Construction and analysis of organizational management structure. Analysis of the organizational structure of enterprise management
ACADEMY OF LABOR AND SOCIAL RELATIONS
ALTAI INSTITUTE OF LABOR AND LAW
FACULTY OF FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC
Course work
by discipline: Fundamentals of Management
on the topic of: Analysis of the organizational structure of the enterprise
and justification for the proposal for its optimization
Completed by: 3rd year student, 351 groups
___________________________
___________________________
Scientific adviser:
___________________________
academic degree, title
___________________________
"_____"______________2006
Grade____________________
___________________________
Barnaul 2006
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………..3 pages.
1. Theoretical aspects of construction
organizational structures.
1.1 The essence of the organizational structure,
its significance and role in the organization…………….…………………………........6 p.
1.2 Classification and types of organizational structures…………………….11 p.
1.3 Principles of constructing organizational structures……………...……..20 p.
2. Analysis of the organizational structure of OJSC Altai-koks
2.1 Conditions and results of activities of OJSC Altai-koks……………...23 p.
2.2 Organizational structure of OJSC Altai-koks.........34 p.
2.3 Assessment and conclusions on organizational
structure of OJSC "Altai-koks"……………………………………………………………………..37 p.
2.4 Side effects of optimization
organizational structure of the enterprise………………………..…………39 pages.
organizational structure of OJSC "Altai-koks"………...………………………41 p.
Conclusion……………….……………………………………………………44 p.
References……….……………………………………………………………...48 pp.
Applications
Introduction
One of the most important problems in the development of modern industrial enterprises is the optimization of their organizational structure in order to create a new one, adequate to the changed realities of the economic environment.
Being in a complex and dynamic environment, an enterprise is influenced by many and not always predictable factors. At the same time, he has to solve many different problems. This variety of factors and tasks to be solved gives rise to various forms of organizational structures.
Creating an effective organizational structure is one of the most important tasks of managers of any company. Both the speed and quality of the organization’s work depend on the harmony and consistency of the structure. If every person in the company is “in the right place” and knows his job responsibilities, if there are rules for the interaction of departments with each other, then the company’s activities will resemble a well-oiled mechanism that works with maximum results and minimum costs.
One of the most painful processes for any company is the optimization of the organizational structure, which affects the material and career interests of employees. The main problem that arises in this regard is the need to simultaneously maintain a stable “core” of the team and introduce new workers. An effective organizational structure, in addition, provides the opportunity for both coordinated interaction of all departments, services and officials in accordance with adopted plans, and the opportunity for self-realization of all employees who ensure the development and progress of the organization.
Thus, optimizing the organizational structure is one of the most important management tasks for modern enterprises.
Problems of organizational structuring in various spheres of the economy were considered in the works of O.S. Vakhinsky, A.I. Naumova, B.Z. Milner, V.R. Vesnina, I.N. Gerchikov and others.
Among foreign scientists, the most famous are the works of M. Weber, A. Fayol, F. Taylor, L. Gilbert and others, who laid the theoretical foundation for modern organizational design.
Based on the relevance of the research, the state of knowledge and the content of the problem, the goal course work is to develop recommendations for optimizing and improving the organizational structure of the enterprise.
To achieve the goal of the study, the following tasks were set:
The main theoretical aspects of the construction of organizational structures are considered: concepts, essence, meaning, classification, types, principles of construction, etc.;
An analysis of the organizational structure of OJSC Altai-koks was carried out based on the conditions and results of the enterprise’s activities;
Based on the shortcomings identified as a result of the analysis, practical recommendations for optimizing and improving the organizational structure are proposed.
To solve the above problems, the annual financial statements of OJSC Altai-koks for 2004, 2005, 2006 were used, namely:
Balance sheet (form No. 1) (Appendix 1);
Profit and loss statement (form No. 2).
The object of study of the course work is the open joint-stock company Altai-koks in Zarinsk Altai Territory.
The subject of the study is the processes of optimizing the organizational structure of an enterprise.
Theoretical and methodological basis of the work there were achievements of domestic and foreign science and practice on issues of organizational structures. The theoretical basis of the study is scientific monographic and journal literature on management, personnel management and a number of other sciences related to management. As the methodological basis of the course work, dialectical methodology with such general scientific methods as induction and deduction, analysis and synthesis, system-structural and structural-functional methods was used.
