Organizational structure of management as an object of research. Coursework: Analysis of the organizational structure of the enterprise and justification of the proposal for its optimization

Introduction …………………………………………………..........… …........ 3
Chapter I. ... 6
1.1. The concept of organizational structure and its essence ………........... 6
1.2. Types of organizational structures ............................................................... ........ 8
Chapter II. Organizational structure analysis
LLC Firm "Liga" .............................. .............................. .............................. .21
2.1. Brief description of LLC Firm "Liga" ................................... ....21
2.2. Analysis of the organizational structure of OOO Firma "Liga" ..........23
2.3. Possible actions for improvement
organizational structure of OOO Firma "Liga" ............................................... .29
Conclusion .............................. .............................. .............................. ......33
Bibliography .............................. .............................. ......................36

Introduction.

Organizational structure is one of key concepts management, closely related to the goals, functions, management process, the work of managers and the distribution of powers between them. Within the framework of this structure, the entire management process takes place (the movement of information flows and the adoption of managerial decisions), in which managers of all levels, categories and professional specializations participate. The organizational structure of an enterprise is understood as the composition, subordination, interaction and distribution of work among departments and management bodies, between which certain relations are established regarding the implementation of power, command flows and information. The structure can be compared to the frame of the management system building, built to ensure that all processes occurring in it are carried out in a timely manner and with high quality. Organizational structures are subject to many requirements, such as optimality, efficiency, reliability, cost-effectiveness, flexibility. , sustainability, but the main one is that the organizational structure must always correspond to the strategy of the enterprise.
Strategy implementation is an important part of the overall development mechanism. Through this, the organization can achieve its intended purpose and ultimately its mission. The skillful execution of the strategy depends to a large extent on competent personnel, on their sufficient skill and competitive capabilities, as well as on the effective internal organization of the enterprise. Thus, the creation of a viable structure is always the highest priority in the implementation of the strategy. The task of managers in this case is to choose the structure that best suits the goals and objectives of the organization, as well as the internal and external factors affecting it. The “best” structure is the one that best enables an organization to interact effectively with its external environment, distribute and direct the efforts of its employees in a productive and efficient manner, and thus meet customer needs and achieve its goals with high efficiency.
An equally important task of building the structure of an organization is to provide functional and production units with personnel with the skills, technical knowledge, and abilities necessary to provide the company with a competitive advantage over rivals in the implementation of one or more types of activities that play important role in the value chain. To do this, you need to have a certain talent and be able to correctly determine what level of training, experience, knowledge the staff should have, what their values, beliefs, personal characteristics should be, so that all this contributes to the successful implementation of the strategy.
Relevance This issue determines that the improvement of the organizational structure of the enterprise is the most important task of modern management, the most important part of organizational development, the process of change, the improvement of the enterprise management system, which also contributes to the speedy achievement of the goals and objectives.
object work is the company OOO Firm "Liga".
Subject study in this case will be the organizational structure of the enterprise LLC Firm "Liga".
aim This work is a study of the organizational structure of the enterprise and a proposal for ways to improve it. In accordance with the goal, the following can be distinguished tasks:
1. Study typical organizational structures.
2. Give a brief description of the company OOO Firm "Liga".
3. To study and analyze the organizational structure of the enterprise I am researching (OOO Firm "Liga").
4. Propose measures to improve the organizational structure of LLC Firm "Liga".
The work contains two chapters.
In the first chapter, the concept of organizational structures is given and their main types and types, advantages and disadvantages are considered. Conclusions are also drawn about the feasibility of their use.
The second chapter gives a general description of LLC Firm "Liga", describes the results of my analysis of the organizational structure of the enterprise and suggests possible measures to improve the organizational structure of this enterprise.

I. Essence and main types of organizational structures.

1.1. The concept of organizational structure and its essence.

Organizational structure of the enterprise- this is its internal structure, characterizing the composition of units and the communication system, subordination and interaction between them. Organizational structures differ from each other in complexity, formalization and the ratio of centralization and decentralization.
1. The complexity of the organizational structure is determined by the number of departments, groups, qualified specialists and hierarchy levels. These parameters in organizations can vary significantly depending on the accepted division of work and the nature of the links between them.The number and composition of departments, groups, highly qualified specialists and levels of hierarchy can change with significant changes both in the structure of the organization itself and in its relations with the external environment.
2. Formalization characterizes the extent of the use of rules and regulatory mechanisms to control people's behavior, i.e. the level of standardization of work within the organization. Standards limit the choice of performers by telling them what, when and how to do it. Work must be performed in accordance with the requirements, instructions, rules, description of procedures and operations for all processes occurring in the organization. Their significance decreases with a decrease in the level of formalization, and performers are given greater freedom of choice and opportunities to make their own decisions.
3. Centralization reflects the degree of concentration of decision making at the highest level of the organization. It shows the formal distribution of rights, duties and responsibilities along the vertical of management, and its level characterizes the extent to which members of the organization are involved in making management decisions. Management is centralized , if all key decisions are made by top management, and the participation of other levels is negligible. A high level of decentralization ensures faster response to events and responses. More managers are involved in their implementation, which increases confidence in solving problems. The criteria by which the real level of decentralization in the management of an organization can be determined are related to the assessment of the system of relations between performers and managers, between managers of different levels, between managers and clients, etc.
The organizational structure in the classical sense defines the following three characteristics of the organization:

the totality of all divisions, services and individual employees of the company;
vertical and horizontal connections between them;
hierarchical levels occupied by them (i.e. subordination of elements of the organization).

1.2. Types of organizational structures.

There are two approaches to the origin of types of organizational structures. The first is the formation of a management structure based on internal structure organizations, division of work and rationalization of management - hierarchical type . The second proceeds from the need for constant adaptation of the management structure to the conditions of the external environment, called organic. In the first approach, the main attention was paid to the division of labor into separate functions and the correspondence of the responsibility of management employees to the powers granted. For many decades, organizations have created formal governance structures that have come to be known as hierarchical (bureaucratic) structures.
Concept of hierarchical structure was formulated by the German sociologist Max Weber. It contained the following fundamental provisions:
1. A clear division of labor, the consequence of which is the need to use qualified specialists for each position;
2. Hierarchy of management, in which the lower level is subordinate and controlled by the higher;
3. The presence of formal rules and norms that ensure the uniformity of the performance of their tasks and duties by managers;
4. The spirit of formal impersonality with which officials carry out their duties;
5. Implementation of hiring in accordance with the qualification requirements for this position.
Organic structure type management rejects the need for a detailed division of labor by type of work and forms such relations between the participants in the management process that are dictated not by the structure, but by the nature of the problem being solved.
The main property of such structures, known in management practice as flexible and adaptive, is their inherent ability to relatively easily change their shape, adapt to new conditions, organically fit into the management system. These structures focus on accelerated implementation complex programs and projects within the framework of large enterprises and associations, entire industries and regions. As a rule, they are formed on a temporary basis, i.e. for the period of implementation of the project, program, problem solving or achievement of goals. The organic type, in contrast to the hierarchical one, is a decentralized management organization, which is characterized by:
- rejection of formalization and bureaucratization of processes and relations
- reduction in the number of hierarchical levels
- high level of horizontal integration between staff
- Orientation of the culture of relationships towards cooperation
- mutual awareness
- self-discipline

Hierarchical type represented by the following structures:
I. Linear.
The basis of linear structures is the so-called "mine" principle of construction and specialization of the management process according to the functional subsystems of the organization (marketing, production, finance, personnel, R&D, innovation, etc.). For each subsystem, a hierarchy of services ("mine") is formed, penetrating the entire organization from top to bottom. The results of the work of each service are evaluated by indicators characterizing the fulfillment by them of their goals and objectives. Accordingly, a system of motivation and encouragement of employees is being built. At the same time, the end result (the efficiency and quality of the work of the organization as a whole) becomes, as it were, secondary, since it is believed that all services work to some extent to obtain it.

Rice. 1. Linear organizational structure

Advantages of a linear structure:
1. A clear system of mutual relations of functions and divisions;
2. A clear system of unity of command - one leader concentrates in his hands the management of all processes that have a common goal;
3. Clearly expressed responsibility;
4. Quick reaction of the executive departments to direct instructions from the higher.
Disadvantages of a linear structure:
1. Lack of links dealing with strategic planning; in the work of managers at almost all levels, operational problems ("churn") dominates over strategic ones;
2. A tendency to red tape and shifting responsibility when solving problems that require the participation of several departments;
3. Low flexibility and adaptability to changing situations;
4. The criteria for the efficiency and quality of work of departments and the organization as a whole are different;
5. The tendency to formalize the evaluation of the effectiveness and quality of the work of units usually leads to the emergence of an atmosphere of fear and disunity;
6. A large number of "management floors" between workers producing products and the decision maker;
7. Overload of top-level managers;
8. Increased dependence of the results of the organization's work on the qualifications, personal and business qualities of top managers.
IN modern conditions the disadvantages of the structure outweigh its advantages. Such a structure is poorly compatible with the modern philosophy of quality.

II. Linear - functional.
This type of organizational structure is the development of a linear one and is designed to eliminate its most important drawback associated with the lack of strategic planning links. The linear-functional structure includes specialized units (headquarters) that do not have the right to make decisions and manage any subordinate units, but only help the relevant manager in performing certain functions, primarily the functions of strategic planning and analysis. Headquarters at several levels of the hierarchy should provide advice and participate in the preparation of decisions, but they do not have the right to make decisions and lead subordinate units or performers.

Rice. 2. Linear - functional organizational structure

Advantages of a linear - functional structure:
1. Deeper than in a linear study of strategic issues;
2. Some unloading of top managers;
3. Ability to attract external consultants and experts;
4. In empowering headquarters units with functional leadership, such a structure is a good first step towards more effective organic management structures.
Disadvantages of a linear - functional structure:
1. Insufficiently clear distribution of responsibility, since the persons preparing the decision do not participate in its implementation;
2. Tendencies towards excessive centralization of management;
3. Difficulty responding to change.
4. Makes horizontal alignment difficult
Linear - functional structure can be a good intermediate step in the transition from a linear structure to a more efficient one. The structure allows, although to a limited extent, to embody the ideas of the modern philosophy of quality.

III. Functional.
This structure is based on the creation of units to perform certain functions at all levels of management. These functions include research, production, sales, marketing, etc. Here, with the help of directive guidance, hierarchically lower levels of management can be connected to various higher levels of management. The transfer of instructions, instructions and messages is carried out depending on the type of task. For example, a worker in a workshop receives instructions not from one person (foreman), but from several staff units, i.e. The principle of multiple subordination applies. The functional structure of production management is aimed at performing constantly recurring routine tasks that do not require prompt decision-making. Functional services usually include highly qualified specialists who perform specific activities depending on the tasks assigned to them.

Rice. 3. Functional organizational structure.
Advantages of a functional structure:
1. Reduction of coordination links
2. Reducing duplication of work
3. Strengthening vertical links and strengthening control over the activities of lower levels
4. High competence of specialists responsible for the performance of specific functions
Disadvantages of a functional structure:
1. Ambiguous distribution of responsibility
2. Difficult communication
3. Long decision-making procedure
4. The emergence of conflicts due to disagreement with the directives, since each functional leader puts his issues in the first place.

IV. Divisional.
This structure appeared at the end of the 1920s, when there was a need for new approaches to the organization of management, associated with a sharp increase in the size of enterprises, the diversification of their activities, and the complication of technological processes in a dynamically changing environment. In this regard, divisional management structures began to emerge, primarily in large corporations, which began to provide some independence to their production units, leaving the development strategy, research and development, financial and investment policy, etc. to the management of the corporation. In this type of structures an attempt was made to combine centralized coordination and control of activities with decentralized management. The key figures in the management of organizations with a divisional structure are no longer the heads of functional departments, but managers who head production departments (divisions). Structuring by divisions, as a rule, is carried out according to one of the criteria: by manufactured products (products or services) - product specialization; by focusing on certain groups of consumers - consumer specialization; on served territories - regional specialization.

Rice. 4. Divisional organizational structure

Advantages of a divisional structure:
1. It provides management of diversified enterprises with a total number of employees of the order of hundreds of thousands and territorially remote divisions;
2. Provides greater flexibility and faster response to changes in the enterprise environment compared to linear and linear - staff;
3. With the expansion of the boundaries of independence of the departments, they become "profit centers", actively working to improve the efficiency and quality of production;
4. Closer connection between production and consumers.
Disadvantages of the divisional structure:
1. A large number of "floors" of the management vertical; between the workers and the production manager of the unit - 3 or more levels of management, between the workers and the company's management - 5 or more;
2. The disunity of the headquarters structures of the departments from the headquarters of the company;
3. The main connections are vertical, therefore, there are shortcomings common to hierarchical structures - red tape, overload of managers, poor interaction in resolving issues related to departments, etc.;
4. Duplication of functions on different "floors" and as a result - very high costs for the maintenance of the management structure;
5. In departments, as a rule, a linear or linear-headquarters structure with all their shortcomings is preserved.
The advantages of divisional structures outweigh their disadvantages only during periods of fairly stable existence; in an unstable environment, they risk repeating the fate of dinosaurs. With this structure, it is possible to embody most of the ideas of the modern philosophy of quality.

organic type includes the following structures:
I. Matrix.
Such a structure is a network structure built on the principle of dual subordination of executors: on the one hand, to the direct head of the functional service, which provides personnel and technical assistance to the project manager, on the other hand, to the project or target program manager, who is endowed with the necessary authority to carry out the management process. With such an organization, the project manager interacts with 2 groups of subordinates: with permanent members of the project team and with other employees of functional departments who report to him temporarily and on a limited range of issues. At the same time, their subordination to the direct heads of subdivisions, departments, and services is maintained. For activities that have a clearly defined beginning and end, projects are formed, for ongoing activities - targeted programs. In an organization, both projects and targeted programs can coexist.

Rice. 5. Matrix organizational structure

Advantages of the matrix structure:
1. Better orientation to project (or program) goals and demand;
2. More efficient day-to-day management, the ability to reduce costs and improve the efficiency of resource use;
3. More flexible and efficient use of the organization's personnel, special knowledge and competence of employees;
4. The relative autonomy of project teams or program committees encourages workers to develop decision-making skills,
managerial culture, professional skills;
5. Improvement of control over individual tasks of the project or target program;
6. Any work is organizationally formalized, one person is appointed - the "owner" of the process, serving as the center of concentration of all issues related to the project or target program;
7. The response time to the needs of the project or program is reduced, since horizontal communications and a single decision-making center have been created.
Disadvantages of matrix structures:
1. Difficulty in establishing clear responsibility for work on the instructions of the unit and on the instructions of the project or program (a consequence of double subordination);
2. The need for constant monitoring of the ratio of resources allocated to departments and programs or projects;
3. High requirements for qualifications, personal and business qualities of employees working in groups, the need for their training;
4. Frequent conflict situations between heads of departments and projects or programs;
5. The possibility of violating the rules and standards adopted in the functional units, due to the isolation of employees participating in the project or program from their units.
The introduction of a matrix structure gives a good effect in organizations with a sufficiently high level of corporate culture and qualifications of employees, otherwise management can be disorganized.

II. Brigade (cross-functional).
The basis of this management structure is the organization of work in working groups (teams). The form of the brigade organization of work is a rather ancient organizational form, it is enough to recall the worker artels, but only from the 80s did its active use begin as an organization management structure, in many respects directly opposite to the hierarchical type of structures. The main principles of such a management organization are:
- autonomous work of working groups (teams);
- independent decision-making by working groups and horizontal coordination of activities;
- replacement of rigid managerial ties of a bureaucratic type with flexible ties;
- involvement of employees of different departments for the development and solution of problems.
These principles destroy the rigid distribution of employees by production, engineering, economic and managerial services inherent in hierarchical structures, which form isolated systems with their own goals and interests. In an organization built on these principles, functional units may or may not be preserved. In the first case, employees are under double subordination - administrative (to the head of the functional unit in which they work) and functional (to the head of the working group or team in which they are a member). This form of organization is called cross-functional. In the second case, there are no functional units as such; we will call it the brigade proper.

Rice. 6. Team (cross-functional) organizational structure.

Benefits of a brigade (cross-functional) structure:
1. Reducing the administrative apparatus, increasing management efficiency;
etc.................

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………...3

1.1. The meaning and objectives of organizational design…………………….7

1.2. Basic metalological principles……………………………………….9

1.3. The process of forming an organizational structure…………………….11

1.4. Evaluation of the effectiveness of organizational decisions………………………… 17

1.5. Adjustment of organizational structures………………………………..21

2.1. The concept and principles of building an organizational structure………...27

2.2. Types of organizational structures…………………………………………..32

2.3. Types of bureaucratic structures for managing an organization…………….35

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………….58

List of used literature……………………………………….….60

Appendix №1…………………………………………………………………..62

Annex №2…………………………………………………………………..63

Annex №3…………………………………………………………………..64

Annex №4…………………………………………………………………..65

Appendix №5………………………………………………………………..…66

Appendix №6………………………………………………………………..…67

Annex No. 7…………………………………………………………………..68

Annex No. 8…………………………………………………………………..69

Appendix No. 9…………………………………………………………………..70

Annex No. 10……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Glossary………………………………………………………………………...72

Management is a special intellectual activity, which employs a huge number of people armed with modern computing and organizational technology. The organization of management acts as one of the factors in the transformation of the economy, through it the action of the objective laws of the functioning of the market is realized; it is the organizational beginning of the whole system of factors of a radical reform of economic management.

