Strategic Apex
The strategic apex refers to the management board, directors, and senior executives of an organization that ensure the company’s objectives/goals align with its mission and vision (Yu et al., 2018).
Operating Core
The operating core are agents who conduct the basic processing and support tasks that produce the desired outcomes or services (Zakaryaei & Noubar, 2016).
Middle-Line
Middle-line managers act as their respective unit’s figurehead, develop their network’s contact, monitor their unit’s activities, lead members, and convey information generated from their team up the command chain (Zeqiri & Alijah, 2016).
Technostructure
The technostructure consists of analysts who plan, control, and standardize other agents’ work in the organization. They are highly-trained specialists who can schedule production, middle-line managers’ roles, and design the organization’s systems.
Support Systems
The support staff indirectly supports the operating core’s function. Their activities’ outcomes contribute to the operating apex’s efficiency and effectiveness.
Significance to a Firm’s Organizational Design
They demonstrate the flow of systems in the organization
An organizational chart provides an accurate representation of labor division, job positions within an organization, these positions’ categorization into workgroups, and the authority flow between these units. Similarly, Mintzberg’s organogram depicts the order, functioning systems, and informational processes’ flow within an organization (Mintzberg, n.d.).
The organogram shows the vertical decisions and information’s flow from the strategic apex to the operational core through the middle line. For example, the strategic apex may develop strategic plans, while the technostructure transforms these programs into operating plans, budgets, and programs. The strategic plans then reach the operating core as task instructions generated by the middle line. The technostructure controls and regulates these system’s flow (Mintzberg, n.d.). The middle-line implements decisions, collects work process data from the operational units, and summarizes it as it goes through each hierarchy level. This information’s total compilation later reaches the strategic apex as an organization’s performance summary.
It Defines Workflow Systems
The above-mentioned organizational parts help elucidate the flow of processes, power, and formal authority in the organization. However, according to Mintzberg (n.d.), 60% of communications in organizations are informal: they happen through face-to-face communication. Often, operators bypass formal communication systems to convey information directly to pertinent parties. These informal contacts suggest that people in organizations work in small peer groups or cliques whose relationships are horizontal rather than vertical. Organizations have different cliques, communication networks at different levels in organization.
Similarly, work constellations can be formal or informal, with workgroups in each unit corresponding with other units in the organogram. For example, operating core’s workgroups will correspond with the technostructure’s workflows. The support staff would loosely interact with many formal work units. The technostructure and middle-line’s relationships would also be informal and cut across various organizational departments.
These work constellations can also overlap with one another. The technostructure may be responsible for scheduling, handling EHR technical problems, and standardizing communication practices in the hospitals, while operating core unit may handle day-to-day EHR administrative tasks. Therefore, Mintzberg’s organizational parts can be used to define team relationships and communication across various hospital units. It can also help managers identify the complex workflow interactions between hospital departments.
They Define Decision-Making Processes
Mintzberg’s organizational parts can show how decision-making flows from one organization unit to another. It also helps managers understand how these decision-making processes connect operators, middle-line, technocratic, and support staff’s roles. Strategic decisions are ad-hoc and generally flow top-down (from the strategic apex to the operating core). However, these decisions can emanate from anywhere in the organization.
For example, the psychiatrist team can change their treatment methods to serve their customers better. The middle-line makes operational decisions, which could only be implemented upon the strategic apex’s approval. Informational flows are two-way: upward as organizational performance and downward as task instructions. Most administrative tasks are routinized and standardized, simplifying the decision-making process for middle-line managers and technocrats.
Structural Dimension Elements and Organizational Design
The structural dimension includes specialization, standardization, formalization, centralization, and configuration (Zeqiri & Alijah, 2016). Specialization refers to the degree to which organizations’ activities are categorized into specialized roles. Standardization is the systematic documentation of the sequence of work elements and standard rules for each procedure (Zanganeh Baygi et al., 2015). Formalization refers to how managers prescribe in writing the behaviors of all individual units and individual employees (Zanganeh Baygi et al., 2015). It outlines the rules, responsibilities, and policies that guide day-to-day operations and interactions.
Centralization is the extent to which organizational leaders make decisions and control the functions and activities of the firm. Configuration defines are the building blocks of an organization or the natural clusters of an organization. It comprises two elements: span of control and chain of command. The chain of Command (CoCs) describes the vertical reporting and communication layers in an organization. The span of control refers to the number of employees that report to a given manager.