In addition, the following methods were also used in the course work:
- monographic And economic-statistical when conducting observations at OJSC Altai-koks and management analysis of the organization’s economic activities;
- observation and interviewing when determining the assessment of the enterprise team of organizational changes;
- abstract-logical– when determining the causes and trends of problems associated with optimizing the organizational structure of an enterprise, assessing possible ways their decisions;
- constructive– to develop recommendations for improving the organizational structure of OJSC Altai-koks;
- drawings, diagrams, diagrams, partial descriptions, etc.. methods.
1. Theoretical aspects of construction
organizational structure
1.1 The essence of organizational structure, its meaning and role
Organizational structure is the composition and relationships between various divisions of an enterprise, which are determined on the basis of common targets and functional tasks, and are based on a combination of specialization and cooperation [Tomilova, 164].
Organizational structure is one of the main elements of organization management. It is characterized by the distribution of management goals and objectives between departments and employees of the organization. In essence, the management structure is an organizational form of division of labor for making and implementing management decisions, aimed primarily at establishing clear connections between individual divisions of the organization, distributing rights and responsibilities between them [Kabushkin, 45].
The organizational structure of management must be understood as the composition of management bodies and individual officials (managers), reflecting the nature of the subordination between them.
The organization's management structure includes the following elements:
Units (departments, divisions);
Levels (stages) of control;
Relationships are functional (horizontal and vertical), linear (relations of management and subordination), formal (regulated) and informal (trust).
Links are structural units, as well as individual specialists performing relevant functions. For example, managers who regulate and coordinate the activities of several structural divisions are classified as management units.
An enterprise division can be defined as a functional area related to the work that a division performs for the organization as a whole. Examples of this include sales, production, personnel training or financial planning.
In the structure of an organization, management levels and functional areas form logical relationships, built in a form that allows the organization's goals to be most effectively achieved. In this case, goals are specific end states or desired results that a group strives to achieve by working together. During the planning process, management develops goals that are subsequently communicated to members of the organization. This is an important point, because is a powerful coordination mechanism; it is what allows members of the organization to know what they should strive for.
Based on management's decision about the structure, each position in the organization includes a number of tasks that are considered as necessary contributions to achieving the organization's goals. Task- is a prescribed work, a series of works or a part of work that must be completed in a predetermined way within a predetermined time [Americans, 95]. From a technical point of view, tasks are not assigned to the employee, but to his position. Formulation of tasks is one of the areas of division of labor in an organization.
The two main concepts related to organizational structure are: specialized division of labor And sphere of control.
Specialized division of labor is the assignment of a specific job to specialists that is, between those who are able to perform it best from the point of view of the organization as a whole. In all organizations, with the exception of the smallest ones, there is a horizontal division of labor along specialized lines.
Horizontal division of labor– this is a qualitative and quantitative differentiation and specialization of labor activity. In essence, this is the division of all work into its constituent components, i.e. division of the general production process into private, continuous separation of various types of labor activity with specialization of production of performers. Horizontally, labor is divided, as a rule, according to functional, product, industry and qualification criteria [Kabushkin, 34].
If the organization is large enough in size, then specialists are grouped together within functional areas. The choice of functional areas determines the basic structure of the organization and, to a large extent, the possibilities for its successful operation.
The effectiveness and efficiency of the ways in which work is divided among people - from the top down to the very first level of the organization - in many cases determines how productive an organization can be compared to its competitors. But no less important is how the vertical division of labor is carried out [America, 93].
Vertical division of labor acts as a separation of the management function, the essence of which is the purposeful coordination and integration of the activities of all elements of the organization [Kabushkin, 35]. In other words, this is the separation of coordination work from the actual execution of the task. The deliberate vertical division of labor in an organization results in a hierarchy of management levels. Figure 1 shows an example of one of the options for management levels [Amerekosy, 43].
Fig.1 Control levels
There can be many levels of management in an organization, but traditionally they are divided into three categories. Sociologist Talcott Parsons views these three categories in terms of the function that a leader performs in an organization. Figure 2 shows the correspondence between these levels and the concept of the level of control according to Parsons [Amerekosy, 45].