The key problem in the organization of management is the structure of the management system (organizational structure). Knowing the structure, it is possible to purposefully influence the composition and content of individual elements of the management system, bringing it into line with changing production conditions, and this is justified. the urgency of the problem.

Scientifically substantiated formation of organizational structures of management is an urgent task of the modern stage of adaptation of economic entities to market economy. Under the new conditions, it is necessary to widely use the principles and methods of designing a management organization based on a systematic approach.

An important function of management is the function of the organization, which consists in establishing permanent and temporary relationships between all departments of the company, determining the procedure and conditions for the functioning of the company. The function of the organization is realized in two ways: through administrative and organizational management and through operational management. Administrative and organizational management involves determining the structure of the company, establishing relationships and distributing functions between all departments, granting rights and establishing responsibilities between employees of the management apparatus. Operational management ensures the functioning of the company in accordance with the approved plan. It consists in periodic or continuous comparison of the actual results obtained with the results planned by the plan, and their subsequent adjustment. Operational management is closely related to current planning. The organizational structure of the firm is understood as its organization from separate divisions with their relationships, which are determined by the goals set for the firm and its divisions and the distribution of functions between them. The organizational structure provides for the distribution of functions and decision-making powers between the executives of the company responsible for the activities of the structural units that make up the organization of the company. The problem of improving the organizational structure of management involves clarifying the functions of departments, determining the rights and obligations of the manager and employee, eliminating multi-stage, duplication of functions and information flows. The main task here is to improve management efficiency. The organizational structure is aimed primarily at establishing clear relationships between individual divisions of the company, the distribution of rights and responsibilities between them. It implements various requirements for improving management systems, expressed in certain principles. Organizational management structures of industrial firms are very diverse and are determined by many objective factors and conditions. These may include, in particular, the size of the company's production activities (medium, small, large); the production profile of the company (specialization in the production of one type of product or a wide range of products from various industries); the nature of the monopolistic association (concern, financial group).

The structure of an organization is a way of building a relationship between levels of management and functional areas, ensuring optimal achievement of the goals of the organization under given conditions, "organizational management structure" is one of the key concepts of management, closely related to the goals, functions, management process, the work of managers and the distribution between them powers.

Within the framework of this structure, the entire management process takes place (the movement of information flows and the adoption of managerial decisions), in which managers of all levels, categories and professional specializations participate.

The structure can be compared to the frame of the management system building, built to ensure that all processes occurring in it are carried out in a timely manner and with high quality.

Hence, the attention that leaders of organizations pay to the principles and methods of building organizational structures, the choice of their types and types, the study of trends in change and assessments of compliance with the tasks of organizations - this shows the relevance and importance of this topic in modern conditions.

The management structure is understood as an ordered set of stably interconnected elements that ensure the functioning and development of the organization as a whole.

The organizational structure of management is also defined as a form of division and cooperation of management activities, within which the management process is carried out according to the relevant functions aimed at solving the set tasks and achieving the intended goals.

From these positions, the organizational structure is presented as a system of optimal distribution of functional duties, rights and responsibilities, the order and forms of interaction between its constituent management bodies and the people working in them.

The purpose of this work is to analyze the organizational structure of enterprise management.

Subject of study: analysis of the organizational structure of enterprise management.

Based on the purpose of the course work, the following tasks were set:

1. Consider the organizational structure - as a guarantee of the successful operation of the enterprise.

2. Consider ways to improve the organizational structure of the enterprise.

In this paper, the current topic is considered - "Analysis of the organizational structure of enterprise management."

Course work consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion, a list of references, ten applications, a glossary.

Chapter I. Analysis and formation of organizational structures

1.1. The meaning and objectives of organizational design

Without the development of methods for designing management structures It is difficult to further improve management and increase production efficiency, since:.

Firstly; in the new conditions, in a number of cases, it is impossible to operate with old organizational forms that do not meet the requirements of market relations and create a danger of deformation of the management tasks themselves;

Secondly, in the sphere of economic management of technical systems. An integrated approach to improving the organizational mechanism was previously largely replaced by work on the introduction and use of automated control systems.

Thirdly, the creation of a structure should be based not only on experience, analogy, habitual schemes and intuition, but also on the scientific methods of organizational design;

Fourthly, the design of the most complex mechanism - the control mechanism - should be entrusted to specialists who own the methodology of the formation of organizational systems.

When developing principles and methods, the design of the structure as a frozen set of bodies corresponding to each specialized management function. It, first of all, includes a system of goals and their distribution between various links. This includes the composition of units that are in certain connections and relationships with each other; distribution of responsibility. Important elements of the management structure are communications, information flows and document flow in the organization.

An organizational structure is a behavioral system, these are people and their groups constantly entering into various relationships to solve common problems.

Such versatility of the organizational mechanism is incompatible with the use of any unambiguous methods - either formal or informal. Therefore, a combination is needed scientific methods and principles of formation of structures (system approach) with a large expert-analytical work, the study of domestic and foreign experience. The entire methodology for designing structures should be based first on the goals, and then on the mechanism for achieving them.

The systematic nature of the very approach to the formation of the structure is manifested in the following:

1. Do not lose sight of any of the management tasks, without which the implementation of the goals will not be complete;

2. Identify and link in relation to these tasks the entire system of functions, rights and responsibilities along the management vertical - from CEO enterprises to the site foreman;

3. Research and organizationally formalize all connections and relationships along the horizontal management;

4. Provide an organic combination of vertical and horizontal management.

Impact Study external environment on the design of the organization

I. Stage - identification and description of elements of the external environment (input, output, technology, knowledge)

II. Stage - identification of the main relationships between the elements of the external environment, including elements of direct impact.

III. Stage - determining the degree of diversity of elements of the external environment (changes, certainty, feedback)

IV. Stage - designing each element of the organizational structure, taking into account the external environment in which this element will function.

V. Stage - the formation of a management mechanism, taking into account the specifics of the elements of the organizational structure and its external environment.

1.2 Basic metalological principles

Until recently, the methods of building management were characterized by an excessively normative nature, insufficient diversity, which led to a mechanical transfer of organizational forms used in the past to new conditions. Often, the administrative apparatus at various levels repeated the same schemes. From a scientific point of view, the initial factors in the formation of structures themselves were interpreted too narrowly: the number of personnel instead of the goals of organizations; a constant set of organs instead of changing their composition and combination under different conditions.

One of the main shortcomings of the methods used was their functional orientation, strict regulation of management processes, and not their results. Therefore, the goals and interrelations of various parts of the management system are of great importance than the strict establishment of their functional specialization. This is especially evident when solving problems related to the creation of corporations, joint-stock companies, financial and industrial groups, orders and contracts at the request of consumers, with a comprehensive solution to product quality problems.

A systematic approach, giving a scientifically based definition of the management function and headcount standards as part of the overall process of forming an organizational and managerial structure, orients researchers and developers towards more general principles for designing organizations. Those. it involves the initial definition of the system of goals of the organization, which determine the structure of tasks and the content of the functions of the management apparatus.

The main purpose of most production organizations from the point of view of society is determined by the goals of satisfying the market demand for products and services. At the same time, the correspondence between the system of goals and the organizational structure of management cannot be unambiguous.

In a single system, various methods of forming organizational management structures should also be considered. These methods have a different nature, each of them separately does not allow to solve everything in practice. important issues and should be used in organic combination with others. The effectiveness of building an organizational structure cannot be assessed by any one indicator. On the one hand, it should be taken into account to what extent the structure ensures the achievement of results by the organization that correspond to the production and economic goals set for it, on the other hand, to what extent its internal structure and functioning processes are adequate to the objective requirements for their content, organization and properties.

The ultimate criterion of effectiveness when comparing different options for organizational structure is the most complete and sustainable achievement of goals. However, as a rule, it is extremely difficult to bring this criterion to practically applicable simple indicators. Therefore, it is advisable to use a set of normative characteristics of the control apparatus: its performance in processing information; efficiency in making managerial decisions; reliability of the control apparatus; adaptability and flexibility.

When problems arise, it is necessary to formulate the number of personnel as a criterion of economic efficiency, in accordance with which the maximization of results in relation to management costs should be ensured. The number of the management apparatus must be objectively justified in order to fully ensure the solution of problems arising from the goals of the organizational system.

1.3. The process of forming the organizational structure

The process of forming an organizational structure includes the formulation of goals and objectives, determining the composition and place of units, their resource support (including the number of employees), the development of regulatory procedures, documents, provisions that fix and regulate the forms, methods, processes that are carried out in the organizational management system.

This whole process can be organized into three major stages:

1. The formation of a general structural diagram in all cases is of fundamental importance, since it determines the main characteristics of the organization, as well as the directions in which a more in-depth design should be carried out, both the organizational structure and other most important aspects of the system (the ability to process information) .

2. The development of the composition of the main divisions and the links between them - lies in the fact that it provides for the implementation of organizational decisions not only in general for large linear-functional and program-target blocks, but also up to independent (basic) divisions of the management apparatus, distribution of specific tasks between them and building intra-organizational relationships. The basic subdivisions are understood as independent structural units (departments, bureaus, departments, sectors, laboratories), into which linear-functional and program-target subsystems are organizationally divided. Base units may have their own internal structure.

3. Regulation of the organizational structure - provides for the development of quantitative characteristics of the management apparatus and procedures for management activities. It includes: determination of the composition of the internal elements of the basic units (bureaus, groups and positions); determination of the design number of units; distribution of tasks and work between specific performers; establishing responsibility for their implementation; development of procedures for performing managerial work in departments; calculations of management costs and performance indicators of the management apparatus in the conditions of the designed organizational structure.

When the interaction of many links and levels of management is required, specific documents are developed and are called organigrams.

The organigram is a graphical interpretation of the process of performing managerial functions, their stages and the work included in them, describing the distribution of organizational procedures for the development and decision-making between departments, their internal structural bodies and individual employees. The construction of an organigram makes it possible to link the process of rationalizing technological routes and information flows with streamlining the relationships between the structural elements of control systems that arise when organizing the coordinated implementation of its tasks and functions. They fix only the organization of the management process in the form of the distribution of powers and responsibilities for the provision, development and adoption of management decisions.

Structure Design Methods

It combines both technological, economic, informational, administrative and organizational interactions that lend themselves to direct analysis and rational design, as well as socio-psychological characteristics and connections.

The specificity of the problem of designing the organizational structure of management lies in the fact that it cannot be adequately represented as a task of formally choosing the best variant of the organizational structure according to a clearly formulated, unambiguous, mathematically expressed criterion of optimality. This is a quantitative - qualitative, multi-criteria problem, solved on the basis of a combination of scientific, including formalized, methods of analysis, evaluation, modeling of organizational systems with the subjective activity of responsible managers, specialists and experts in choosing and evaluating the best options for organizational decisions.

The process of organizational design consists in a sequence of approaching the model of a rational management structure, in which design methods play an auxiliary role in considering, evaluating and adopting the most effective options for organizational decisions for practical implementation.

There are complementary methods: .

1. The method of analogies consists in the application of organizational forms and management mechanisms in relation to the projected organization. The analogy method includes the development of standard management structures for production and economic organizations and the definition of the boundaries and conditions for their application.

The use of the analogy method is based on two complementary approaches. The first of these is to identify for each type of production and economic organizations and for various industries the values ​​and trends in the main organizational characteristics and their corresponding organizational forms and management mechanisms. The second approach represents the typification of the most general fundamental decisions about the nature and relationships of the links of the management apparatus and individual positions in clearly defined working conditions of organizations. of this type in specific industries, as well as the development of individual regulatory characteristics of the administrative apparatus for these organizations and industries.

Typification of solutions is a means of increasing the overall level of organization of production management. Typical organizational decisions should be, firstly, variant, and not unambiguous, and secondly, reviewed and adjusted at regular intervals and allowing deviations in cases where the conditions of the organization’s work differ from clearly formulated conditions for which the appropriate standard form of organizational structure is recommended. management structures.

2. The expert-analytical method consists in the examination and analytical study of the organization by qualified specialists with the involvement of its managers and other employees. In order to identify specific features, problems in the operation of the management apparatus, as well as to develop rational recommendations for its formation or restructuring based on quantitative assessments effectiveness of the organizational structure, rational management principles, expert opinions, as well as generalization and analysis of the most advanced trends in the field of management organization. This includes conducting expert surveys of managers and members of the organization to identify and analyze individual characteristics of the construction and functioning of the management apparatus, processing the obtained expert assessments by statistical and mathematical methods.

Expert methods should also include the development and application of scientific principles for the formation of organizational management structures. The principles of formation of organizational structures of management are the specification of more general principles of management (for example, unity of command or collective leadership, specialization). Examples of the formation of organizational management structures: building an organizational structure based on a system of goals, separation of strategic and coordinating functions from operational management, a combination of functional and program-targeted management, and a number of others.

A special place among expert methods is occupied by the development of graphical and tabular descriptions of organizational structures and management processes, reflecting recommendations for their best organization. This is preceded by the development of options for organizational solutions aimed at eliminating the identified organizational problems that meet the scientific principles and best practices of management organization, as well as the required level of quantitative and qualitative criteria for assessing the effectiveness of organizational structures.

3. The goal structuring method provides for the development of a system of organization goals, including their quantitative and qualitative formulations. When using it, the following steps are most often performed:

1. Development of a system (tree) of goals, which is a structural basis for linking all types of organizational activities based on the final results;

2. Expert analysis of the proposed options for the organizational structure in terms of organizational security for achieving each of the goals, observing the principle of homogeneity of the goals set for each unit, determining the relationship of leadership, subordination, cooperation between units based on the relationship of their goals, etc .;

3. Drawing up maps of rights and responsibilities for achieving goals for individual departments, and for complex cross-functional activities, where the scope of responsibility (products, resources, labor, information, production and management resources) is regulated; concrete results, for the achievement of which responsibility is established; the rights that are given to achieve results (to agree, confirm, control).

4. The method of organizational modeling is the development of formalized mathematical, graphical, machine and other representations of the distribution of powers and responsibilities in an organization, which are the basis for building, analyzing and evaluating various options for organizational structures by the relationship of their variables. There are several main types of organizational models: .

1. Mathematical and cybernetic models of hierarchical management structures that describe organizational connections and relationships in the form of systems of mathematical equations and inequalities; .

2. Graphic-analytical models of organizational systems, which are network, matrix and other tabular and graphic representations of the distribution of functions, powers, responsibilities, organizational relationships. They make it possible to analyze their direction, nature, causes, evaluate various options for grouping interrelated activities into homogeneous units, “lose” options for the distribution of rights and responsibilities between different levels of management, etc. Examples are "meta-scheme" descriptions of material, information, cash flows together with managerial actions.

3. Full-scale models of organizational structures and processes, which consist in assessing their functioning in real organizational conditions. These include organizational experiments - pre-planned and controlled restructuring of structures and processes in real organizations; laboratory experiments - artificially created situations of decision-making and organizational behavior; management games - actions of practical workers;

4. Mathematical and statistical models of dependencies between the initial factors of organizational systems and the characteristics of organizational structures. They are based on the collection, analysis and processing of empirical data on organizations operating in comparable conditions.

The process of designing the organizational structure of management should be based on the joint use of the methods described above.

The choice of a method for solving a particular organizational problem depends on its nature, as well as the possibilities for conducting an appropriate study.

1.4. Evaluation of the effectiveness of organizational decisions

Performance evaluation is important element development of design and planning decisions, which makes it possible to determine the level of progressiveness of the current structure, projects under development or planned activities, and is carried out in order to select the most rational version of the structure or a way to improve it. The effectiveness of the organizational structure should be assessed at the design stage, when analyzing the management structures of existing organizations for planning and implementing measures to improve management.

A comprehensive set of criteria for the effectiveness of the management system is formed taking into account two areas for assessing its functioning: .

1. According to the degree of compliance with the results achieved goals production and economic organization;

2. According to the degree of compliance of the process of functioning of the system with the objective requirements for its content of the organization and results.

The criterion of effectiveness in comparing various options for the organizational structure is the possibility of the most complete and sustainable achievement of the ultimate goals of the management system at relatively lower costs for its operation.

Of fundamental importance for evaluating the effectiveness of a management system is the choice of a basis for comparison or determining the level of efficiency, which is taken as normative. One of the differentiation approaches is reduced to comparison with indicators that characterize the effectiveness of the organizational structure of the reference version of control systems. The reference version can be developed and designed using all available control system design methods and tools. The characteristics of this option are accepted as normative. It can also be compared with the performance indicators and characteristics of the management system chosen as a benchmark that determines the acceptable or sufficient level of efficiency of the organizational structure.

