There are several management routes that an organization can take to succeed. Some may choose to focus on creating an effective mission while others may go with building a selling product and service. However, a company’s organizational structure is the ultimate aspect that determines the success of an organization. An organizational structure refers to how an organization arranges employees and performance of jobs to meet the goals. One of the issues that can be solved by organizational redesign entails dealing with the large size of employees. This article talks about a management approach that can help deal with issues of size and boost productivity in an organization with many employees.
Organizational redesign involves integrating some strategies into the organizational structure to support the working and operations of an organization. When considering corporate design, an organization has to focus on aligning the structure with the mission by considering the complex relationship between tasks, workflow, and authority ( Daft, Murphy & Willmott, 2010). Excellent organizational design is one that supports efficient communication between different departments and creates an environment where employees work effectively regarding the size. At the same time, the management has to adopt a design that supports the strategy that can either involve being innovative or maintaining high volume delivery. For example, an organization cannot use a rigid hierarchical structure when its approach is innovation.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Organizations are today struggling with dealing with challenges brought about by shifting economic pressures, market conditions, globalization as well as technological innovations. In response to these challenges, managers are required to change their designs and adopt ones that are flexible enough and which supports their strategies and goals. The strategic goal of the organizational model is to maintain strategic flexibility and enabling response to global competition and new markets ( Daft, Murphy & Willmott, 2010) . Flexibility can only be created through changing the organizational structure by moving away from vertical hierarchies and replace them with horizontal networks that link traditional functions with modern fabrics. The organizational redesign aims to allow employees flexibility to adhere to the strategic mission of an organization.
The management of a company can redesign the organizational structure to match strategic intentions and help in executing and meeting company goals. For example, an organization must take into account its size regarding some employees when implementing a structure and design. Large organizations such as Wal-Mart have complex decision-making needs and responsibilities that can better be applied when decentralized. The organization may also have economies of scale that can be gained when it maintains functionally specialist departments ( Daft, Murphy & Willmott, 2010) . In this regard, the management should consider a structure that accommodates all these needs. For example, a company whose sales department works as a separate unit from the production department after requires a good organizational design to communicate about the needs of customers. The performance of a company will always be compromised when it fails to align its structure to meet the requirements, such as when looking to acquire new customers or get to a new market.
A functional organizational structure is one that entails getting a balance between employees and the strategic goals. Such a structure dictates business processes, information sharing and how work is done to determine the performance of an organization ( Daft, Murphy & Willmott, 2010) . On the other hand, poor organizational design is associated with performance issues where different departments cannot coordinate to achieve a mission despite having great employees and leadership. Without proper planning, there is a high likelihood that an organizational structure will be flawed with processing gaps and barriers to good communication, affecting the performance of employees and overall production. Organizational structures that lack flexibility and which takes on a hierarchical structure often underuse the key people and their skills ( Daft, Murphy & Willmott, 2010) . They may cause ambiguity and confusion within roles as well as create a lack of coordination among functions. Most employees find it difficult to operate within dysfunctional structures
There are many organizational structures with different benefits when adopted within an organization. They include functional and divisional structures, the matrix as well as the flat structure. When an organization is dealing with the issue of considerable size, a matrix organizational design is the most appropriate to achieve productivity and performance. Matrix organizational structure is the new corporate form that has gained significant popularity in the U.S industry due to its ability to facilitate management response to the changing market and technical requirements ( Daft, Murphy & Willmott, 2010) . This design does not follow the traditional hierarchical model of organizational design, though it has a functional as well as divisional structure. Such an arrangement, when adopted for organizations with many employees, allows for flexibility as well as more balanced decision-making since there are two chains of command. It also creates opportunities for employees to communicate and share resources regularly compared to the other structures.
A matrix structure combines both functional and divisional lines of responsibility where they focus on divisional performances among employees while still sharing practical specialist skills and resources. ( Daft, Murphy & Willmott, 2010). A functional departmentalization entails using functions as the basis for structuring the organization which has an advantage with efficiency while divisional departmentalization involves using products to structure an organization. In a matrix structure, a marketing manager will be required to report to the functional market director as well as the division director. Under this structure, the product manager may find himself working across functional lines in coordinating production schedules, inventories, and cash flow without having to change their department. This flexibility is crucial to ensure proper utilization of resources without having to acquire new employees or specialists in a particular area.
There are several advantages of using a matrix structure for organizations facing issues of considerable size. Adopting a matrix structure during organizational design provides several benefits for the performance of the business by improving the interaction of a company with the business environment while aligning the company’s efforts with market needs. The structure facilitates efficient use of resources within an organization, whereby the best employees to handle some specific work forms a task-oriented team while maintaining their positions in their departments ( Daft, Murphy & Willmott, 2010) .
Adopting a matrix organization or adding it to a hierarchical structure such as functional can help a large size company to align its operations with complex markets. While most traditional factors are aligned around a single aspect of the market, a matrix design has additional integrating functions that allow al market aspects to interact within the organizational structure. In such a corporate model, employees aligned with the marketing function of an organization can have matrix links to other features such as product department and customer service ( Daft, Murphy & Willmott, 2010) .
A matrix organizational structure also allows an organization to be competitive in an industry. The arrangement will enable employees to take action based on their direct observation of the market. Another critical advantage of matric organizational structure is employee satisfaction, something that hierarchical organizations struggle to achieve due to controlling every employee action. A matrix structure allows autonomy among the functional workforce that is crucial for productivity. The only shortfall for this structure is the complexity in reporting which can cause confusion or frustration to employees and the authority. It can be challenging reporting to multiple bosses in this structure, which requires employees to know and master their roles and work priorities under this design. ( Daft, Murphy & Willmott, 2010).
In conclusion, organizational design is more like a vehicle for executing business strategy for an organization. The best organizational structure is the one that puts in mind the size regarding employees, the geographical dispersion to its facilities, revenue as well as the rage of businesses across markets ( Daft, Murphy & Willmott, 2010) . For organizations with large employees, adopting a traditional hierarchical organizational design can be inefficient as it can create barriers between different functions, limiting communications between departments that is needed to succeed. Such a structure can also be ineffective in organizations with a variety of products and target markets. In this regard, Managers are allowed to break down structural boundaries that make organizations rigid and implement new organizational structures that can allow a competitive advantage ( Daft, Murphy & Willmott, 2010) . The most important thing is to apply a design that aligns with an organization’s business strategy as well as the market environment in which a particular business operates. A better structure is one that has the right controls, flexibility, resources, and incentives.
References
Daft, R. L., Murphy, J., & Willmott, H. (2010). Organization theory and design . Cengage learning EMEA.