Managerial Control
level middle management
Fig.2 Methods of representing control levels
The shape of the pyramid shows that at each subsequent level there are fewer people than at the previous one.
Highest level of management The organization can be represented by the general director, deputy director, board, etc. This group provides for the interests and needs of shareholders, develops the policies of the organization and contributes to its practical organization. Top management can be divided into two sub-levels: executive management and general management.
Management mid-level management ensure the implementation of the organization's operating policies developed by senior management and are responsible for communicating more detailed tasks to divisions and departments, as well as for their implementation. Managers in this group have a wide range of responsibilities and have greater freedom of choice. These include such managers as heads of departments, heads of structural divisions, as well as directors of enterprises that are part of the organization.
Lowest level of management are represented by junior managers who are above workers and other employees who are not managers. These are foremen, foremen, administrators, etc.
Thus, the hierarchy permeates the entire organization, descending to the level of non-managerial personnel. Figure 3 provides an example of a vertical hierarchy.
Fig. 3 Levels of management and scope of control
The number of persons subordinate to one manager is sphere of control, which is an important aspect of organizational structure. The scope of control can be wide or narrow. If a manager has a fairly large number of people subordinate to him, then we are talking about a wide sphere of control, which results in a flat management structure. With a narrow span of control, few people report to the manager, but this may mean a multi-level structure of the organization. In general, large organizations with flat structures have fewer layers of management than comparable-sized organizations with multi-level structures. In practice, the scope of control in an organization often varies greatly, both across management levels and across functional areas [Amerekosy, 93].
The purpose of the organizational structure is to ensure the sustainable development of the socio-economic system through the formation, preservation and improvement of ways of interconnection and interaction of the system with the external environment and internal interaction of system elements. Associated with the intended purpose is the ability to adapt the structure to changing environmental conditions with the least expenditure of time, labor, material and financial resources [Rusinov, 181 p.].
Stability, rationality, adaptability, flexibility, controllability, communication, reliability, organizational culture are the main characteristics determined by the essence, properties and purposes of the organization’s structure.
Therefore, organizational structure is a means to achieve the company's strategic goals. A tool that, being a kind of “skeleton,” ensures the stability and sustainability of the company, while at the same time changing as the business environment changes.
1.2 Classification and types of organizational structures
Organizational structures are divided into four types: traditional, divisional, matrix, combined.
Traditional structures are based on a combination of the principles of linear and functional departmentalization in the design of an organization.
Departmentalization is the process of dividing an organization into separate units, which may be called departments, divisions or sectors.
Traditional structures are sometimes also called classical.
Sustainability and rationality were priority parameters in the formation of classical organizational structures. At the beginning of the twentieth century. The German sociologist Max Weber formulated the concept of bureaucracy, which contains the following characteristics of a rational structure:
A clear division of labor, which leads to the emergence of highly qualified specialists in each position;
Hierarchy of management levels, in which each lower level is controlled by a higher one and is subordinate to it;
The presence of an interconnected system of generalized formal rules and standards that ensures the uniformity of employees’ performance of their duties and the coordination of various tasks;
Formal impersonality in the performance of official duties by officials;
Carrying out hiring in strict accordance with qualification requirements. Protection of employees from arbitrary dismissals [Americans, 339 p.].
Bureaucratic structures developed successively from simpler to more complex.
Among the traditional structures, the following structures are distinguished:
Linear;
Functional;
Linear-functional;
Divisional.
Linear organizational structure is one of the simplest organizational structures. An example of a linear organizational structure is presented in Fig. 4
Fig.4 Diagram of linear organizational structure
The linear structure is built on the basis of a vertical management hierarchy and is based on the strict subordination of the lower echelons to the highest management echelons. With this structure, the performance of highly specialized functions is intertwined with a system of subordination and responsibility for the direct implementation of tasks, for example, in the design, production of products and their delivery to consumers [Milner, 106 p.].
A linear structure is typical when organizing work at the lower levels of a family or small business. In this structure, the work performed is very similar, and workers are not differentiated.