Often used instead of methods expert review the organizational and technical level of the analyzed and designed system, as well as its individual subsystems and the design and planning decisions made, or a comprehensive assessment of the management system based on the use of a quantitative and qualitative approach that allows evaluating the effectiveness of management by a significant combination of factors.

The indicators used in assessing the effectiveness of the management apparatus and its organizational structure can be divided into the following three interrelated groups.

A group of indicators that characterize the effectiveness of the management system, expressed through the final results of the organization's activities, and management costs. When evaluating efficiency based on indicators characterizing the final results of the organization's activities, as an effect due to the functioning or development of the management system, volume, profit, cost, capital investment, product quality, timing of the introduction of new technology, etc. can be considered. .

1. A group of indicators characterizing the content and organization of the management process, including the immediate results and costs of managerial work. As management costs, current expenses for the maintenance of the management apparatus, the operation of technical facilities, the maintenance of buildings and premises, the training and retraining of management personnel are taken into account.

When evaluating the effectiveness of the management process, indicators are used that can be evaluated both quantitatively and qualitatively. These indicators acquire a normative character and can be used as a criterion for the effectiveness of restrictions when the organizational structure changes in the direction of improving one or a group of performance indicators without changing (worsening) the rest. The following can be attributed to the regulatory characteristics of the control apparatus: productivity, efficiency, adaptability, flexibility, efficiency, reliability.

1. The productivity of the management apparatus can be defined as the amount of final products produced by the organization or the volume of information generated in the process of management.

2. The efficiency of the control apparatus is understood as the relative costs of its operation. To assess the profitability, indicators such as the share of costs for maintaining the management apparatus, the share of managerial employees in the number of industrial and production personnel, the cost of performing a unit of volume of certain types of work can be used.

3. The adaptability of the control system is determined by its ability to effectively perform task functions in a certain range of changing conditions. The relatively wider this range, the more adaptive the system is considered.

4. Flexibility characterizes the property of the organs of the administrative apparatus to change their roles in the decision-making process in accordance with emerging tasks and to establish new connections without violating the orderliness of relations inherent in this structure.

5. Efficiency in making managerial decisions characterizes the modernity of identifying managerial problems and the speed of their solution, which ensures the maximum achievement of the goals set while maintaining the stability of established production and support processes.

6. The reliability of the control apparatus as a whole characterizes its trouble-free functioning. If we consider the quality of setting goals and setting problems to be sufficient, the ability to ensure the completion of tasks within the established deadlines and allocated resources. To assess the performance of the management apparatus and its subsystems, the level of implementation of planned targets and compliance with approved standards, the absence of deviations in the execution of instructions can be used.

3. A group of indicators characterizing the rationality of the organizational structure and its technical and organizational level. The structures include the linkage of the management system, the level of centralization of management functions, the accepted standards of manageability, the balance in the distribution of rights and responsibilities.

To assess the effectiveness of management, it has a definition of the compliance of the management system and its organizational structure with the management object. This finds expression in the balance of the composition of functions and goals of management, the correspondence of the number of employees to the volume and complexity of work, the completeness of providing the required information, the provision of processes for managing technological means, taking into account their nomenclature.

Important requirements are the ability to adequately reflect the dynamism of controlled processes, balance and consistency of indicators. When evaluating the effectiveness of individual measures to improve the management system, it is allowed to use the basic requirements for their choice - the maximum compliance of each indicator with the target orientation of the event and the completeness of the reflection of the achieved effect.

1.5. Adjustment of organizational structures

In most cases, decisions to adjust structures are made by the top management of the organization as part of their core responsibilities. Significant in scope organizational enterprises not carried out until there is a firm adjustment of the structure or the development of a new project.

Unsatisfactory functioning of the enterprise. The most common reason for the development of a new organization design is failure to reduce cost growth, increase productivity, expand ever-shrinking domestic and foreign markets, or attract new financial resources. Usually, first of all, changes are made in the composition and level of qualifications of workers, the development of special programs. But the reason for the unsatisfactory activity of the enterprise lies in certain shortcomings of the organizational structure of management.

Top management overload. If measures to change management methods and procedures do not reduce the burden, do not lead to lasting relief, then a very effective means of solving this problem is the redistribution of rights and functions, adjustments and clarifications in the forms of organization.

Lack of perspective orientation. The future development of the enterprise requires more and more attention from top managers to strategic tasks. At the same time, many managers still continue to devote most of their time to operational issues. Which will lead to a simple extrapolation of current trends in the future. The top manager must be aware that his most important responsibility is to enable the enterprise to develop and implement a strategic program.

Disagreements on organizational issues. Every experienced manager knows that there is internal harmony in the organizational structure of an enterprise. This structure makes it difficult to achieve goals, allows for an unfair distribution of power, and so on. When there are deep and enduring disagreements about organizational structure, the only way out is to study the structure carefully. A change in leadership often prompts a decision to reorganize. The replacement group may find this form completely inconsistent with its approach to the problems of the enterprise.

Trends in organizational structure change

In the conditions of production processes and marketing with a continuous increase in the enterprise of the organization, there is a need to increase the scale of activity and you can adapt to small changes in the structure, but if the basic structure remains unchanged, then the functioning of the enterprise worsens.

Increasing diversity. Expansion of the range of manufactured products or services, entry into various markets, additional development of new production processes introduce completely new moments in the organization, up to structural changes in the enterprise.

Association of business entities. The merger of several enterprises necessarily introduces some changes in the organizational structure. Problems of coincidence of functions, redundant staff, confusion in the distribution of rights and responsibilities require an immediate solution, therefore, major structural changes should be expected.

Change of control technology. Scientific achievements in the field of management are beginning to have an increasing impact on organizational structures and processes (progressive methods of information processing). New positions appear, decision-making processes change. Some industries - mass production, some financial institutions - have actually changed dramatically due to advances in management technology.

Influence of technology of production processes. The rapid development of industry research, the growth of scientific institutions, the ubiquity of project management, the growing popularity of matrix organizations - all this indicates the spread of influence exact sciences to industrial organizations.

external economic environment. Most industrial enterprises are in a constantly changing economic environment. Some changes are made abruptly, because of which the normal functioning of the enterprise suddenly becomes unsatisfactory. Other changes, which are slower and more fundamental, are forcing enterprises to switch to other areas of activity, which means a new organizational structure is emerging.

Each of the noted circumstances leads to changes in the structure and may indicate the need to revise the main strategy of the enterprise.

The inability to survive and function effectively is most often the result of: .

1. Unreasonable strategic decisions are made;

2. Enterprises are trying to continue activities in a volume that is no longer economical;

3. It is not possible to establish the release of new products or products that do not find a market and are not produced where necessary;

4. Firms with one sales market are not able to diversify production.

The redistribution of tasks, rights and responsibilities, information flows increases the efficiency of the organization by increasing productivity and, at least temporarily, restrains the growth of costs, increases profitability. Improvement in organizational forms often contributes to the development of new and better strategic decisions.

In almost any large enterprise, examples can be found where the implementation of well-conceived strategic plans was hindered by an organizational structure that delayed their implementation or favored resolving secondary issues.

The relationship between strategy and structure underlies all recommendations for adjusting and changing the organization of enterprise management. The analytical process of studying the strategy of the enterprise is an integral element of adjustments in the structure. The analysis methods used usually consist of five steps.

1. It consists in clarifying the task of the enterprise, areas of uncertainty and the most likely development alternatives. In the case of the formation of completely new enterprises, the definition of the task may be limited to the establishment of design parameters.

2. The analysis of the organizational structure is to identify the variables that significantly affect the performance of the task. At this stage, a deep analysis of the economic and production structure of the enterprise and its main components is necessary.

3. The goals and programs for the development of the enterprise are being studied. It is important to make sure that the current goals are consistent with the main task of the enterprise, and programs are aligned with the key factors for successful operation. This is essential because goals and plans have a direct impact on the organizational structure by prioritizing and prioritizing past decisions.

4. Assess how the structure of the organization meets the objectives, goals and factors on which the success of its functioning depends. To do this, it is necessary to carefully study the existing formal structure, identify all its weaknesses and strengths, find out what shortcomings in the formal structure compensate for informal elements and how effectively.

A difficult but inevitable moment in the analysis of the organization is the assessment of the human resources of the enterprise. The researcher studies the main management processes - planning, resource allocation, operational control - in order to establish how they contribute to the achievement of the task, goal and strategic programs. Organizational and environmental analysis represents a tremendous amount of information that needs to be assessed so that a decision on structure can be made, which is the final step in the analytical process.

Making such a decision is a very difficult, almost entirely empirical process. The structure of large organizations has become extraordinarily confusing due to numerous changes. The speed of change is increasing so much that they are looking not so much for a specific, permanent structure as for a temporary one, which reflects a certain stage in the development of the organization.

Chapter II. Organizational structure as the key to a successful enterprise

2.1. The concept and principles of building an organizational structure

Organizational structure is one of the main elements of organization management. It is characterized by the distribution of goals and objectives of management between departments and employees of the organization.

The organizational structure of management is the totality of all elements and links of the management system and the permanent links established between them. It expresses a certain technology of management activity, the processes of division and cooperation of labor in the field of management, the sequence of implementation of management procedures. It also links the structure and functions of management.

The organizational structure of management determines the subordination and coordination of production units and management services of the organization.

The organizational structure of management (organizational structure of management) is a combination of individual links in their relationship and subordinate, performing various functions of the management of the organization, and characterizes one of the basic elements of the management system.

The organizational structure of management, its types and parameters depend on many factors and are determined by the size of the organization, the nature and type of production, the type of activity, the level of intra-production specialization and cooperation, the nature and complexity of products.

First of all, the organizational structure of management is determined by the production structure of the organization. At the same time, it has a significant impact on the change in the production structure, since the complication of the first leads to the creation of unnecessary workshops, sections and services.

The organizational structure of the management body (apparatus) is a unity of units, each of which is designed to perform certain functions for managing the organization and is interconnected and subordinated to other units. The organizational system is presented (Appendix No. 1).

The management apparatus is organized organizationally in such a way that it is possible to single out links and steps in its structure.

The link of the management apparatus is a structural unit that performs a specific function for the implementation of the management process.

A stage is a set of management links at one hierarchical level of management.

The organizational structure of management can be two- and multi-stage (Appendix No. 2; Appendix No. 3).

The number of links and steps in the organization's management apparatus is determined by the following factors: production structure; the nature, range and volume of products (services rendered); the number of employees; the level of mechanization and automation (computerization) of the work of managers and specialists; the complexity of the technological process of production; the level of specialization of production and the degree of development of cooperation.

When forming the management apparatus, it should be borne in mind that its structure largely determines the content, validity and speed of bringing decisions to the executors, the reliability and efficiency of the information received, the content of the work of managers and executors and structural divisions. This means that the organization's management apparatus should be: firstly, prompt and perform the functions assigned to it in a timely manner; secondly, it is reliable, providing an unambiguous reliable display of the actual state of production and the results of decisions made; thirdly, it is optimal, which means ensuring that the best solutions are found for the technical, technological, organizational, economic, social and environmental aspects of the organization's production and economic activities through their multivariate elaboration; finally, fourthly, it is economical, i.e. perform the functions assigned to it with the lowest possible costs, while simultaneously reducing administrative and management costs for the production and sale of products (services).

Under the management philosophy, we will understand the most general principles on the basis of which the organization's management structure is built and management processes are carried out. Of course, the philosophy of quality and the philosophy of management are interrelated - the philosophy of quality sets the goal and direction of the organization, the philosophy of management determines the organizational means to achieve this goal.

The foundations of the philosophy of management, as well as the philosophy of quality, were laid by F. W. Taylor.

Let's consider the main types of enterprise management structures from the point of view of their compliance with the ideas of modern quality management. The term "organizational structure" immediately conjures up a two-dimensional tree diagram, consisting of rectangles and lines connecting them. These boxes show the work to be done and the scope of responsibilities and thus reflect the division of labor in the organization. The relative position of the boxes and the lines connecting them show the degree of subordination. The considered ratios are limited to two dimensions: up - down and across, since we operate with a limited assumption, according to which the organizational structure should be represented on a two-dimensional diagram drawn on a flat surface.

The organizational structure itself does not contain anything that would limit us in this respect. In addition, these constraints on organizational structure often have severe and costly consequences.

Here are just four of them.

First, between the individual parts of organizations of this kind, there is not cooperation, but competition. There is stronger competition within organizations than between organizations, and this internal competition takes on a much less ethical form.

Secondly, the usual way of representing the structure of organizations makes it very difficult to define the tasks of individual departments and measure the corresponding indicators of performance due to the great interdependence of departments that are grouped in this way.

Thirdly, it contributes to the creation of organizations that resist change, especially changes in their structure; therefore, they degenerate into bureaucratic structures that cannot be adapted. Most of these organizations learn extremely slowly, if at all.

Fourth, the representation of the organizational structure in the form of a two-dimensional tree limits the number and nature of options solutions to emerging problems. In the presence of such a limitation, solutions are impossible that ensure the development of the organization, taking into account technical and social changes, the pace of which is growing more and more. The current environment requires organizations to be not only ready for any changes, but also able to undergo them. In other words, dynamic balance is needed. Obviously, in order to achieve such a balance, the organization must have a sufficiently flexible structure. (While flexibility does not guarantee adaptability, it is nonetheless necessary to achieve adaptability.)

The construction of a flexible or otherwise meritorious organizational structure is one of the tasks of the so-called "structural architecture". Using the terminology adopted in architecture, we can say that this abstract sets out the main ideas on the basis of which various options for solving the problem of organizational structure can be developed without the restrictions associated with its graphical representation.

The above disadvantages can and should be overcome by building a multidimensional organizational structure. The multidimensional structure implies the democratic principle of governance.

Hierarchical type of control structures

Management structures in many modern enterprises were built in accordance with the principles of management formulated in the early twentieth century. The most complete formulation of these principles was given by the German sociologist Max Weber (the concept of rational bureaucracy):

The principle of hierarchy of management levels, in which each lower level is controlled by a higher one and obeys it.

The principle of compliance of powers and responsibilities of management employees with a place in the hierarchy, which follows from it; .

The principle of division of labor into separate functions and specialization of workers according to the functions performed; the principle of formalization and standardization of activities, ensuring the uniformity of the performance of their duties by employees and the coordination of various tasks.

The principle of impersonal performance by employees of their functions arising from it;

The principle of qualification selection, according to which hiring and dismissal from work is carried out in strict accordance with qualification requirements.

The organizational structure, built in accordance with these principles, is called a hierarchical or bureaucratic structure. The most common type of such a structure is linear - functional (linear structure).

2.2 Types of organizational structures

Types of organizational management structure have gone through a difficult path of development under the influence of improving the production structure of enterprises, concentration and specialization of activities, scientific and technological progress. The beginning of this path is characterized by the appearance of a linear organizational management structure, a change in its functional structure, then the replacement of the last linear-functional management structure, etc. .

The variety of internal and external relations of the organization, the high organizational and technical level and the complexity of production technology, the development of concentration, the deepening of specialization, dynamic changes in the external environment led to the formation of various types of organizational management structures.

In modern management, two types of organizational management structures are distinguished - bureaucratic and organic, each of which has its own specific features and, consequently, areas of its development.

The bureaucratic type of organizational structure of management was historically formed first. The main conceptual provisions of rational bureaucracy are the following:

1. Organization is, first of all, an order, the starting point of which is the labor behavior of the personnel, directed in a certain direction.

2. The necessary behavior of the staff is achieved by regulation: the distribution of tasks, the dissemination of relevant information, the delimitation of powers.

3. General order regulation is achieved as a result of creating management levels, which leads to the formation of hierarchy levels (hierarchical relationships).

4. The advantages of a hierarchical organization are achieved:

A long period of using effective methods of organizing labor, common at different levels of management;

The predictability of the behavior of members of the organization, both in their internal communication and in contact with the external environment.

5. Restriction of the behavioral range of employees by the current rules (instructions), which creates the prerequisites for uniform behavior of personnel.

6. The use of general (typical) rules of organizational behavior increases the effectiveness of coordination actions in the organization.

The main thing in the bureaucratic organizational structures of management is the “position”, and not the “person” with its individuality. As a result, an organization that uses bureaucratic organizational structures of management becomes "rigid", its development is possible only thanks to activities carried out from the outside.

In addition, the functional specialization of elements of the bureaucratic type is characterized by unevenness and different rates of change in its development, which leads to contradictions between the individual parts of the organization, to the inconsistency of their actions and interests.

The bureaucratic type of organizational structure of management has varieties, among which the most common ones can be distinguished: linear, functional, linear-functional, linear-staff, divisional structures of organization management.

In the 60s. more flexible organizational structures have emerged that, compared to bureaucratic ones, are better adapted to rapid changes in the conditions of economic life and the introduction of technical and technological innovations. They are called organic or adaptive structures.

