior production methods to change the ways they compete ( Hickman & Silva, 2018) . This means that the environment is pushing businesses to become organic.
Mechanistic structure responds poorly to dramatic changes. Its high bureaucracy prevents the free flow of information in time thus solutions, even if present, can be implemented late. Information has to wait for approvals from the authority and the extreme job specialization means that there is no freedom for employees to be creative. Resistance to change is high in such organizations. On the other hand, the free-flowing information in the organic structure makes it flexible to listen to suggestions on how to solve a problem. This kind encourages the communication of ideas and thoughts and can lead to creativity. Decentralization of power makes the lower levels of employees empowered and thus become part of decision making. Therefore, the organic structure responds and adapts to the changing environment.
As discussed above, the conclusion is that the organic structure is more applicable to the current environment. This is because of the great uncertainty of the future methods of completing tasks and conducting business. This structure encourages creativity and flexibility and thus brings morale to the workforce. In any organization, the determination of employees is determined by the way the power and control are exercised. The organic structure allows for information sharing thus decisions can be made more quickly.
References
Donaldson, L. (2015). Mechanistic/organic. Wiley Encyclopedia of Management , 1-1.
Hatch, M. J. (2018). Organization theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. Oxford university press.
Hickman, C. R., & Silva, M. A. (2018). Creating excellence: Managing corporate culture, strategy, and change in the new age. Routledge.
Kalay, F., & Lynn, G. S. (2016). THE IMPACT OF ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE ON MANAGEMENT INNOVATION: AN EMPIRICAL RESEARCH IN TURKEY. Journal of Business Economics and Finance , 5 (1), 125-137.