In order to move on to an explanation of the linear-functional structure, we will consider separately the functional organizational structure, since functional structuring is the most widespread form of organizing activities and takes place in almost all enterprises at one or another level of the organizational structure. The functional structure is shown schematically in Fig. 5
Fig.5 Diagram of functional organizational structure
The chain of command comes from the president (senior leader) and permeates the structure from top to bottom. Management of sales organization, financial issues, data processing and other functions that are specific to a particular enterprise is carried out by vice presidents. Managers report to them. And so on down the hierarchical ladder, tasks are subject to further functional division in accordance with processes [Milner, 106 p.].
In the functional structure, personnel are grouped according to the broad tasks they perform (for example, production, marketing, finance, etc.) The specific characteristics and features of the activities of a particular unit correspond to the most important areas of activity of the entire organization. When the functional structure is used partially, one of the functions (for example, financing) is carried out either at a higher level of management, or at the same level with divisions structured by product, customer or territorial basis.
In its pure form, the functional structure is practically not used, but is used in organic combination with a linear structure. Hence arises linear-functional structure (Fig. 6).
Fig.6 Linear-functional diagram
organizational structure of the enterprise
In this structure, the division of rights and responsibilities is divided between different bodies that manage technical developments, for example, the purchase of raw materials, production, sales, etc. A special management apparatus, consisting of functional units (directorates, departments, groups, bureaus) is called services (headquarters - from the English staff). Such units carry out their decisions either through the top manager, or (within the limits of special powers) directly convey them to specialized services or individual performers at a lower level. Functional departments, as a rule, do not have the right to independently give orders to production departments. (Grechkova, p. 441)
The linear-functional structure is used in enterprises where they produce sustainably great amount homogeneous products and economies of scale of production are significant [Milner, 106 p.].
Linear-functional structures have a number of advantages and disadvantages (Table 1).
Table 1
Advantages and disadvantages of a linear-functional organizational structure
| Advantages |
Flaws linear-functional structure |
| Clarity and certainty in the system of relationships between functions and departments The ability of the manager to concentrate on the entire set of functional processes Clear Responsibility Fast and adequate reaction executive units on direct instructions from superiors |
Lack of strategic planning units Lack of understanding of strategic perspectives by managers at many levels and, consequently, dominance of operational management Difficulties in coordinating the activities of functional units and determining responsibilities when solving problems that require the participation of several units Insufficient flexibility and low degree of adaptability to the dynamics of external factors Inconsistency between the performance criteria of functional units and the organization as a whole Distancing the direct performers of specific functions and decision makers - “overload” of managers top level Increasing dependence of the organization’s performance on the personal and business qualities of the leader Lack of opportunities to enhance internal communications and compensate for the feeling of disconnection between employees of different departments |
An analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the linear-functional structure of an organization leads to the conclusion that it is difficult to use in modern conditions, when the tasks of market adaptation become relevant [Tomilov, 174 p.].
For organizations with a wide range of products, operating in an environment with rapidly changing consumer and technological needs, as well as for organizations operating on a wide international scale, simultaneously in several markets in countries with different socio-economic systems and legislation, it will be most suitable divisional structure[Americans, 343 p.].
A divisional scheme, according to A. Sloan, can be defined as “coordinated decentralization” [Tomilov, 175 p.]. An example of a divisional structure is presented in Figure 7.
Fig.7 Divisional organizational structure
The highest level of management in the organization centralizes planning and distribution of basic resources, and also makes strategic decisions. Units make tactical and operational decisions and are responsible for generating profits.
The divisional structure breaks a complex linear-functional organization into separate blocks, in which “local” problems are solved in their own way. Individual divisions can be bureaucratic or also divisional, have an authoritarian leader, or serve as a model of democracy [Tomilov, 176 p.].
There are structures that are formed either on a product or territorial basis. They are most often used in large corporations that produce a wide range of products for various markets. In this case, the product organizational structure is most typical for them (Fig. 8).
Fig.8 Product organizational structure
With this structure, departments specialized in types of products with independent economic activities are subordinate to the central headquarters of the organization. Here, senior management may delegate broad authority to direct production, sales, support and engineering activities related to the manufacture of a specific product or range of products.