The organic type of organizational structures of management involves: improvisation of management activities instead of planning; flexibility of structures instead of rigidity bound by rules and regulations; collegiality in decision-making instead of authoritarianism; trust among staff instead of power. In addition, the integrating goal of this type of organization is the development strategy of the organization, the rules for the work of the personnel of the management apparatus are the principles, the distribution of duties and work between personnel is determined by the nature of the problems being solved, and, finally, the organization has a constant readiness for progressive changes.

This type of organizational structure of management is effective in conditions where the organization's activities are associated with active work to improve products and services, taking into account the latest achievements of science and technology, since in this case a new approach to organizational problems is required. The uncertainty of the external environment, the variety of influencing factors that determine the internal structure of the organization, causes the emergence of unique situations that cannot be resolved within the framework of a rigid (bureaucratic) management organization. The organic type of organizational structures with this approach provides a natural adaptive development of the organization, the uniqueness of which is determined by the increasing interaction with the environment and the need to solve emerging, sometimes new problems.

The basic principle of building such structures is the autonomous ability to fulfill goals and objectives, as well as their rapid adaptation (adaptation) to changes.

One of the possible forms of organizing the management structure in such conditions is the creation of flexible, problem-solving temporary systems that are combined into a single whole with the help of managers and specialists who set, evaluate and solve emerging problems.

Organic organizational management structures are simpler, have a wide information network, and are less formalized. Management in organic structures is decentralized. It is characterized by a small number of management levels, higher independence in making managerial decisions at the lower levels of management, and partnerships between managers.

Organic structures began to be used during periods when competition increased sharply. Under these conditions, a timely and adequate response to changing market situations began to acquire particular importance, which was impossible with the use of rigid traditional structures.

Today, large organizations use two types of adaptive structures: project, matrix, team, and target.

2.3. Types of bureaucratic structures for managing an organization

As noted earlier, the main types of bureaucratic management structures are the following: linear, functional, linear-functional, linear-staff, divisional organization management structures.

And now about each structure in more detail.

The linear control structure has only vertical connections between elements and is built on the principle of hierarchy. This structure is characterized by a clear unity of command. Each employee or manager reports directly to only one superior person and through him is connected with higher levels of management. Thus, a hierarchical ladder of subordination and responsibility is created in the management apparatus.

The main advantages of the linear management structure is the relative simplicity of the selection of leaders and the implementation of management functions. Such a management organization ensures prompt adoption and implementation of managerial decisions, unity and clarity of command and eliminates duplication of authority and inconsistency of orders.

The disadvantages of this type of structures include the disunity of horizontal connections, the possibility of excessive rigidity. In the conditions of modern production, they require a high level of universal training from the manager. Which, in turn, limits the scale of the headed unit and the ability of the head to effectively manage it. In addition, a large overload of information, multiple contacts with subordinate, higher and related organizations leads to the fact that most of the manager's time is spent on solving operational problems, and promising issues are not given sufficient attention.

Linear structures are typical for small organizations with up to 500 employees with a high level of technological or subject specialization, in the absence of broad cooperation ties between organizations. The linear structure is presented in (Appendix No. 4).

In the functional structure, each senior manager is delegated powers within the boundaries of the function performed

Its essence lies in the fact that the performance of certain functions on specific issues is assigned to specialists. Specialists of the same profile are united in structural units of the management system and make decisions that are binding on production units. Thus, along with the linear organization, there is also a functional organization. The performers are in double subordination. So, the worker is obliged to simultaneously fulfill the instructions of his line manager and the functional specialist. With a functional management structure, the line manager has the opportunity to deal more with operational management issues, since functional specialists free him from solving special issues. But management commands come from many functional services to one production unit or to one performer, and therefore the problem of mutual coordination of these commands arises, which creates certain difficulties. In addition, the responsibility of performers for the performance of their duties is reduced due to depersonalization. The functional structure is presented in (Appendix No. 5)

In a linear-functional organizational structure, which combines the principles of linear, functional and staff management, the performance of special functions is closely intertwined with a system of subordination and responsibility for the direct solution of managerial tasks.

This structure is based on the regulation of linear and functional relationships. In it, line managers have linear powers, and functional ones have functional ones in relation to lower line managers and line managers in relation to their subordinates. Linear-functional organizational management structures are most effective in a stable environment, designed to use existing technologies and established markets, and contribute to effective production of standardized goods and services, focused on price competition. They have advantages both linear and functional.

The disadvantages of the linear-functional structure are the violation of the principle of unity of command, the difficulty in making and implementing agreed management decisions. Rigid division of labor contributes to the strengthening of the interest of each management body in the performance of only "its" function, which is typical for functional units. Therefore, when new, non-standard, complex, cross-functional tasks appear, there is a need for frequent approval of draft decisions at the highest level of management. The linear-functional structure is used in medium and large industrial enterprises, design and research organizations with a staff of 500 to 3000 people. . The linear-functional structure is presented in (Appendix No. 6)

When the linear-functional structure is supplemented by a headquarters body, a linear-staff organizational structure of management is formed.

The line-staff (headquarters) organizational structure of management is also built on the principle of functional specialization of managerial work, however, the main task of managers is to coordinate the actions of functional services at headquarters of various levels and thereby direct these actions in accordance with the general interests of the organization

The headquarters reports to the line manager (LR). He is not vested with the right to make decisions, but only performs the functions of an advisory body preparing draft decisions. The line-staff management structure is presented in (Appendix No. 7).

Such a structure, thanks to the unification of functional specialists in one management body, ensures the efficiency and quality of decisions due to their comprehensive justification. It virtually eliminates conflicting orders and allows you to release line managers from activities to coordinate the work of various services.

The main advantages of the linear-staff management structure are a significant increase in the efficiency of using managerial potential to solve urgent problems.

However, management systems with a linear staff structure do not effectively solve new problems (transition to the production of new products, changes in technology, etc.). In addition, additional costs are required for the creation of special councils, boards, commissions for coordination and decision-making.

The line-headquarters management structure is being created to eliminate the consequences of natural disasters, to promptly solve extraordinary tasks.

Divisional organizational structure. The new organizational structure is especially evident in large enterprises with a wide range of goods and services, rapidly changing equipment and technology that responds to changes in the needs and demand of society for the latest consumer goods. The divisional management structure is presented in (Appendix No. 8).

The division of functions is no longer limited to the classical principle: production - supplies - finance. At large enterprises, departments subordinate to them begin to specialize in the production of any one product or increase the range and sale of all products. This entails the emergence of a product structure. The exit of enterprises with these products beyond their region and even national borders leads to the need to create territorial structures. The unpredictability and instability of the external environment require managers to create an innovative structure, where special departments develop, master and prepare for mass production of new types of products or services. In many large firms, the sales area has grown into entire marketing departments, where market structures are the basis for structuring. Such organizational structures received a certain independence and the right to dispose of their funds not strictly according to instructions, but in accordance with the rapidly changing external environment and internal capabilities. The local initiative has increased, which is being implemented by those who come forward with it, while at the same time being fully responsible for the result. It became possible to respond faster and more efficiently to changing situations and to take into account new needs.

But divisional structures, like functional structures, are not free from shortcomings. Thus, the process of control over the actions of new structures has become much more complicated. Negative results of the work can only appear over time, when it will be too late to correct the situation from above. The expansion of horizontal ties, for all its positivity, brings about a weakening of vertical ties. Difficulties may arise due to duplication and confusion in the network of commands and managerial decisions. Excessive autonomy of parts of the organization can lead to a complete loss of influence on the part of the central structures, and therefore, subordination to common goals and objectives.

2.4. Types of organic structures of organization management

The first of this group is the matrix management structure presented in (Appendix No. 9).

The matrix structure combines two types of structures: linear program-target. Along the vertical (linear structure), management is built in separate areas of activity (production, supply, marketing, etc.). Horizontally (program-target structure) management of programs, projects, topics is carried out.

When determining horizontal links, a program (project) manager and his deputies are appointed for individual topics, a responsible executor in each specialized unit, and a special program management service is organized.

The work is ensured through the creation of target units, where leading specialists are brought together to jointly develop the program. The program manager determines what and when should be done, and who and how will perform this or that work is decided by the line manager.

Thus, the matrix management structure supplemented the linear-functional organizational structure with new elements. This created a qualitatively new direction in the development of program-targeted and problem-targeted forms of management. These forms contribute to the rise of the creative initiative of managers in the matter of increasing the efficiency of production. Matrix management structures encourage the restructuring of production based on the latest technological processes and more productive equipment.

The advantages of the matrix structure are significant opportunities effective use personnel potential of the organization in setting and solving new tasks.

Matrix, like other organizational structures, also have disadvantages. They often tend to anarchy due to unclear rights and double subordination of workers. Group action and the struggle for leadership in the field of science, engineering and technology are manifested. There may be snobbery and hostility between the "upper" and "lower" links of the matrix in the course of work.

Project management organizational structures are used in organizations engaged in targeted changes in the current or created system management. As a rule, such a system has several changing goals, and the process of managing it includes defining goals and functions, forming an organizational structure, planning and organizing work, and coordinating the actions of performers.

The form of implementation of the project organizational structure of management is the creation special unit, working for the time required to implement a specific problem (project), for example, the development of new learning technologies, production. With this form of organizational management structure, the project manager is vested with project authority and is responsible for business planning, spending allocated funds, material and moral motivation of employees, and most importantly, developing a project management concept - priorities, distribution of tasks and responsibility for their implementation.

The project type of the organizational structure of management has great flexibility and versatility, simplicity, economy, and most importantly, it allows you to simultaneously develop several problems (projects). To perform work on the implementation of several projects, a headquarters consisting of project managers can be created.

Organic type of management structures

Organic or adaptive management structures began to develop around the end of the 70s, when, on the one hand, the creation of an international market for goods and services sharply aggravated competition among enterprises and life demanded high efficiency and quality of work from enterprises and a quick response to market changes. And on the other hand, the inability of structures of a hierarchical type to meet these conditions became obvious. The main property of organic management structures is their ability to change their form, adapting to changing conditions. Varieties of structures of this type are project, matrix (program-targeted), brigade forms of structures. When introducing these structures, it is necessary to simultaneously change the relationship between the departments of the enterprise. If, however, the system of planning, control, distribution of resources, leadership style, methods of staff motivation are preserved, and the desire of employees for self-development is not supported, the results of the introduction of such structures may be negative.

Brigade (cross-functional) management structure

The basis of this management structure is the organization of work in working groups (teams). The form of the brigade organization of work is a rather ancient organizational form, it is enough to recall the worker artels, but only from the 80s did its active use begin as an organization management structure, in many respects directly opposite to the hierarchical type of structures. The main principles of such a management organization are: autonomous work of working groups (teams); independent decision-making by working groups and horizontal coordination of activities; replacement of rigid managerial ties of a bureaucratic type with flexible ties; involvement of employees from different departments to develop and solve problems.

These principles destroy the rigid distribution of employees by production, engineering, economic and managerial services, inherent in hierarchical structures, which form isolated systems with their own goals and interests.

In an organization built according to these principles, functional units may be preserved or absent. In the first case, employees are under double subordination - administrative (to the head of the functional unit in which they work) and functional (to the head of the working group or team in which they are a member). This form of organization is called cross-functional, in many ways it is close to the matrix. In the second case, there are no functional units as such; we will call it a brigade unit. This form is widely used in the organization of project management.

The advantages of a brigade (cross-functional) structure: reduction of the administrative apparatus, increase in management efficiency; flexible use of personnel, their knowledge and competence; work in groups creates conditions for self-improvement; the possibility of applying effective methods of planning and management; reducing the need for generalists.

Disadvantages of the brigade (cross-functional) structure: complication of interaction (especially for the cross-functional structure); difficulty in coordinating the work of individual teams; high qualification and responsibility of personnel; high communication requirements.

Conclusion: this form of organizational structure is most effective in organizations with a high level of qualification of specialists with good technical equipment, especially in combination with project management. This is one of the types of organizational structures in which the ideas of the modern philosophy of quality are most effectively embodied.

Project management structure

The basic principle of building a project structure is the concept of a project, which is understood as any purposeful change in the system, for example, the development and production of a new product, the introduction of new technologies, the construction of facilities, etc. . The activity of the enterprise is considered as a set of ongoing projects, each of which has a fixed beginning and end. For each project, labor, financial, industrial, etc. resources are allocated, which are managed by the project manager. Each project has its own structure, and project management includes defining its goals, forming a structure, planning and organizing work, and coordinating the actions of performers. After the project is completed, the project structure falls apart, its components, including employees, move to a new project or leave (if they worked on a contract basis). In form, the project management structure can correspond to both a brigade (cross-functional) structure and a divisional structure, in which a certain division (department) does not exist permanently, but for the duration of the project.

Advantages of the project management structure: high flexibility; reduction in the number of managerial personnel in comparison with hierarchical structures.

Disadvantages of the project management structure: very high qualification requirements. Personal and business qualities of the project manager, who must not only manage all stages of the project life cycle, but also take into account the place of the project in the company's project network; fragmentation of resources between projects; the complexity of the interaction of a large number of projects in the company; complication of the process of development of the organization as a whole.

Conclusion: the advantages outweigh the disadvantages in enterprises with a small number of simultaneously running projects. The possibilities of implementing the principles of modern philosophy of quality are determined by the form of project management.

Multidimensional organizational structure

Any organization is a purposeful system. In such a system, there is a functional division of labor between its individuals (or elements), the purposefulness of which is associated with the choice of goals, or desired outcomes, and means (lines of behavior). This or that line of behavior involves the use of certain resources (input values) for the production of goods and the provision of services (output values), which for the consumer should be of greater value than the resources used. Consumed resources include labor, materials, energy, production capacity and cash. This applies equally to public and private organizations.

Traditionally, the organizational structure covers two types of relationships: .

Responsibility (who is responsible for what) and subordination (who reports to whom). An organization with such a structure can be represented as a tree, while the responsibilities are represented by boxes, the relative position of which shows the level of authority, and the lines connecting these boxes indicate the distribution of powers. However, such a representation of the organizational structure does not contain any information regarding at what cost and with the help of means the organization managed to achieve certain results. At the same time, a more informative description of the organizational structure, which can be the basis for more flexible ways of structuring the organization, can be obtained on the basis of input-output or means-end type matrices. Let's illustrate this with the example of a typical private corporation producing some product.

Information about manufactured products can be used to determine the goals of the organization. To do this, for example, you can classify products according to their types or quality characteristics. The elements of the structure responsible for ensuring the production of products or the provision of services by the consumer outside the organization are called programs and denoted by P1, P2,. . . , Pr. Funds used by programs (or activities) can generally be subdivided into operations and services.

An operation is a type of activity that directly affects the nature of the product or its availability. Typical operations (O1, O2, . . . , Om) are the purchase of raw materials, transportation, production, distribution and marketing of products.

Services are the activities required to provide programs or carry out an operation. Typical services (S1, S2, . . . , Sn) are the work performed by departments such as accounting, data processing, technical services, labor disputes, finance, human resources, legal services.

The types of activities carried out within the framework of the program and within the framework of actions for its implementation can be presented as in Fig. 7 and 8. The results of each individual type of activity can be used directly by the same type of activity, programs and other types of activity, as well as by the executive body and an external consumer.

General programs can be subdivided into private programs, for example, by type of consumer (industrial or individual), geographic area supplied or served, by type of product, etc. Private programs, in turn, can also be further subdivided.

Similarly, you can drill down the types of activities of activities. For example, the manufacturing operations of a product may include the production of parts, assemblies, and assembly, each of which may be broken down into smaller operations.

If the number of programs and main and ancillary activities (operations and services) is so large that the manager is not able to effectively coordinate, then there may be a need for coordinators within specific managerial functions. Each line of action may require more than one coordinator or coordinating unit. In cases where the number of coordinators is too large, the use of higher coordinators or coordinating units (in this context, "coordination" means coordination, not leadership) is not excluded.

To carry out coordination, a group consisting of the heads of coordinating departments and leaders is quite sufficient. Programs, as well as functional units, have certain requirements. Programs and functions can be grouped by product, customer type, geographic area, and so on. If there are too many and highly dispersed customers for a program's products, it may be unconventional to use geographic location as an additional dimension of the 3D organizational chart. In this case, there is a need for regional representatives, whose duty is to protect the interests of those who consume the product or are affected by the activities of the organization as a whole.

Regional representatives play the role of external intermediaries who can assess the programs and various activities of the organization in each particular region from the point of view of those whose interests they represent. In the future, this information can be used by the governing body, coordinators and heads of departments.

By receiving such information simultaneously from all regional representatives, the manager can get a complete picture of the effectiveness of his program throughout the service area and in each region. This allows him to more rationally distribute the available resources across regions.

However geographical position not the only criterion for organizing the activities of external intermediaries; other criteria may be used. For example, an organization supplying various industries with lubricants, it is advisable to have representatives not by region, but by industry (this can be automotive, aerospace, machine tool building and other industries). The public service organization may determine the responsibilities of its representatives based on the socio-economic characteristics of the users.

