What is meant by alternative organizational structures?
The concept of “alternate organizational structures” as it is called in the communication world is referring to the idea of reorganizing the basic functions of a specific organization, and then organizing the work and employees’ relationships around the basic functions. As George Cheney says in his book Organizational Communication in an Age of Globalization, “As we depart from the bureaucratic form, the organizational structure get more fluid, more flexible. The hierarchy becomes flatter, and people are released from the moorings of the traditional division and department structure (p.35)”. This is significant because the boundaries in the organizational as a whole and as an individual become much less apparent and a result people’s work patterns and behaviors become much less predictable because they are exposed to different people on a day to day basis. Another concept of Cheney’s is that “The point in moving toward a project-based structure is to allow the organization to orient itself toward its most fundamental concerns at a given time and to bring all the necessary expertise and resources (p.37)”.
A few examples of these alternate structures are from Gareth Morgan, an organizational theorist. These alternate structures are designed to meet the needs of an organization at any given time while being able to use all of its resources. The first of these organizations is your typical rigid bureaucracy, which consists of standard operating procedures, emphasis on rules and established procedures, and fixed positions and boundaries throughout the organization. In this context work is usually done in a very formal manner with relationships and messages that reflect this concept. (See Fig.1)
(Fig.1)
The next alternate organizational structure that Morgan came up with is the matrix organization. This type of organization is really a detachment form the regular patterns of communication between departments and requires a lot of on the spot organizing and innovation. In this context there is a variation of informal and formal relations and messages due to the more fluid boundaries of this organization.
The third type of structure suggested by Morgan is the project organization. In this structure departmental boundaries are largely eliminated and members of this team will most likely come from widely different parts of the organization. This structure allows the organization as a whole to function as a team or a group of teams accomplishing goals and tasks to get the overall project completed. In this situation there is a high demand on coordination and again as a result there is little predictability in relationships, work activities, and messages. (See Fig.2)
(Fig.2)
The last type of structure that is presented by Morgan is the loosely coupled organic network. This particular structure has no definite structure and is formed when a set of groups or organizations with common interests try and form a larger working group that consists of all the smaller organizations to achieve a goal.
In conclusion all of these alternate structures are designed to meet the needs of an organization depending on what its goals are and what resources it has to achieve its goals. These structures allow for a basis of organization in a world where businesses and their environments are changing all the time and to meet the demands of these changes efficiently and effectively, changes within the organization will have to take place and adaptations will have to be encouraged. As Stephen P. Borgatti says, “Organizations actively adapt to their environments. For example, organizations facing complex, highly uncertain environments typically differentiate so that each organizational unit is facing a smaller, more certain problem”. In analyzing all of these alternate structures one can see the need for different relationships and different communication in an organization so it can function properly on a day to day basis.
References