Relationship with Organizational Design
Each structural dimension relates to one element of an organizational structure: delegation, job design, span of control, chain of command, and departmentalization (Yu et al., 2018). For example, centralization relates with delegation, a crucial approach in an organization’s structure. It determines how power will be distributed in the organization. Organizations whose authority lines flow from the top to the bottom assume vertical organizational structures, e.g., simple and mechanical bureaucracy (Mintberg, n.d.).
Formalization
Several organizational aspects are guided by structural policies that guide employees’ behaviors. They are determined by the formalization aspect of the structural dimension. Formalization describes the procedures that shape employees’ jobs and the implicit and explicit rules that control their behaviors. Explicit rules are outlined in policy books, contracts, and procedure manuals, while implicit ones are embedded in the organizational culture.
A highly formalized organization has more rule-bound jobs and high violation intolerance than informal organizations. These rules influence an organization’s relationships/interactions, motivation, and job design. There are three methods through which organizational structures can be evaluated: configuration (organization’s size and shape), operational features (specialized tasks, rules, decision-making, etc.), and the authority and responsibilities in the company.
Configuration, Specialization, and Standardization
An organization’s configurations can be analyzed based on labor division and how task coordination is accomplished. Control span, command chain, and departmentalization can help managers coordinate task division. They help managers group tasks using meaningful approaches, create right-sized workgroups, and establish effective reporting systems (Zeqiri & Alijah, 2016). Departmentalization is a job design’s outcome: it is created when tasks are divided and allocated to teams.
Managers must coordinate tasks to ensure employees don’t lose focus. To do this, managers typically group department-related tasks based on function, process, product/service, geography. Departmentalization helps narrow a job’s focus, leading to job specialization (Zakaryaei & Noubar, 2016). Managers must always ensure they select employees who are specialized in assigned tasks.
Control span relates to the number of people who report to a manager: it defines workgroups or unit sizes (“Dimensions of organizational culture,” n.d.). A manager with a small control span can closely monitor and control employees, whereas one with a large span cannot attain this control level. Managers need to determine the optimal size of each department to ensure organizational resources and activities’ effective control. To do this, they determine each organization’s unit’s coordination requirements, which include job specialization degree, task similarities, the extent to which unit members need access to managers, and the type and amount of information each unit requires to achieve autonomy.
The chain of command (CoC) relates to the reporting relationships between the CEO, organizational managers/supervisors, and general employees. The CoC is inversely associated with control span (“Dimensions of organization structure,” n.d.) An organization with a small control span requires a flat organization structure or more managers in the hierarchy. Contrarily, those with a high control span need fewer managers and more centralization (“Dimensions of organization structure,” n.d.). When the control span is small, workers will be under close supervision from managers and vice versa. The CoC’s size also depends on the organization’s size: as the organization’s size increase, so does coordination requirements and complexities, emphasizing the need to have more people managing the organization.
Organizational Parts Relationships with Structural Configurations
The Simple Organization Structure
The strategic apex is the central focus of a simple structured organization because decision-making is centralized. The CEO makes all decisions (strategic, operating, and administrative decisions) and monitors them closely (“Dimensions of organizational structure,” n.d.). The middle-line is essentially irrelevant in simple organizations because the CEO does all the coordination. For example, the organization can have two or three levels, and all employees, regardless of department, report to the CEO.
The organization has less staff (minimal workgroups and small units), presumably because it is a start-up or owner-managed. Communications are also informal, formalities are minimal, little unit differentiation is typical, and labor divisions are loose.
Machine Bureaucracy
The technostructure is the main focus of a machine bureaucracy because its optimal functioning depends on operational work’s standardization to allow effective coordination (Mintzberg, n.d.). The operating core is characterized by repetitive tasks, requiring little training and skills, explaining why standardization is essential. Behaviors are formalized; thus, mutual adjustment while performing tasks is limited. Top managers do not need to supervise operating core agents directly because coordination is mainly done by standardization (Mintzberg, n.d.).