Sharing of responsibility. The considered "multidimensional" organization has something in common with the so-called "matrix organizations". However, the latter are usually two-dimensional and lack many of the important features of the considered organizational structures, especially in terms of funding. In addition, all of them have one common drawback: employees of functional units are in double subordination, which, as a rule, leads to undesirable results. It is this most commonly noted deficiency in matrix organizations that is the cause of so-called "occupational schizophrenia".

A multidimensional organizational structure does not give rise to the difficulties inherent in a matrix organization. In a multidimensional organization, the functional unit personnel whose output is purchased by the program manager are treated as an external client and are accountable only to the functional unit manager. However, when evaluating the activities of his subordinates, the head of the functional unit, of course, should use the assessments of the quality of their work given by the program manager. The position of the person leading the functional unit team that does the work for the program is much like that of a project manager in a construction and consulting firm; he has no uncertainty as to who the owner is, but he has to deal with him as a client.

Multidimensional organizational structure and program funding. Usually practiced (or traditional) program financing is only a way of preparing cost estimates for the functional departments and programs. It is not about providing resources and choice for program units, or requiring functional units to independently conquer markets within and outside the organization. In short, program funding generally does not take into account the specifics of the organizational structure and does not affect its flexibility. This way of distributing funds between functional units guarantees only the execution of programs, while providing a more efficient than usual determination of the cost of their implementation. The multidimensional organizational structure allows you to keep all the advantages of the traditional method of financing and, in addition, has a number of others.

Benefits of a Multidimensional Organizational Structure

A multidimensional organizational structure allows you to increase the flexibility of the organization and its ability to respond to changing internal and external conditions. This is achieved by dividing the organization into units whose viability depends on their ability to produce competitively priced goods that are in demand and provide services that consumers need. This structure creates a market within the organization, whether it is private or public, commercial or non-profit (non-profit), and enhances its ability to respond to the needs of both internal and external customers. Since the structural units of the "multidimensional" are relatively independent of each other, they can be expanded, reduced, eliminated or changed in any way. The performance indicator of each division does not depend on similar indicators of any other division, which makes it easier for the executive body to evaluate and control the activities of divisions. Even the work of the executive body can be evaluated autonomously in all aspects of its activities.

A multidimensional structure discourages bureaucracy by preventing functional units or programs from falling prey to service units, whose procedures sometimes become an end in themselves and become an obstacle to achieving the organization's goals. Customers inside and outside the organization control the internal providers of products and services; Suppliers never control consumers. Such an organization is oriented towards ends rather than means, while bureaucracy is characterized by the subordination of ends to means.

Disadvantages of a Multidimensional Organizational Structure

However, a multidimensional organizational structure, although devoid of some significant shortcomings inherent in conventional organizations, nevertheless, cannot eliminate all the shortcomings completely. By itself, such a structural organization does not guarantee meaningful and interesting work at lower levels, but it facilitates the application of new ideas that contribute to its improvement.

The introduction of a multidimensional organizational structure in an enterprise is not the only way to increase the flexibility of an organization and its sensitivity to changes in conditions, but a serious study of this allows you to "increase the flexibility" of people's ideas about the capabilities of organizations. It is this circumstance that should contribute to the emergence of new, even more advanced organizational structures.

Ways to improve the organizational structure of the enterprise

The process of managing economic activities in an organization is associated with the organizational structure of management adopted by it, which predetermines the entire management cycle. The main activities associated with the organizational structure - the creation of departments and services, the definition of the scope of management, the distribution of rights and duties - are based on one or another theory of the organization, according to which the organization is considered designed to achieve prescribed goals.

The main characteristic of the organization, as we already know, is the formal organizational structure of the organization's management, the consciously established composition of departments, the hierarchy of positions, the set of job descriptions, internal organizational regulations, guidelines, etc. .

The organizational structure depends on the external environment of the organization. It is built in accordance with the strategic goals of the organization, is determined by the nature of the production process, the features of the technology used. Therefore, it is not immovable, once and for all given, it can and should change. The organizer must be able to feel the need for reorganization and be ready to carry it out.

The organizational structure of management, despite the fact that it is a static part of the management system, due to the dynamism of the management system itself, must also develop. This process should not be spontaneous, and it should be carried out purposefully. It is assumed that it is possible to obtain all the necessary information and increase its effectiveness by pre-planned changes in the combinations of individual elements of the organization, in their internal structures, in the relationship of individual elements of management technology.

The organizational structure of management has a number of features that distinguish it from the technical system.

The main ones are as follows: the presence of a person (a person makes decisions); multi-purpose nature (multi-criteria); multiply connected elements (a complex system of interaction).

Changes in management structures associated with changes in the goals of the organization are mainly determined by two groups of factors. Firstly, factors reflecting the need to form and / or maintain competitive advantages in the relevant target markets, as well as the development of scientific and technological progress and the possibilities of using its results to improve the efficiency of the organization. Secondly, possible (tested by practice) forms and methods of improving the structures themselves. Such opportunities include:

Improving structures through internal reserves, including decentralization, delegation of authority to lower levels. Linear structures turn into flatter ones by reducing the number of management levels with a simultaneous (as a rule) enlargement of functions and reduction of departments at one hierarchical level;

Replacement of mechanistic structures with adaptive ones. Such a transition is the most radical form of reorganization of structures, but this requires a strong leader with a team; .

Integration (creation) of various forms of adaptive structures within the mechanistic structure, for example, by creating venture innovation departments, business centers, brigade structures, project teams, etc.;

Creation of conglomerate structures. In this case, top management retains only finances. Most conglomerates arise through external mergers of companies;

Formation of the structures of the future (modular and atomistic organizations), providing a general focus on the mass economy, while simultaneously allowing the production and release of non-standard products focused on individual orders and individual customer service. The introduction of these structures can be implemented during the transition from the industrial phase of the organization of production to the information one.

Improving the organizational structure of management takes the form of a search for an alternative solution between the centralization and decentralization of power functions. The desire to find an acceptable agreement between centralized and decentralized management leads to the need to create such a management system, which is characterized by a centralized development of enterprise improvement and economic policy with decentralized operational management.

To strengthen the management function, they use: groups of innovations, program-target approach, matrix structures. But the most attention deserves the use of the concept of strategic business units of the organization in the design of organizational management structures. The following principles are fully implemented here: centralization of strategy development and decentralization of the process of its implementation, ensuring flexibility and adaptability of management, involvement of a wide range of managers at all levels in the management process. A diagram of the structure of an organization focused on strategic management is presented in (Appendix No. 10).

The application of this model will allow: .

1. Create a modern organizational management structure that adequately and promptly responds to changes in the external environment.

2. Implement a strategic management system that contributes to the effective operation of the organization in the long term.

3. Release the management of the association from daily routine work related to the operational management of the research and production complex.

4. Increase the efficiency of decisions made.

5. Involve in business activities all divisions of the association that can expand the range of products and services, increase flexibility and competitiveness.

The top level of management in this model can be represented by a typical management structure or another organizational and legal form. With the transition to a new management structure, the functions of top management change significantly. Gradually, it is freed from the operational management of subdivisions and focuses on the problems of strategic management of the economy and finances of the association as a whole.

A feature of this organizational structure is the allocation of strategic business units within the organization and giving individual production and functional units the status of profit centers. These divisions represent a direction or a group of directions of scientific, production and economic activity with a clearly defined specialization, its competitors, markets. Each independent unit must have its own purpose, comparatively independent of the others.

An independent business unit can be a branch, a branch, a group of workshops or a separate workshop, located at any level of the hierarchical structure. Responsibility for each direction rests with one manager - the director. The director is responsible for the strategy, he must be ready to defend, within his powers, interests in the field of technology, production, capital investments. At the same time, when distributing resources between various independent units, the plan of each of them should be specified in order to balance the interests of the organization as a whole.

The choice of the strategic planning structure is determined by many factors: the complexity of the organizational structure of the enterprise, its specific properties, accumulated experience and planning traditions. However, in all cases it is necessary to decide whether such a unit should be line or headquarters. There can be no unequivocal answer to this question, because. its solution in each organization must be approached individually.

In our model of the organizational structure of management, independent business units represent the middle level of power through which strategic management is implemented, at the lower level of management there are profit centers created on the basis of production and functional divisions of the organization. Operational management of production is realized through these centers.

This structure will make it possible to gradually transfer the personnel of managers and specialists from the top management level to independently operating units and profit centers. This is due to the constant transfer of a number of management functions from top to lower levels and the need to staff them with qualified managers and specialists.

CONCLUSION

While studying this topic, we considered the following:

1. The concept of the organizational structure of the enterprise and its determining factors is given. The analysis of the main types of organizational structures is made, the advantages and disadvantages of each of them are highlighted.

2. Much attention was paid to the principles and methods of formation of structures, the choice of type and combinations of types of structures, and the study of the principles of their construction. The study of the types of structures made it possible to note their main advantages and disadvantages, which must be taken into account when improving organizational management structures.

3. Possible ways of improving the organizational structure of the enterprise are described. Evaluated possible ways improvement of the management structure. A clear organizational mechanism is needed in the context of restructuring to improve management efficiency.

It is obvious that each organization is a rather complex technical, economic and social system, reflecting its individuality and specificity. It is possible to describe this system if we determine the nature of interaction between departments. The methods of interaction of the parties characterize the system under consideration in a certain way and allow us to judge how effectively it copes with its main task - the organization of harmonious interaction between the individual and the external environment. An important place in this is occupied by the structure of the organization through which or through which this interaction is carried out. According to the existing theory and practice, interaction at the level of "subdivision - subdivision" or "group - group" is implemented using combinations of various types of departmentalization. And it acts within the framework of organizational structures: linear, functional, linear-functional, divisional, matrix, as well as other more advanced and most adapted structures to modern life requirements. In conclusion, it is important to emphasize that experimentation with the development and introduction of new management structures has become a characteristic feature of the last decade. These experiments often use a wide variety of combinations. known species and types of structures that organizations adapt to the specific conditions of their functioning. But still main trend is that each successive structure becomes simpler and more flexible than the previous ones. At the same time, the following ten requirements and characteristics of the formation of effective management structures are named: Reducing the size of units and staffing them with more qualified personnel. Reducing the number of management levels. group organization labor as the basis of a new management structure. Orientation of current work, including schedules and procedures, to the needs of consumers. Creation of conditions for flexible packaging of products, minimization of stocks. Quick response to changes. Flexible equipment, high productivity and low costs. Impeccable product quality and focus on strong relationships with the consumer. There is no doubt that in the near future we will be faced with a wide variety of structures, each of which will meet the needs of a particular organization.

LIST OF USED LITERATURE

1. Blyakhman L.S., Galenko V.P., Minkin A.V. Introduction to management. - Tutorial. - St. Petersburg. : SPbUEF, 1994 - 650s.

2. Vachugov D.D. Fundamentals of management: Proc. for universities / Ed. D.D. Vachugova. THOSE. Berezkina, N.A., N.A. Kislyakova and others; M.: Higher. School, 2001.- 367 p.

3. Vershigora E.E. Management: Proc. allowance. M.: INFRA-M, 1998. -256s.

4. Vikhansky O.S., Naumov A.I. Management: Textbook. M.: Gardariki, 2001.- 528 p.

5. Gamzhin V.T., Sidorov P.I. Self-management guide. Ecology of business destiny. - St. Petersburg: AGMA Publishing House, Bukovsky Publishing House, 1996. - 288 p.

6. Goncharov V.I. Management: Proc. allowance. Mn.: Misanta, 2003. -624 p.

7. Kabushkin N.I. Organizational forms and structure of organization management // Methods and principles of management. 2000. - 290s.

8. Klimovich L.Kh. Fundamentals of management: a textbook for students of secondary schools. Mn.: Design PRO, 2005. -344 p.

9.Kolesnik M. Management (lecture notes). - M., Prior, 2001. - 344s.

10. Krichevsky R.L. If you are a leader. Elements of psychology of management in everyday work. -M.: Delo, 1996.-380s.

11. Ladanov I.D. "Practical Management". M.: Elnik, 1995.-320s.

12.Meskon M.Kh., Albert M., Hedouri F. Fundamentals of management: Per. from English. - M.: Delo, 1995. - 704 p.

13. Molnar Ya.F. Fundamentals of Management: Guidelines for the implementation of the course project. - Arkhangelsk: Publishing House of ASTU, 2003.- 264 p.

14. Obozov N.N., Shchekin G.V., "Psychology of working with people", Kyiv, 2002.-450p.

15. Pereverzev M.P., Shaidenko N.A., Basovsky L.E. Management: Textbook. M.: INFRA-M, 2002. -288 p.

16. Rogozhin S.V. Theory of organization: Proc. allowance. - M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University of Commerce, 1998.-180s

17. Rumyantseva Z.P., Filinov N.V., Shramchenko G.B. General management of the organization: principles and processes. Modular program for managers. - M.: INFA-M, 2000.-150s.

18. Samkov V.M. Theory of organization: Proc. allowance. At 2 o'clock - Yekaterinburg, Ural. acad. state services, 1998.-365s

19. Tombovtsev V.L. Analysis of goals in the management of social production - M .: Economics. Yu 1982 - 260s.

20. Shipunov V.G., Kishkel E.N. Fundamentals of management activities: personnel management, managerial mythology, enterprise management: Proc. for avg. specialist. textbook establishments. M.: Higher. school, 1999; -304 p.

21. Yanchevsky V.G. Fundamentals of management: Proc. allowance. Minsk: TetraSystems, 2004.; - 224 p.

Glossary

1.Horizontal division of labor This is the division of labor according to function. It manifests itself in the creation of functional services and divisions in the organization.

2.Control apparatus link- This is a structural unit that performs a specific function for the implementation of the management process.

3. Linear control structure- This is a system of organizing the management apparatus, assuming that at the head of each unit is a single leader who manages his employees and concentrates all management functions in his hands.

4. Organigram- this is when the interaction of many links and levels of management is required, specific documents are being developed.

5.Organizational structure It is one of the main elements of managing an organization.

6.Organizational structure of management- this is a combination of all elements and links of the management system and the permanent links established between them.

7.Organization structure- this is a way of building the relationship between management levels and functional areas, providing optimal achievement of the organization's goals under given conditions.

8.Managment structure- this is an ordered set of stably interconnected elements that ensure the functioning and development of the organization as a whole.

9.Control is the process of foresight, planning and organization, motivation, control and analysis necessary for the optimal achievement of the goals of the organization.

There is no sufficiently developed methodology for analyzing the organizational structures of enterprise management in market conditions, which could serve as the basis for the project of the necessary organizational changes. The need to develop strategically effective solutions that maximize the adaptation of the enterprise to the external environment, the development of tactical tasks on their basis requires consideration as an object of analysis not only the current results of work, but also development prospects, justification of goals, strategies for achieving them. The effectiveness of the organizational structure depends on the conformity of its system with the goals of the enterprise, the adopted strategies and the mechanism for distributing the minimum but necessary resources. In this sense, the analysis of the organizational structure of management is promising and is the most important information-forming aspect of the system as a whole. The formation of an adequate organizational structure of management and the content of management activities ultimately depend on the quality of strategic analysis. In this regard, experts note two main features of analysis in modern conditions: the promising nature of analytical work and the functional orientation of the analysis.

The functional orientation of the analysis implies its organic relationship with the implementation of management functions, helps to determine the role of individual links and their relationships in the process of achieving the organization's goal, which turns it into the basis of management technology. A qualitative forecast regarding possible directions for the development of an enterprise is made on the basis of scanning, monitoring and forecasting, which requires special information-analytical, legal, organizational and technical support. This is the so-called strategic decision support system. The set of external in relation to the organization predictive factors , significant for the purpose of the forecast are called the forecast background. Analysis of the forecast background and potential of the organization is the essence predictive analysis , the result of which is the development of a direction of development, provided with the potential that an enterprise can count on in a competitive struggle in the process of achieving its goals.

The system of indicators in the form of DPE OS contains information blocks that reflect the essence of economic phenomena related to the effectiveness of the organizational structure of management in its structural (organizational structure) and dynamic (organizational mechanism) aspects. Such a systematization of performance indicators predetermines the performance analysis model, branched by levels and types (direction and main stages of the analysis methodology), which should serve to solve three main tasks:

a) identifying and evaluating the predictive capabilities of the management system, which through its structural blocks provides a promising direction, stability of the organization's development based on an adequate response to changes in the external environment, develops real goals and strategies for achieving them;

b) identifying the degree of influence of the organizational structure of management on the implementation of the enterprise's goal;

c) substantiation of measures to improve the organizational structure of management and its individual links (elements).

The control of indicators of DPE OS allows to reveal the facts of a critical discrepancy between their given and observed values. In the context of this study, problem is understood as a critical mismatch between the real and desired state of the system, when there is a threat to the implementation of the goals. Diagnostics of the problem involves identifying the causes of its occurrence, determining the magnitude of the mismatch of indicators due to the influence of external and internal factors (5.2). There are correlations between the change in the degree of influence of factors, their combinations and the mismatch between the given and observed values ​​of the indicators. Diagnostic analysis of performance indicators provides information about the positive or negative dynamics of certain aspects of the management system and shows whether it was able to identify all the impacts that are significant for it and how appropriate and conscious the response to them was. It also creates a field for detailed analysis its individual links, which characterizes the individual state of each block of the control system and solves the following tasks:

a) identification of block problems;

b) discovery of reserves and development of directions for their mobilization;

c) substantiation of options for the development of management links;

d) ranking them according to the degree of influence on the development processes, depending on the factors of the external and internal environment of the enterprise.

