Transition from Mechanistic to Organic Organizational Structures

Organization can be defined as two or more people working together, to achieve a group result. Once the objectives of the organization have been established, the functions that are to be performed are determined. Then the personal requirements are assessed and the physical resources needed to accomplish the objectives are determined. These elements are then coordinated into a structural design in order to help achieve the established objectives (Montana and Charnov, 1993).

Montana and Charnov further explains that, the formal relationships for organizing are, responsibility, authority and accountability. They bring together functions, people and other resources in order to achieve the established objectives of the organization. The framework for organizing such formal relationships is known as the Organizational Structure.

According to Burns and Stalker, two basic forms of organizational structures are identified.

• Mechanistic Organizational Structure
• Organic Organizational Structure

In order to critically analyze reasons behind the transition from Mechanistic Organizational Structures to Organic Organizational Structures in the present scenario, it is wise to first understand the characteristics and differences between these two.

Mechanistic Structure 

Burns and Stalker describes a Mechanistic structure as a bureaucratic structure. Few characteristics identified by them regarding mechanistic structures were, as follows:

• Stable environment 
• Low differentiation of tasks
• Low integration of departments and functional areas 
• Centralized decision making
• Standardization and formalization

Organizations with mechanistic structures are suitable when the environment surrounding it, is more stable. Since each sub task would be stable and relatively easy to control, tasks are not differentiated much. Due to this reason tasks are standardized and formalized, so that operations can run smoothly without breakdowns. There isn't a need for complex decision making when the environment surrounding the organization is stable. Therefore, decision-making is centralized at the top of the organization (Burns and Stalker, 1961).

Organic Structure 

Burns and Stalker further explained that Organic structures are used by organizations that faces dynamic environments and that requires to quickly adopt to the changes. Key characteristics of organic structures were identified as follows :

• Dynamic and uncertain environment
• High differentiation of tasks
• High integration of departments and functional areas
• Decentralized decision making
• Little standardization and formation

 Since the dynamic change of the organizational environment, tasks in such organizations may change time to time. Therefore, tasks may need to be differentiated and specialists who are each responsible to one or few tasks would respond quickly.

It is known that the environmental analysis of an organization can be done using a PESTLE analysis (FME, 2013). By closely analyzing the characteristics of the above structures, it can be understood that transition from one structure to another may depend on the environment that surrounds the organization. Management of organizations operating in stable environments (Universities , Military etc.) may benefit from mechanistic structures, where as management of organizations that operate in dynamic or uncertain environments (IT companies, commercial airlines etc.) may benefit from organic organizational structures.


Author - Randoll James


References:

Montana, P. and Charnov, B.(1993) Management: A Streamlined Course for Students and Business People. Hauppauge, New York: Barrons, 155-169.

Banks, T. and Stalker, GM.(1961) The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock Publications.

Team, FME. (2013) PESTLE Analysis: Strategy skills. www.free-managementebooks.com