Departmentalization is functional-based, and the middle-line directly leads the operating core and manages conflicts. According to Mintzberg (n.d.), Machine bureaucracy’s key definitive feature is the shard unit differentiation in all forms: vertical/horizontal, hierarchical, functional, and product line. Labor division is strong; task boundaries are clearly defined. Power and decision-making authority runs from the strategic apex to the operating unit. The middle-line control is weak, and the operating core agents’ power is inexistent. The only organizational part with authority is the technostructure: their power is informal. Therefore, machine bureaucracy’s vertical decision-making is centralized, and the horizontal one is decentralized, but only to a small extent.
Professional Bureaucracy
The operating core is the central focus of professional bureaucracies. The agents working in a professional organization desire little influence and control from administrators, managers, and analysts to achieve work autonomy (Mintzberg, n.d.). Professional organizations are also bureaucratic but differ from machine organizations because they rely on skilled professionals. Experts are given more control, power, and autonomy over their tasks and responsibilities. Standardization coordinates activities between organization units because work is repetitive.
This organizational type is characterized by job specialization and decentralized decision-making. Similar to a machine organization, professional firms are also formalized because structured rules and procedures guide them (Mintzberg, n.d.). Departmentalization is either functional or product-based because different services are tailored to different clients. The CoC is highly decentralized (vertically and horizontally): the decision-making power is assigned to the professionals (Mintzberg, n.d.). Professionals derive their power and authority from the skills and expertise in the job. They can achieve coordination by standardizing their skills; hence, training is intense in these organizations.
Divisional
Middle-line managers are the divisional organization types’ central focus (Mintzberg, n.d.). They have autonomy; they draw power and authority from the strategic apex. Their work’s nature exerts pressure on the organization to split into divisions to achieve decision-making power and control. Organizations that favor this pull are divisional; they acquire coordination by standardizing their outputs or outcomes.
Departmentalization in divisional organizations is market-based, i.e., units are divided based on the markets they serve. Each division has its operating functions. The organization is mainly decentralized because most power lies on the divisional managers (Mintzberg, n.d.). There is a strong labor division between the organization’s headquarters and division. The relationships and communication between the firm’s headquarter and division are formal and limited to the transfer of performance standards. The firm’s headquarters is responsible for allocating resources to the divisions and monitoring their performance.
Adhocracy
The support staff is the central focus of an adhocracy organization. The support staff acquires influence when they are asked to collaborate in decision-making due to their expertise in the area. According to Martela (2019), adhocracies are capable of sophisticated innovation. Adhocracies seamlessly combine the skills in different disciplines to ensure the efficient functioning of all projects.
Work processes are innovative, and the organization is designed to enable the quick response to complex and turbulent environments (Martela, 2019). There is no hierarchy; authority is accorded to technical experts appointed to solve problems within their specialization areas. Decision-making is devolved to middle-level and general employees. The organization units and sub-units are fluid; the organizational structure is matrix; it combines functional and divisional structures (Martela, 2019). The tasks are unstructured, and authority and decision-making are unconventional, i.e., authoritative leadership and control are not tolerated in such organizations. Power in such organizations is decentralized because employees can freely make decisions and coordinate within their tasks and workgroups.
References
Dimensions of organization structure. (n.d.). Web.
Martela, F. (2019). What makes self-managing organizations novel? Comparing how Weberian bureaucracy, Mintzberg’s adhocracy, and self-organizing solve six fundamental problems of organizing. Journal of Organization Design, 8(1), 1-23. Web.
Mintzberg, H. (n.d.). The structuring of organizations. Web.
Yu, D., Xiao, H., & Bo, Q. (2018). The dimensions of organizational character and its impacts on organizational performance in Chinese Context. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1–13. Web.
Zakaryaei, S., & Noubar, H. B. K. (2016). The study of relationship between structural dimensions of organizational structure with producing amount of Tabriz enormous city areas. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies, 2(4), 2158–2177. Web.
Zanganeh Baygi, M., Seyedin, H., Salehi, M., & Jafari Sirizi, M. (2015). Structural and Contextual Dimensions of Iranian Primary Health Care System at Local Level. Iranian Red Crescent Medical Journal, 17(1). Web.
Zeqiri, J. & Alija, S. (2016). The organizational culture dimensions: The case of an independent private university in Macedonia. Studia Universitatis Babe-Bolyai Oeconomica, 61(3), 20–31. Web.