As a result of a detailed analysis, “pain points” are identified, characterized by a mismatch between costs and the quality of performance of functions, which makes the analysis the basis not only for optimizing a number of production and management parameters, but also for restructuring. Partial performance indicators carry some information about the positive or negative dynamics in the activities of individual blocks of the control system and show their contribution to achieving the main goal of the system. The identification of problems, their investigation and solution can be done within the framework of specific programs or problem-oriented organizational structures. The most common method for identifying problems is diagnostic interviews, the number of which for average organizations is about 30, which helps to identify 40-50 problems.

The generalizing indicator of the effectiveness of the control mechanism K mu characterizes the degree of achievement of the system's goal with the actual costs of maintaining the control apparatus. Particular indicators of the block To mu - the degree of implementation of the targets of individual links with the actual costs of their implementation. The solution of the identified problem lies in the field of adjusting the values ​​of indicators (adjusting the control mechanism), clarifying the goals of the blocks and the main goal of the system (adjusting the goal-setting system), increasing the efficiency of the organizational management structure (the degree of rationality of structuring the system into elements and rationalizing the structure of relations between them). The problem can be solved at the stage of adjusting the values ​​of indicators of the management mechanism and clarifying the goals of the blocks, which does not require restructuring of the organizational structure, and hence significant resources. The relationship between individual types of analysis and their results, which are used to justify the development plan for the organizational structure of management, is shown in Scheme 9.

Generalizing information can be obtained on the basis of a comprehensive analysis of indicators K MC and indicators of the goal-setting mechanism K mu.

It is expedient to carry out an analysis of the organizational structure of the enterprise management in the sequence presented in Scheme 10.

Stage 1. Analysis of the organizational and regulatory support of the management system.

Purpose of the analysis: assessment of the level of organizational and regulatory support (classification of available regulatory and methodological documents), the degree of its compliance with the theory and practice of management, the degree of influence on the formulation of regular management.

Analysis method - normative. Of the main structure-forming documents that are the basis for setting up regular management at the enterprise, the most common are the staffing table and job descriptions. At domestic enterprises, the Regulation on the organizational structure is an extremely rare document. The lack of basic organizational and regulatory documents does not allow building an effective system of control over the activities of the management apparatus and creates great difficulties in identifying defects in the organizational structure of management.

The most common linear-functional management structure cannot ensure the effective functioning of a production organization without the development of appropriate regulatory and regulatory documents that define the tasks of each structural unit, its functions, communications that form rational information flows, the correspondence between the responsibilities and powers of managers at different levels within the allocated resources etc.

Stage 2. Analysis of the integrity of the control object.

Purpose of analysis- assessment of the degree of interrelation and interdependence of the divisions of the production organization, which ensure their interaction in achieving the goal of the system, the formation of information on the feasibility of identifying target economic objects.

Scheme 9. The relationship of individual types of analysis and their results

Scheme 10. Methodology for analyzing the organizational structure of management

Analysis methods: projection method (correspondence matrix), goal structuring method.

Only compatible elements can interact, therefore, a matrix analysis of the expedient compatibility of various activities in the performance of the main function of the system, which determines the mission of the organization, its long-term and short-term goals, as well as ways to achieve them, is necessary. Based on this analysis, incompatible elements of the system receive autonomy, legally fixed by the appropriate organizational and legal form. Interdependence is revealed at the stage of building a tree of system goals.

Stage 3. Analysis of the effectiveness of the goal-setting system.

Purpose of analysis- assessment of the predictive capabilities of the management system, characterized by its ability through its organizational structures to develop a set of real goals and objectives provided by the potential of the organization.

Analysis methods: comparison method, questioning, interviewing, ranking method.

Since the concept of "goal" is fundamental in system analysis and 90% of all errors in management stem from errors in the formulation of goals, the analysis and evaluation of K mts, which characterizes the predictive capabilities of the management system and the quality of planning, is of great importance. To develop goals and strategies to achieve them, ensure the implementation of goals and strategies, as well as adjust them if necessary, the organizational structure should include a predictive block.

The goal tree is not developed by most domestic enterprises with an adequate system of indicators. The main goal of the enterprise as a system is not defined. Planned indicators that are not systematically ordered do not agree with the structure of economic objects, do not correspond to the directions of using resources and obtaining material and material results, therefore it is impossible to evaluate the contribution of each block to the target efficiency of the system.

Stage 4. Analysis of the external effectiveness of the organization (analysis of the degree to which the organization uses external opportunities).

Purpose of the analysis: assessment of the degree to which the management system uses the capabilities of the external environment, taking into account threats, identifying the reasons for the mismatch between the result and the goal in the problem areas discovered at the second stage, the degree of compliance of the organizational structure of management with the entire set of conditions for its functioning in the external environment.

Analysis methods: all methods of analysis and forecasting of the external space of the enterprise from the arsenal of strategic planning.

At this stage, the main environmental factors that most significantly affect the final results of the functioning and development of the organization are clarified, the factors that limit the achievement of private indicators included in the general indicator K MC DPE OS are determined, the gaps between the actual and planned indicators are identified, the reasons for the discrepancy are identified, which can lead to a crisis.

The initial economic standards used in the development of the marketing, financial, supply and sales, pricing, accounting, production, technical, and innovation policies of the enterprise, analyzed as a whole, make it possible to identify specific problems and make a forecast of their development, to clarify the model of the organization's relationship with the external environment. If an enterprise can afford to build a tree of performance indicators for manufactured products, which is somewhat difficult, but well covered in the literature, the quality of the analysis increases.

Allocate:

a) liquidity crisis (real loss of solvency);

b) crisis of success (deviation of actual performance indicators from planned ones);

c) a strategic crisis (diagnosed emerging gap between the likely and desired outcomes).

The external environment of domestic enterprises is characterized a high degree complexity, mobility, uncertainty. The low competitiveness of products makes many enterprises so unstable that any negative changes in the external environment can cause a “collapse of the system”, which, even under normal conditions, is not capable of developing a set of reactions aimed at self-preservation. The main characteristic of the external environment of domestic enterprises should be considered its uncertainty, which is a function of the quantity and quality of incoming information. Consequently, enterprises must have structural prerequisites both for obtaining reliable information about the external environment and for processing it, which affects the effectiveness of decisions made. The lack of reliable information about the external environment is one of the reasons for the formation of an inefficient goal-setting system.

The position of enterprises in the market of manufactured products characterizes their commodity and market potential. The main problems affecting the formation of commodity and market potential are:

insufficient information about the forecast and current state market, considerable effort required to obtain the required information;

discrepancy between the type and structure of the production program and the structure of demand;

wrong marketing and sales policy;

the emergence of high-tech and high-quality competitive products on the market;

instability of logistics conditions.

The degree to which an organization uses external capabilities also characterizes its resource and market potential. The situation of domestic enterprises in the resource and commodity markets is quite difficult, since their financial condition in the vast majority remains difficult. Accounts receivable burden falls on the financial and economic condition of the enterprise. A high percentage of settlements by barter remains, and the quality of supplies is declining.

Stage 5. Analysis of the internal efficiency of the organization (analysis of the degree of use by the organization of its internal capabilities, characterizing the potential of the organization).

Purpose of the analysis: assessment of the ability of the organizational management structure to ensure the achievement of the set goals at the minimum and necessary costs (correspondence of the actual use of internal capabilities by the organization to the “management mechanism” block of the conceptual model, formalized in the form of a generalizing indicator K mu DPE OS).

Analysis methods: all methods of analysis and forecasting of the internal environment of the enterprise used in strategic planning. Of particular importance are the methods of financial analysis and planning, functional cost analysis.

The construction of a logical scheme of the main problems of the enterprise determines the structure of the problem field, the main areas of which are structural and technological(reduction of sales markets for products, non-competitiveness of products due to obsolescence and physical depreciation of fixed capital, growth of costs in excess of the planned level) and organizational and economic(low level of organization of production and management) problems. S. Yang also noted that the viability of an organization and the well-being of its members is determined by their ability to detect, recognize and solve problems in a timely manner. Building a problem field within the framework diagnostic analysis allows you to identify the cause of failures in management and the conditions for their elimination. According to the definition of V. Sh. Rapoport: "Management diagnostics is the identification of problems." Within the framework of a diagnostic analysis of the management system and a detailed analysis of its individual links, organizational problems are recognized, systematized, structured and clearly formulated.

Diagnostic analysis of performance indicators provides information about the positive or negative dynamics of certain aspects of the management system and shows whether it was able to identify all the impacts that are significant for it and how appropriate and conscious the response to them was.

Detailed analysis characterizes the individual state of each block (element) of the organizational structure of management. Partial performance indicators carry some information about the positive or negative dynamics in the activities of individual blocks of the control system, which allows:

specify the problems identified in the diagnostic analysis;

identify the problems of the block (element) itself;

reveal reserves and develop directions for their mobilization.

As a result of a detailed analysis, “pain points” are identified, characterized by a discrepancy between costs and the quality of performance of functions. The generalizing indicator of the effectiveness of the control mechanism K mu characterizes the degree of achievement of the system's goal with the actual costs of maintaining the control apparatus. Particular indicators of the block To mu - the degree of implementation of the targets of individual links with the actual costs of their implementation. Generalizing information can be obtained only on the basis of a comprehensive analysis of indicators K mu and indicators of the goal-setting mechanism K mu.

But identifying, precisely formulating and systematizing problems is only one side of diagnostics. The second is a forecast of the development of existing problems, taking into account the real possibilities for their solution. The connection between prognostic and diagnostic analysis is realized through the forecast of the development of problems. The construction of a logical scheme of the main problems facilitates the process of ranking the performance indicators of the organizational structure of management according to the degree of their influence on the final results of the organization's activities. The analysis of the DPE is predictive in nature, as it involves the refinement of the desired model of the system. Attention to the problem orientation of the analysis is primarily due to the extreme instability, mobility of the external and internal environment of the enterprise, associated with the transitional nature of the domestic economy. An analysis of a problematic situation can lead to a change in intermediate, key goals and even the main goal of the economic system.

The degree of use by the organization of its internal capabilities is characterized by the state technical and technological, property and financial, experimental design, social and other potentials. A certain service is responsible for the state of each of these potentials, and top management is responsible for their linkage and coordination. According to the law, the least structural stability of the whole is determined by the least stability of its part. Therefore, it is economically expedient to have a system of interconnected and interconnected potentials.

Stage 6. Analysis of the compliance of the organizational structure of management with the production structure.

Purpose of the analysis: assessment of the correspondence of the two main subsystems to each other, the formation of information for the development of measures to ensure economic, technological, socio-psychological and organizational compliance.

Analysis methods: methods of financial analysis, projection method (correspondence matrix), functional cost analysis, questioning, interviewing.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of the organizational structure of management can be carried out only from the standpoint of its effectiveness for the managed object. From this point of view, in the chain of the most significant factors taken into account when analyzing the organizational structure, the main ones are: the level of specialization, volume and type of production → technological factors → organization of the production process → production structure → reproduction structure → financial structure → organizational structure.

The information base for such an analysis was mainly created at the previous stages. Particular attention should be paid to the analysis of the feasibility of technological and subject specialization of production units in conjunction with the economic indicators of their activities. The discrepancy between the organizational structure of management and production and reproduction structures can manifest itself in the following areas:

discrepancy between the goals of the blocks (elements) of the management system and the production system;

the failure of the organizational structure of management to ensure the solution of the tasks facing the managed object, when the existing structures are a reflection of the problems that were once solved by the organization;

discrepancy between the capacity of technological and experimental units (pre-production structure) and the pace of production renewal;

the existence of the expediency of identifying target economic objects, when the predicted efficiency of their functioning outside the enterprise is higher than in its composition (the presence of demand for the products of individual divisions);

the presence of a discrepancy between the existing organizational structure of management and the features of interaction and forms of integration with other enterprises;

discrepancy between the organizational and economic, and possibly the organizational and legal form of the subdivisions of the actually established degree of autonomy;

socio-psychological discrepancy.

Stage 7. Identification of the degree of rationality of the distribution of tasks, rights and responsibilities between various structural links. Purpose of analysis : assessment of the degree of reliability (operability) of the organizational structure of management, characterized by the degree of rationality of the horizontal and vertical structuring of the integral system into elements (correspondence of the existing composition of the system, the grouping of types of work and the distribution of managerial functions to the “composition of the system” block of the conceptual model, formalized in the form of a generalizing indicator K ss DPE OS ).

Analysis methods: structuring goals, matrix, expert.

At this stage, based on the data of the previous stages, the functional model of the enterprise is refined, a hierarchy of main and auxiliary functions is built, with the help of which they are implemented. The number of management functions determined by the tree of system goals and the number of actually performed functions are specified, unrealizable (the so-called white spots in the distribution of functions), duplication of functions by two or more services are identified. In parallel, using the matrix, defects are identified in the exercise of delegated decision-making powers (with varying degrees of detail of managerial actions - preparation of a decision, coordination at the stage of preparation, decision-making, execution, control), which can be combined into three main groups:

decisions are made at an unreasonably high level, which reduces their efficiency and distracts management from strategic tasks;

decisions are formally transferred to a lower level, but are not provided with appropriate resources;

decisions are made by employees who not only lack the authority to do so, but also lack reliable information.

Stage 8. Identification of defects in the structure of links (lack of links, breakage, irrationality of links) and ways to implement them.

Purpose of the analysis: assessment of the degree of reliability (operability) of the organizational structure of management, characterized by the degree of rationality of the structure of relations between elements (relationship and interaction), which determines the ability of organizational structures of management to import, process and export information (correspondence of the existing system of relations, their relative position in space and interaction in time to the block " system of connections” of the conceptual model, formalized in the form of a generalizing indicator K sv DPE OS).

Analysis methods: matrix, network, expert.

At this stage, certain parameters of their expedient relationships are analyzed and regulated between the selected elements of the system. The basis is the results of the analysis of input and output documents (information flows), the results of interviews and surveys on the order and content of information exchange between the units (elements) of the system, the analysis of defects in the implementation of transferred decision-making powers, carried out at the previous stage. The matrix of delegated powers for decision-making with varying degrees of detail of management actions allows us to analyze the flow of information (its routing).

Stage 9. Analysis of the quality of the implementation of functions and the cost of their execution.

Purpose of the analysis: formation of information on management costs, taking into account the degree of participation of each unit in achieving the goal of the production organization in order to optimize the costs of performing functions.

Analysis methods: matrix, functional-value.

Functional-cost and functional-quality diagnostics of the organizational structure of management are described in sufficient detail in the literature. Features are ranked using a score matrix in which they are assigned numerical value, reflecting their relative weight and role in achieving the main goal of the organization.

Stage 10. Determination of the integral indicator K eff (zero level of indicators), complex K os and K om (first level), summarizing K ss, K sv, K mts, K mu and comparing them with the corresponding indicators of DPE OS.

Purpose of the analysis: identifying the degree and causes of discrepancy between indicators, determining the degree of impact of identified deviations on achieving the goal of the system.

Analysis methods: factor analysis, expert method.

Generalizing performance indicators K ss, K sv, K mts, K mu are determined by the ranking method based on the principle of optimizing their weighted sum. The integral indicator of the effectiveness of the organizational structure of management K ef is derived on the basis of a formal procedure for applying the principle of successive resolution of uncertainty, which is the key to understanding and using in practice the principles of its construction when forming the organizational structure of management. It is known that the structure of an organization is determined by the complexity and degree of uncertainty of its functioning, so this approach to the synthesis of indicators makes its hierarchy understandable.

The main goal of the system, formulated in the category of profit, also allows you to use this method to comparative analysis organizational structures of management at similar facilities and in similar areas of management activity, since one of the conditions for conducting a comparative analysis is the use of the same calculation methodology and the procedure for measuring indicators. As a basis for comparison, a specially developed average industry, corporate, regulatory standard, formed from several objects according to their standard level, can be used.

Stage 11. Adjustment of indicators of the conceptual model in the form of DPE OS, development of measures to improve the efficiency of the organizational management structure.

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………...3

Chapter 1. The essence of the organizational structure……………………………......5

Scheme of the organizational structure……………………………………………...5

Classification of organizational structures………………………………….… 7

Principles and methods of formation of structures…………………………………………………………………11

Chapter 2. Construction of the organizational structure of the limited liability company "MMC"……………………………………………………….….…13

general characteristics enterprises………………………………………...…………………………………………………13

Analysis of the organizational and managerial structure…………………………15

Chapter 3. Improving the organizational structure of the enterprise ... ... 16

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………38

References………………………………………………………………39

Annex №1…………………………………………………………………..40

Appendix No. 2………………………………………………………………….41

Appendix No. 3………………………………………………………………….42

Appendix No. 4………………………………………………………………….43

Annex No. 5………………………………………………………………….46

Introduction

Increasing the efficiency of the enterprise is largely determined by the organization of the management system, which depends on the clear structure of the enterprise and the activities of all its elements in the direction of the chosen goal.

