Centralised organisation Essay

Outline the main ways in which a double centralised administration might achieve a to a greater extent conciliatory organised coordinate. Using examples, discuss the advantages and disadvantages of pursuing greater placemental tractability The constructions that organisations dramatise ar usu totallyy aligned to one of five generic organisational structures. These ar the simple structure, the functional structure, the divisional structure, the holding conjunction structure and the hyaloplasm structure. (Capon, C. (2009) the business environment.Chapter 4 Inside organisations. This essay will explain the mixed ways of how a large centralised organisation achieves a more flexible structure through de-centralisation. This essay will analyse the benefits and drawbacks of the ground substance structure and the functional structure. A flexible structure allows staff to operate part in decision fashioning hence making them feeling more valued and motivated, this favours the organisation because capability and communication is improved. Centralised structures be often referred to as bureaucracies and kick in a long chain of overleap and a narrow span of control.They are pontifical structures designed so that directors, owners and management can achieve maximum control. Decision making is disjointed deep down the top part of the hierarchy with a very supreme style of management (none/very little shared decision making with employees further down the hierarchy). Centralised structures allow benchmarks and certain procedures to monitor tonus closely. A clear path can be seen by employees in terms of promotion which often aids in penury, in exhaust improving the productionivity of staff.However there are some downsides to a centralised or bureaucratic structure, such as the fact that its time-consuming for decisions to be made because the decision has to come from the top of the organisation (CEOs/Directors) all the way to the bottom through m any levels forward the employees actually get told what they need to do because of this it is difficult for companies with a tall structure to quickly react to changes in the market that they operate in.In tall organisations there is a tendency for red tape or excessive regulation which also slows down many processes within a business. other problem with tall organisations is that there is a divide mingled with the top managers and regular employees, which means that the workers lower down in the hierarchy feel excluded and less(prenominal) valued. This In turn leads to workers becoming less motivated. Because of all these difficulties big organisations are constantly attempting to increase tractableness by ever-changing their structure.Decentralisation provides higher subordinate satisfaction and a quicker reply to problems and may give workers a sensation of ownership and greater levels of motivation in their work (Ray French, Charlotte Rayner, Gary Rees and Sally Rumbles ( 2008) Organizational behaviour ). De-centralised structures are suitable because they allow flexibility within a business, it is essentially a antiauthoritarian management style of running an organisation, and this means that there is more feedback and stimulation from staff regarding decision making.With a shorter chain of command, due to the flat hierarchical structure, and increased motivation of staff production can increase. The functional structure is relatively restrictive of flexibility, it is fairly inflexible and centralised. The managers of the departments are given the righteousness to manage day-to-day problems and find out part in decision making only in the short term. Decision making and power in the long term rests very much within the board of directors, thus slowing down communication within the organisation.The functional structure is mainly used by small businesses large organisations tend to move outdoor(a) from this structure in the search for more flexi bility. The reason for this is because of product or service diversification and larger target markets. The functional structure tends to have poor career prospects, high pressure on senior managers , calibre monitoring is very difficult and there are skills shortages in the sense that job roles are set so skills cannot be shared within the departments. The matrix structure integrates two structures together, often geographical and multi product structures.For example, a company may have a department for a product A in Europe and for Product A in Asia. unrivaled of the advantages of the Matrix structure is the convenience of experts simplifying the sharing of knowledge between the goods. Another advantage of the matrix structure is intra-team communication, this allows ease of communication between the diametric functional product groups within the alike(p) organisation, and similarly there is less pressure on managers, quality monitoring is easier and skills are interchanged wit hin departments of the same function thus improving efficiency.In the early 90s the majority of IBM and the business press were convinced decentralisation would aid the company in terms of flexibility, speed and entrepreneurial motivation. They believed splitting up IBM into smaller companies would speed up processes and promote and enhance efficiency, which can be true of decentralisation. Lou Gerstner was appointed CEO of IBM in 1993. He was convinced IBM should lie centralised and to use its unique size and capabilities to help customers integrate the assorted components of their information technology (IT) systems.In the end IBM was loosened up exactly not completely decentralised. This worked tremendously well with IBMs stock harm rising by almost a factor of ten. (Thomas W. Malone Harvard Business train Archives (29/3/2004) Making the decision to decentralise. )From this we can conclude that de-centralisation improves organisational flexibility by speeding up the process of decision making, improving efficiency and communication and increasing job satisfaction for employees.Pursuing greater organisational flexibility could be complex in the sense that the organisation may effect less efficient due to the change in structure and managerial span of control. Nonetheless changing from a tall centralised structure to a flat decentralised structure favours the organisation because there are fewer levels of hierarchy and a shorter chain of command which enables better communication. Decentralisation, in theory, provides greater potential for motivating employees and, because decisions are taken nearer the tramp of work, the organisation can react faster and smarter.Ian Brookes (2009) Organisational behaviour individuals, groups and organisation fourth edition). However not all flat structures are decentralised take for example the functional structure, despite being flat it is a rigid and centralised structure. The Matrix structure would enable a larg e organisation to achieve greater organisational flexibility because one of its main strengths is allowing ease of communication.