The need to improve the management system at the present stage is determined by many factors. This includes optimizing the size of the administrative apparatus and its functions; introduction of automated control systems and development of decision-making systems.

Exist Various types organizational structures (linear, linear-functional, functional, matrix, design, divisional, brigade). But not every type of organizational structure fits the organization. Therefore, each organization itself develops an organizational structure that should set a system of responsibility, reporting relationships, and principles for combining employees into groups. In addition, the structure must contain the mechanisms of communication and coordination of the elements of the organization into a coherently working whole.

The consulting project revealed the concept of the organizational structure, the need for its competent construction in accordance with the goals and objectives of the organization, to analyze the current organizational structure in MMC LLC, identify problematic moments and conflict zones, determine their causes and develop ways to solve existing problems.

When collecting information for this work, I used the method of questioning and analysis of documents of the organization.

theoretical object this work is - the organizational structure of the enterprise.

theoretical subject- organizational structure of OOO MMC.

empirical object– fundamental documents of OOO MMC.

Target:analysis of the existing organizational structure of MMC LLC and development of documents for the approval of the organizational structure.

The first chapter is devoted to the disclosure of the concept of organizational structure and its scheme, as well as the classification of organizational structures and the principles of their formation.

In the second chapter, an analysis was made of the construction of the organizational structure of MMC LLC.

The third chapter proposes a solution to existing problems - the lack of an organizational structure, job descriptions and internal labor regulations.

The project consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion and a list of references.

Chapter 1 . The essence of the organizational structure.

Organizational structure diagram.

An organizational structure is a holistic system specifically designed so that people working within it can most effectively achieve their goals.

Within the framework of this structure, the entire management process takes place (the movement of information flows and the adoption of managerial decisions), in which managers of all levels, categories and professional specializations participate. Under organizational structure of management it is necessary to understand the totality of management links located in strict subordination and providing the relationship between the control and managed systems. For the effective operation of the organization, it is important to clearly and clearly define the functional responsibilities and authorities, as well as their relationship. Each employee of the company must understand what is expected of him, what powers he has, what his relationship with other employees should be. This is achieved with the help of an organization scheme, supplemented by appropriate reference books (instructions), and the distribution of responsibilities.

Organizational charts are necessary to ensure effective management, their absence creates chaos: employees do not understand what they should do, how they should do it and with whom they should work; heads of various departments have no idea how their work is combined with the work of other departments. In the absence of an organizational chart, illogical relationships can appear, creating confusion. Organizational charts should be supplemented with a written specification of the basic requirements for each level of management, each department, each position or group of similar positions. These materials will provide workers and groups with additional information to help them understand how their efforts compare with those of others. That is why they will be able to devote all their efforts to the effective performance of their duties, avoiding duplication with other individuals and organizational units. To create a workable mechanism, management must design it according to organizational principles, and not according to individual principles. Moreover, without accurate description official duties no framework can be established to train other employees to do the work of those employees who are promoted. Organizational charts and supporting documentation are needed from the start of a firm, not when it becomes too big to be managed by one person.

Organizational charts do not show important relationships between workers and organizational units. In fact, exactly what they show can be misleading. For example, they do not depict informal lines of communication and influence. The organizational chart depicts the hierarchy of positions, implying that the higher they are, the more important and influential. This is not always true, as some employees are influential in some decisions and lack influence in others. Organizational charts contribute to a very narrow view of employees about their positions. Job definitions mean what people can not do, as well as explaining what they should do. The result is an organization that is not responsive to change. Organizational charts and all supporting documentation (job descriptions and instructions) become only a surrogate for action, not a constructive response.

Attention should be paid to the creation of a well-thought-out, and most importantly, effective scheme of organizational structures.

Classification of organizational structures

In essence, the organizational structure determines the distribution of responsibilities and authorities within the organization. As a rule, it is displayed in the form of a graphic scheme, the elements of which are hierarchically ordered organizational units (divisions, job positions).

There are the following organizational structures:

Linear / line-staff organizational structure;

functional;

Divisional;

Matrix;

Often, the organizational structure is adjusted to the production process of products or services, depending on the type and type of production.

Linear / line-headquarters organizational structure

The linear organizational structure of an enterprise (organization, company) is based on the principle of unity of command, according to which each employee of the organization has only one immediate supervisor. Traditionally, a linear organizational structure is understood as a hierarchy of positions in which the top manager of the organization is connected with each of the subordinate employees by a single chain of command that passes through the corresponding intermediate levels of management (Appendix 1, Fig. 1.).

The advantages of the linear structure are explained by the ease of application. All duties and powers are clearly distributed here, and therefore conditions are created for an operational decision-making process, to maintain the necessary discipline in the team.

Among the shortcomings of the linear construction of the organization, rigidity, inflexibility, unsuitability for further growth and development of the enterprise are usually noted. The linear structure is focused on a large amount of information transmitted from one level of management to another, limiting the initiative of workers at lower levels of management. It makes high demands on the qualifications of managers and their competence in all matters of production and management of subordinates. No more than some variation of the linear organizational structure is the so-called line-staff organizational structure , in which there are positions and divisions that support the adoption of managerial decisions (Appendix 1, Fig. 2.).

It should be noted that based on the approach described above, almost any organizational structure of a modern enterprise can be characterized as linear or linear-headquarters. The matrix or project organizational structure is superimposed on the linear one, and does not eliminate either it or the principle of unity of command as the basis for the stability of the organization's existence.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/

COURSE WORK

Analysis of the organizational structure of the enterprise

Introduction

organizational management management

Today, special attention is paid to the effectiveness of the enterprise management system, which is largely determined by the rationality of the current organizational management structure.

The relevance of the chosen topic lies in the fact that today every enterprise is trying to stay on the world and domestic markets. Not many enterprises are held because of the influence of many factors on the enterprise. One of them is the weak organizational structure of management.

The analysis of management organization is a complex interrelated process of studying the structure and content of the management cycle, the organization of managerial work, information, technical and mathematical support, the composition of bodies and management costs.

The organizational structure of management is the composition, interconnection and subordination of independent management units and individual positions that perform management functions.

The purpose of this course work is to study the existing types of organizational management structures, which will determine the rational management structure for various organizations.

The objectives of this course work are as follows:

Consideration of the concept and essence of the organizational structure of management;

The study of the main types of organizational structures;

Identification of factors that determine the organizational structure of management;

Analysis of the organizational structure of management;

Designing the organizational structure of management.

The object of study of this course work is the organization as a whole: its functional areas, divisions, groups, jobs.

The subject of the study is the organizational structure of management.

1 . Theoretical aspects organizational structure of the enterprise

1.1 The concept and essence of the organizational structure of management

The organizational structure of management refers to the composition of departments, services and divisions in the management apparatus, the nature of subordination and accountability to each other and supreme body management of the firm, as well as a set of coordinating and informational links, the distribution of management functions at various levels and divisions of the management hierarchy. Without an organizational management structure, it would not be possible to manage people, they would not be a controlled crowd, but at best a collection of independent groups, but not as an organization.

Division into departments, subordination, accountability are the main characteristics of organizational management structures. But there are also other characteristics, such as information systems and numerous coordination procedures, that cannot be shown in such a diagram.

The work of an enterprise can be divided and coordinated in various ways. To be effective, the organizational structure of management must be appropriate to the circumstances and conditions prevailing within the organization, as well as in its environment, that is, in the outer. It follows from this that it is possible to determine the optimal structure for only one organization, since the same management structure can never be suitable for another organization. Even for a given organization, after a certain period of time, it will be necessary to modify or draw up a new optimal organizational management structure. The enterprise should not stop at only one organizational structure of management, it alone cannot be suitable for the organization at all times of its existence. Under specific conditions of several structures, one organization is more suitable than the other. But no organization will be absolutely effective.

The internal environment of the organizational structure of management is the composition, ratio, location and interconnection of individual subsystems of the organization. It is aimed primarily at establishing clear relationships between individual divisions of the organization, the distribution of rights and responsibilities between them.

In the organizational structure of the organization's management, the following elements are distinguished: links, levels of management and communication - horizontal and vertical.

Management links include structural units, as well as individual specialists performing the relevant management functions or part of them. Managers who regulate and coordinate the activities of several structural divisions should also be referred to the management links. The formation of the management link is based on the performance of a certain management function by the department. Communication between departments is called horizontal.

Management levels are a set of management links that occupy a certain level in the organization's management systems. Management levels are vertically dependent and subordinate to each other in a hierarchy: managers at a higher level of management make decisions that are concretized and brought to lower levels. Hence the pyramidal structure of the organization's management arose.

Organizational management structures are distinguished by a wide variety of forms, which are based on distinctive features, in particular, the size of the production and commercial activities of the organization, the production profile, the degree of financial and economic independence, the centralization (decentralization) of management, etc. Within the framework of the structure, the management process takes place, between the participants which the tasks and functions of management are distributed, and, consequently, the rights and responsibilities for their implementation.

1.2 Types of organizational management structure

Now organizations that are successfully functioning regularly evaluate the degree of effectiveness of their organizational structures and change them, as required by the external environment. As a result, many types of organizational structures have now appeared, they all depend on adaptation to the specific conditions of the functioning of organizations - complex, multifunctional and extremely flexible. The variety of organizational structures is associated with differences in the field of activity, the nature and complexity of the products produced, the size, degree of differentiation and territorial location of the enterprise. Modern organizational structures are not much similar to the structures of the early twentieth century, when management was just emerging, and they all have a connection with the linear-functional structure of that time. Modern organizational structures, in principle, function as long as they remain the fundamental ideas and rules of linear-functional management.

Consider the main types of organizational management structures:

1. There is a classic management structure, it is also called bureaucratic or traditional. It is characterized by a high degree of division of labor, a developed management hierarchy, a chain of commands, the presence of numerous rules and norms of personnel behavior, and the selection of personnel according to their business and professional qualities.

Figure 1 - Classical organizational structure

Most modern organizations are variants of bureaucracy. The reason for such a long and widespread use of the bureaucratic structure is that its characteristics are still quite well suited to most industrial firms, service organizations and all kinds of public institutions. The objectivity of the decisions made allows an effectively managed bureaucracy to adapt to the ongoing changes. Promotion of employees on the basis of their competence allows for a constant influx of highly qualified and talented technical specialists and administrative workers into such an organization.

2. Linear organizational structure. It is currently the simplest control structure. It is characterized by the fact that at the head of each structural unit there is a single leader, endowed with all powers and exercising sole leadership of subordinate employees and concentrating all management functions in his hands.

Figure 2 - Linear control structure

3. Linear-functional control structure. With this structure, line managers are single bosses, and they are assisted by functional bodies. At present, it is widespread in our country. They carry out their decisions either through the chief executive or directly through the appropriate heads of executive services, but all these decisions are made within the authority of the head.

Figure 3 - Linear-functional structure of the enterprise

4. The functional structure does not exist in the so-called pure form. It is used in conjunction with a linear structure built on the basis of a vertical management hierarchy and based on the strict subordination of the lower management to the highest. With such a construction, the performance of highly specialized functions is intertwined with a system of subordination and responsibility for the direct execution of tasks for designing, manufacturing products and supplying them to consumers.

Figure 4 - Functional management structure

In the process of management, with the growth of the scale of the enterprise, conflicts arise in the choice of priorities, decision-making is delayed, communication lines are lengthened, and the implementation of control functions is difficult.

5. Divisional management structure. Divisional, or departmental (from the English division - branch), management structure is the most common form of management organization of a modern industrial firm. This structure provides a certain independence to its production units, leaving behind the management only the development strategy, research and development, financial and investment policy, etc. In this structure, the heads of functional services report to the heads of production services.

Figure 5 - Divisional structure of the organization

Structuring of production is carried out by departments:

By manufactured products, that is, this is a product specialization;

By focusing on certain groups of consumers, that is, this is consumer specialization;

According to the territories served, that is, territorial specialization.

6. The matrix management structure is a lattice organizational chart built on the principle of dual subordination of performers. With a matrix structure, the personnel of functional units, remaining in their composition and subordination, are also obliged to follow the instructions of project managers or special headquarters, councils, etc., which are formed to manage individual developments and carry out special work.

Figure 6 - Matrix structure of the organization

The matrix structure is a very complex, difficult and sometimes incomprehensible form of organization, and because of this, this structure is often impossible to use. A lot of problems arise due to the imposition of vertical and horizontal powers, which undermines the principle of unity of command. Research in some organizations has shown that this overlap often leads to conflicts. But it responds very well to innovations, such changes are effective and required in a dynamically changing external environment. Therefore, this structure has become widespread in rapidly developing industries such as pharmaceuticals and chemicals.

1.3 Factors that determine an organmanagement structure

An enterprise has the right to exist as an organizational structure in the event that it finds a more effective way than buying on the market to obtain the products the consumer needs, i.e. production and management technology. But at the same time, the functioning of the enterprise takes place in interaction with the external environment for it - sales markets and resources of all kinds. Thus, the formation of the organizational structure occurs as a result of the mutual influence of the strategic plan of the owner and external conditions. The first step is to find out what the company is guided by when deciding to release certain products.

Strategies can be divided according to the entrepreneurs who practice them:

Preservation of the productive capacity of property (in the introduction it appeared as survival);

Social factors entrepreneurial activity(growth of property, obtaining and maximizing income in the short and long term, growth social status and so on.);

Individual attachment to activities of a certain kind.

The first strategy is more or less passive, the other two are active, but in different ways: the second is more flexible in terms of the types of activities chosen, since it focuses on the most efficient (commercially) projects, the second is more conservative, i.e. less sensitive to their commercial side.

Of course, when forming the organizational structure of any enterprise, the needs of their workforce should also be taken into account. However, this component of the formation of the organizational structure in Russia is currently taken into account even too often, which is only to the detriment of the functioning of most enterprises. To the extent that an enterprise practices the second type of strategy, the characteristics of its products depend on market trends. Those. the most important factor in the organizational structure of the enterprise are the consumer preferences of potential customers.

The products manufactured by the enterprise can be intended for people of a narrow circle with specific, different needs, or to meet the needs of ordinary, everyday, or to meet quickly (as a result of changing social trends) changing needs. Depending on this, the motives of end consumers can be divided as follows:

Physiological survival;

Social factors of consumption (tradition, prestige, fashion, hype, utility maximization, etc.);

individual tastes and preferences.

As a rule, the organizational structure of any enterprise "adjusts" to the range of products, output, etc. External investors can also have a significant influence on the formation of the organizational structure. Moreover, the feedback is also very strong here, that is, not only the motives of external investors affect production activities, but also the state of the organizational structure affects the behavior of external investors.

This factor plays a particularly important role in the presence of relationships with foreign investors, for whom the state of the organizational structure is almost the main guarantee of the successful implementation of investment projects. In modern economic conditions, the influence of macroeconomic parameters on the functioning of enterprises and the formation of an organizational structure can hardly be overestimated. If many of the factors listed above can be regulated by the administration of enterprises, then this parameter (as well as the motives of consumers) is completely uncontrollable from the inside, therefore, the organizational structure of enterprises is forced to adapt to its influence.

In order to correctly predict the impact of macroeconomic factors on the functioning of enterprises, it is necessary to evaluate:

Tax regime;

legal regime;

monetary policy;

The rate of inflation and non-payments;

Conditions of foreign economic activity.

After obtaining an idea of ​​the motives of all external groups associated with the activities of the enterprise, it is possible to determine the position of the enterprise in the markets and resources. This factor, in turn, makes it possible to predict the expected state of the enterprise, and, therefore, helps, through a flexible change in the organizational structure, to mitigate the adverse effects of a change in the market situation.

Typically, the assessment of the market position of the enterprise is carried out according to the following parameters:

The degree of differentiation of the sales market by groups of goods and consumers (the degree of qualitative homogeneity of products and the mass of its buyers);

Market sustainability (product life cycle time from market entry to withdrawal from production and sale);

The degree of commercial risk (probability of loss of capital as a result of unforeseen changes);

Capacity (how many goods can be sold on the market during a certain period);

The strength of competition from other sellers of goods and sellers of substitute goods (analogues);

Degree of economic dependence on suppliers (are there alternative supply channels);

The degree of economic dependence on consumers (are there alternative distribution channels).

Another important factor influencing the organizational structure of enterprises is personnel policy. Unfortunately, until now, in most regions, the personnel policy of the administration of enterprises has had a negative impact on the process of forming their organizational structure. The pseudo-concern of many managers about their own employees, attempts to save the team by any means and the rejection of staff reductions necessary in the current economic conditions lead to an unreasonable weighting of the organizational structure at enterprises, which, naturally, does not allow them to function optimally. At this stage, any leader should already be clear that the organizational structure must be sensitive to all changes occurring both in the environment external to the enterprise and within it.

Production and technology are usually evaluated according to the following parameters:

1. Equipment specialization level:

Universal (it is characterized by relatively low cost, productivity, changeover costs and its timing);

Specialized;

Production line (it is characterized by relatively high cost, productivity, changeover costs and its timing).

2. Type of movement of objects of labor:

With or without returns;

The degree of parallelism of the movement (the size of the batch of products, the frequency of launching into production and the volume of backlogs).

3. The nature of the production functions of workers and the way they are coordinated:

Non-standardized and weakly standardized with decentralized management;

Standardized with centralized management.

Undoubtedly, the organizational structure of any enterprise depends on the management style of its leader. However, this factor is absolutely individual, and in addition, any leader is able to create a management structure that would meet the goal of creating the most favorable regime for the implementation of leadership. And the last - the organizational structure is directly dependent on the financial condition of the enterprise. Many cases can be cited when plans for creating an optimal organizational structure were not implemented at enterprises precisely because of the lack of the necessary amount of funds.

2 . Organizational structure of management as an object of study

2.1 Analysis of the organizational structure of management

The study of organizational management structures is an analysis of existing organizational management structures, as well as a synthesis of these management structures.

The analysis of the current organizational structure of management is intended to establish to what extent it meets the requirements for the organization, i.e. determine how rational the management structure is in terms of established evaluation criteria that characterize its quality. Evaluation criteria include:

management principles - the relationship between centralization and decentralization (how many and what decisions are made at the lower level? what are their consequences? how much control functions lie at each level of management?);

The management apparatus is a regrouping of departments, a change in the relationship between them, the distribution of powers and responsibilities, the allocation of some links into independent structures, a change in the nature of intercompany relations, the creation of the necessary intermediate links in the management apparatus, etc.;

management functions - strengthening strategic planning (adjusting the "business plan"), strengthening control over product quality, involving employees in management through the sale of shares, changing approaches to labor motivation, etc.

As a result of the analysis, it is possible to identify "bottlenecks" in the organization's activities. This may be a large linkage of management, parallelism in work, a lag in the development of the organizational structure from ongoing changes in the external environment.

Let's take the first linear organizational structure of management. Here, vertical lines denote organizational communications built on the principle of a leader - a subordinate (or vice versa - in the case of feedback). Horizontal lines indicate business connections between managers of the same level, between colleagues (the linear structure does not provide for horizontal communication links). This kind of structure has a hierarchical chain extending downwards vertically. In other words, each leader is subordinate to several (more than one) members of the organization.

The linear structure does not provide for the specialization of managers as managers, and the problems of managing departments of the organization and the organization as a whole are solved by specialists of a narrow profile. The linear structure in its pure form assumes that in his area of ​​work the manager must solve all the problems of production (technological, personnel, problems of supply, control, planning, etc.).

The behavior of members of the organization within the linear structure is completely focused on the immediate leader. Any issue must be resolved only through the immediate supervisor. At the same time, without the permission of the leaders, initiatives of subordinates and innovations are not allowed. Of course, this is unrealistic without strict, if possible, comprehensive managerial control. The unconditional behavior of subordinates in relation to the norms in a linear structure is achieved due to the absence of horizontal connections that ensure collegiality in solving production problems and a certain independence in decision-making at lower management levels.

Successful leadership within a linear structure is possible only if managers at all levels exercise their authority in terms of accounting and control of literally all the actions of subordinates. As a result, the leaders of linear structures use punishments and rewards of subordinates as a motivating incentive. Other methods of motivation are practically not used. As a rule, linear structures are appropriate in cases where team members have a low degree of maturity, have mastered a small number of organizational roles and are not prone to independent decisions and initiative.

In general, we can say that linear structures have the following advantages:

The ability of the organization to function in the mode of simple and quick solutions. At the same time, there is practically no uncertainty in the perception of decisions and the most complete control is exercised over literally all the actions of the members of the organization;

Minimizing the possibility of creating coalitions of managers of the same level, which greatly reduces the resistance of middle managers in relation to the decisions of top managers;

Minimizing the number of managers in the organization. The lack of specialization, the multifunctionality of managers at various levels, the formalization and rigidity inherent in the very basis of the linear structure lead to a reduction in the number of specialized functions, and the main emphasis is on control functions. The latter can be carried out with a minimum of costs if the leader has authority among subordinates.

But the shortcomings of these structures are so significant that modern organizations are practically not built on the basis of purely linear structures. Their shortcomings, first of all, include;

extreme difficulties in adapting to any changes in the external environment

· the lack of originally foreseen specialization, as a result of which managers in linear structures have to perform not only the functions of managing all processes at the level of their department, but also the role of experts on all technical issues, i.e. specialists-professionals in a narrow production area;

· the presence of only vertical communication links and a multi-level management structure causes the absence of collective, coordinated decisions at the level of management of departments.

Linear organizational structures are effective only in a very limited number of cases of the functioning of the organization, in particular, in the presence of simple goals and an unchanged external environment. In the case of a real complex market environment, the creative nature of work or goals associated with the need to adapt to the external environment, such structures are not effective and their real application should be abandoned.

Linear-functional structures. The presence of functional elements in management structures is due to the constant desire of the management of organizations to use the high managerial and leadership qualities of managers and at the same time make competent, informed decisions in highly specialized areas that require special education and special knowledge and skills.

The essence of the functional structure of the organization lies in the fact that all complex decisions that require technical, economic, legal, psychological and other special knowledge should be made only by employees who specialize in these areas and have the necessary competence, which ordinary line managers do not have.

The functional structure allows for leadership organizational processes with the inclusion of the largest number of competent managers, professionals in narrow areas of knowledge and activity, but it is practically not used in modern organizations due to its inefficiency.

Experience shows that from the activities of organizations, the effect is achieved only if one person, the only leader, is responsible for the entire production process in a unit or in one area. in fact, it is a line manager. The constant change of specialist managers inevitably gives rise to irresponsibility, lack of control over activities; double subordination, as well as role conflicts and uncertainty of role settings. Due to these circumstances, the functional structure in its pure form is not currently used.

The practice of using linear structures suggested some ways to overcome their shortcomings, in particular, the combination of a centralized linear structure and a highly specialized functional structure. The essence of the linear-functional structure is that the organizational structure includes separate structural units: (subdivisions) that perform highly specialized functions at a high professional level. The influence of the activities of these structural units extends to certain aspects of the linear structure in this way: at some point in the activity, the line manager transfers his management rights to representatives of the functional structure, but makes sure that the prerogatives of the functional manager do not go beyond his competence.

The unity of such an organization is not easy to achieve. All the problems of combining linear and functional structures are connected with the law of the action of power in an organization. Each line manager believes that only he is able to make the right decisions and contribute to their implementation. At the same time, a specialist in a narrow field of activity - a functional manager - believes that no one understands his issues except him. This attitude to decision-making in the organization's divisions can create tension and conflict between line and functional managers, as well as the problem of dual leadership in relation to performers.

divisional structures. One of the noticeable trends in the organizational restructuring of enterprises in a transitional economy is a significant increase in the independence of individual links in management structures and the creation of subsidiaries on this basis. Around large enterprises, a network of small mobile firms is being formed that can quickly rebuild in relation to changing demand. Thanks to this, the enterprises of manufacturers of products are approaching the consumer sector, and the process of selling products is accelerating. From the production and organizational structure of many large enterprises, subdivisions with a complete production cycle stand out. On the one hand, independent economic entities are created, focused on certain consumers, and on the other hand, the integrity of the production and technological complex, the general focus and profile of its activities are preserved.

The divisional form can be viewed as a combination of organizational links serving a specific market and managed centrally. Its logic is to combine the autonomy of departments with a centrally controlled process of resource allocation and evaluation of results.

Matrix structures. Modern market relations, especially relations such as producer - consumer or producer - competitors, as well as producer - social institutions, are undergoing constant changes, to which the organization must respond in order to maintain a balance between input and output. For example, if a change in market conditions requires the release of another product (or another modification of the product), some of the organizational units of the organization must be changed or replaced with new structural units and temporarily out of the production process. However, all parts of the former structure are rigidly interconnected, all the roles of members of the organization are rigidly fixed, so it is necessary to carry out major structural changes at high costs on the part of the organization.

The need to take into account these circumstances ultimately led to the search for new organizational structures that could easily respond to such external influences as changes in situations in the market and institutional environment. These structures are called flexible. Their flexibility manifests itself in two main aspects:

Structural flexibility - the mobility of relationships between structural units;

numerical flexibility - variability quantitative composition personnel focused on certain areas of organizational activity.

In a matrix organization, project managers are responsible for coordinating all activities and using resources related to a given project. To this end, all material and financial resources for this project are transferred to their disposal. Project managers are also responsible for the planning of the project and the progress of its implementation in all quantitative, qualitative and temporal terms. As for the heads of functional units, they delegate some of their responsibilities to the project manager, decide where and how this or that work should be done.

The matrix structure contributes to the collective expenditure of resources, which is essential when the output is associated with the need to use rare or expensive types of resources. At the same time, a certain flexibility is achieved, which, in essence, is absent in functional structures, since in them all employees are permanently assigned to certain functional units. Along with flexibility, the matrix organization opens up great opportunities for effective coordination of work.

At present, the linear-functional structure continues to exist along with project management, hence it follows that the project structure is most likely one of the ways to overcome the shortcomings and complement the specified structure, and not as its replacement.

2.2 Designing organizational management structures

The design of organizational management structures is a synthesis, that is, a division into parts. The methodology for researching and designing management structures of organizations, on the one hand, should be based on scientific principles of management, on the other hand, take into account the personal qualities and experience of managers who are well aware of the capabilities of the organization and the requirements that regulate the activities of each of the departments.

These requirements emphasize the importance of a systematic approach to the formation or improvement of organizational structures and to the development of a methodology with a sufficient degree of detail in the management stages.

Organizational design is the modeling of the enterprise management system, carried out before its construction, or on the eve of significant changes.

There are many requirements for the management structure, reflecting its key importance for management. They are taken into account in the principles of designing the organizational structure of management. The main of these principles can be formulated as follows.

1. The organizational structure of management should, first of all, reflect the goals and objectives of the organization, and, therefore, be subordinate to production and its needs.

2. An optimal division of labor between management bodies and individual workers should be provided for, ensuring the creative nature of the work and the normal workload, as well as proper specialization.

3. The formation of the management structure should be associated with the definition of the powers and responsibilities of each employee and management body, with the establishment of a system of vertical and horizontal links between them.

4. Between functions and responsibilities, on the one hand, and powers and responsibilities, on the other, it is necessary to maintain a correspondence, the violation of which leads to dysfunction of the management system as a whole.

5. The organizational structure of management is designed to be adequate to the socio-cultural environment of the organization, which has a significant impact on decisions regarding the level of centralization and detail, the distribution of powers and responsibilities, the degree of independence and the extent of control of leaders and managers. In practice, this means that attempts to blindly copy management structures that function successfully in other socio-cultural conditions do not guarantee the desired result.

The main factor "setting" the possible contours and parameters of the management structure is the organization itself. A wide variety of organizations in the Russian Federation predetermines the plurality of approaches to building management structures. These approaches are different in organizations commercial and non-commercial, large, medium and small, located at different stages of the life cycle, having different levels of division and specialization of labor, its cooperation and automation, hierarchical and "flat", and so on. Obviously, the management structure of large enterprises is more complex than that required by a small firm, where all management functions are sometimes concentrated in the hands of one or two members of the organization (usually a manager and an accountant), where, accordingly, there is no need to design formal structural parameters. As the organization grows, and hence the volume of managerial work, the division of labor develops, and specialized units are formed (for example, in personnel management, production, finance, innovation, etc.), the well-coordinated work of which requires coordination and control. Building a formal governance structure that clearly defines roles, relationships, powers, and levels becomes imperative.

It is important to pay attention to the interface between the management structure and the phases of the life cycle of an organization, which, unfortunately, is often forgotten by designers and specialists who solve the problem of improving management structures. At the stage of the inception of the organization, management is often carried out by the entrepreneur himself. At the stage of growth there is a functional division of labor of managers. At the stage of maturity in the management structure, the tendency towards decentralization is most often realized. During the decline stage, measures are usually developed to improve the management structure in accordance with the needs and trends in changing production. Finally, at the stage of termination of the existence of the organization, the management structure is either completely destroyed (if the company is liquidated), or it is reorganized.

The formation of the management structure is influenced by changes in the organizational forms in which enterprises operate. So, when a company joins any association, management functions are redistributed (of course, some of the functions are centralized), so the management structure of the company also changes. However, even if an enterprise remains independent and independent, but becomes part of a network organization that temporarily unites a number of interconnected enterprises (most often to take advantage of a favorable situation), it has to make a number of changes to its management structure. This is due to the need to strengthen the functions of coordination and adaptation to the management systems of other companies in the network.

Conclusion

In this course work, a study was made of the organizational structure of management. The assigned tasks were completed.

The organizational structure of management is a set of ways in which the labor process is first divided into separate work tasks, and then coordination of actions to solve problems is achieved. In essence, the organizational structure determines the distribution of responsibilities and authorities within the organization. It is displayed as a graphical scheme, the elements of which are hierarchically ordered organizational units (divisions, job positions).

The main characteristics of organizational management structures are division into departments (departments, sectors, etc.), subordination, accountability.

There are main types of organizational management structures:

Linear;

Linear-functional;

Divisional;

Matrix.

The variety of organizational structures is associated with differences in the field of activity, the nature and complexity of the products produced, the size, degree of differentiation and territorial location of the enterprise. Modern organizational structures are not much similar to the structures of the early twentieth century, when management was just emerging, and they all have a connection with the linear-functional structure of that time. Modern organizational structures, in principle, function as long as they remain the fundamental ideas and rules of linear-functional management.

The analysis showed the advantages and disadvantages of each of the studied management structures. Each management structure is optimal in its own way, they can simply exist at different periods of the enterprise's existence and adapt to ongoing changes. Flexible structures were also considered, including both matrix and project management structures.

Currently, each enterprise chooses its own organizational structure of management.

The design of the management structure makes it possible to create a rational structure. The creation of departments (divisions) by grouping similar production functions and employees allows for more efficient management, the necessary flexibility of the company's management during the expansion of its economic activities.

The main trend is that each subsequent structure becomes simpler and more flexible than the previous ones. There is no doubt that in the near future we will be faced with a wide variety of structures, each of which will meet the needs of a particular organization.

List of sources used

1. Alekseenko V.B. Organization and management of an industrial enterprise: Proc. allowance - 2007

2. Ignatiev A.V. Control Systems Study - 2008

3. Knorring V.I. Theory, practice and art of management. Textbook for universities in the specialty "Management". - 2007

4. Makasheva Z.M. Research of control systems: Proc. allowance - 2009

5. Marenkov N.L. Personnel management of organizations. - 2006

6. Novitsky N.I. Organization of production at enterprises - 2007

7. Economics of the organization - 2007

Hosted on Allbest.ru

Similar Documents

The concept of the organizational structure of management, its classification and varieties, development technology at the present stage and the requirements. Analysis and proposals for the development of the organizational structure of the management of the enterprise under study.

thesis, added 08/22/2012


Essence and concept of organizational structure. Analysis of the external and internal environment, the main performance indicators on the example of MUP "IMKH". Ways to improve the economic efficiency of the organization on the basis of improving the management structure of the enterprise.

term paper, added 11/30/2010


The concept of the organizational structure of management. Factors influencing the process of choosing the organizational structure of management. General characteristics of the organization's activities. Development of an organizational and managerial plan for the implementation of project activities.

thesis, added 01/20/2010


The role of the management structure in the effective operation of the enterprise. The concept and principles of building organizational structures. Analysis of the production structure on the example of an enterprise, its description. Ways to improve the organizational structure of the enterprise.

term paper, added 01/21/2009


Characteristics of the types of management structures. Study, analysis, ways of development of the organizational structure of LLC "PPO "ORBITA". Criteria for the effectiveness of measures to improve the organizational structure. Indicators of efficiency and effectiveness.

term paper, added 05/08/2015


Theoretical foundations for the formation of the organizational structure of the management of mass catering enterprises. Analysis of the current management structure at Eurasia Bolsheviks LLC. Evaluation of the effectiveness of the implemented organizational structure of management in the company.

thesis, added 03/14/2010


The essence of the organizational structure of personnel management, types of organization, stages and principles of its construction. Evaluation of the organizational structure and organizational links of the enterprise, calculation of the economic effect of measures to improve it.

thesis, added 05/31/2010


The concept, essence and meaning of the organizational structure, its forms and types. Brief description of the enterprise under study, analysis of its economic activity, efficiency assessment, directions for improving the organizational structure, its management.

term paper, added 12/05/2014


Characteristics of the organizational structure as a category of management. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of CJSC "Pharmindustrias". Portfolio analysis of the organization's activities. The design process and ways to improve the organizational structure of the enterprise.

term paper, added 11/25/2012


Essence and concept of organizational structure. Methods for designing the organizational structure of enterprise management. Analysis of the organizational and managerial structure of CJSC "Energotex". Analysis of the work of functional units and management levels.