Division on a territorial basis is a fairly common way of structuring enterprises dispersed over a vast territory. Such structures are also called regional (Fig. 9)
Fig.9 Regional organizational structure
All activities of the organization in a given territory are grouped and subordinate to its top manager.
The divisional structure has a number of advantages and disadvantages.
Advantages:
Solving current problems is excluded from the work of top management;
Separation of the operational level of management, concentrating on the production of a specific product, from the strategic level, responsible for the development of the organization as a whole;
Transfer of responsibility for profit to the “product” level, which frees up time for senior management to think about strategic tasks;
Increasing attention in the process of work to a specific result (product, consumer, market);
Development of decentralization, initiative and autonomy;
Translating the “bottleneck effect” from the top level down, weakening its negative effect.
Disadvantages of the divisional structure:
Contrasting product goals with overall organizational goals;
The emergence of duplication of work and an increase in the number of personnel, due to which there is an increase in income for the maintenance of additional services;
The autonomy of parts of the organization makes it difficult to control from above.
To enable organizations to respond to environmental changes and implement new technology They were designed adaptive organizational structures.
The two main types of adaptive organizational structures used today are project-based and matrix organizations.
A project organization is a temporary structure created to solve specific problems.
As a rule, this is a team of the most qualified employees of the organization assembled to implement a complex project on time with a given level of quality, without going beyond the established budget. After completing the project, the team disbands.
The main advantage of a project-based organizational structure is the concentration of all efforts on solving one single problem.
By combining two types of structures: project and linear-functional, a modern effective type of organizational structure is formed, which is called a matrix organizational structure. The matrix structure diagram is shown in Fig. 10
 |
- working autonomous groups
Fig. 10 Matrix organizational structure
Matrix structure- this is a structure that unites relatively autonomous groups focused on the implementation of individual projects and the development of individual areas of activity [Tomilov, 176 p.]. Each group is free to find methods for organizing its work. It independently acquires resources and distributes produced products. Distinctive feature The matrix structure is the formal presence of two bosses at the same time for an employee who have equal rights.
The advantages of this structure are:
High ability to adapt to changes in the external environment;
Changing the balance between technical and administrative goals;
Changing the balance between features and product;
Possibility of flexible use of personnel with both functional and product training;
Development of mechanisms for plurality of power and local decision-making (in groups);
Flaws:
Dual subordination can become a source of conflict;
The ambiguity of the role of the employee and his managers;
Creating tension in relations between employees;
The need for long-term training of employees when implementing the structure;
The need for an appropriate organizational culture;
Complexity and cumbersome structure;
High overhead costs;
Ineffectiveness of the structure during periods of crisis.
In addition to traditional and adaptive organizational structures, there are combined (mixed) organizational structures that can consist of various structures presented above. Practice abounds in combined structures that combine the properties of linear-functional, divisional and matrix structures.
Thus, from the many types of organizational structures, a manager must choose the most optimal one for his enterprise.
1.3 Design principles
organizational structure
According to classical organization theory, the structure of an organization should be designed from the top down. At the beginning, the organization is divided into broad areas, then specific tasks are set [Americans, 338 p.].
We must not forget that the organizational structure must change in accordance with the requirements of external conditions. The requirements of the external environment are determined during planning and control.
The principles of designing organizational structures are mainly based on the systems approach [Smolkin, 53 p.]. These principles include:
1. The principle is function is primary - structure is secondary. The systems approach suggests restructuring system goals into subgoals, and the latter into functional and linear tasks, and then building a structure and assigning powers in accordance with it.
2. The principle of constructing an organizational structure as a structure of connections(direct and inverse) to perform basic management functions: planning (decision making), organization, control, regulation. These connections include: relationship connections, communication connections, planning and coordination connections, execution organization connections, control connections, regulation connections.
3. Principle of completeness of conformity, which means that each of the main tasks must correspond to a specific link (unit or official) in the management structure. In order to save money, several tasks can be delegated to one official (unit), but not a single task should remain “orphaned”. At the same time, it is unacceptable for more than one responsible person (management level) to be assigned to one task. If there is a need for several persons to be assigned to one task, then an unequal degree of responsibility should be distributed to each of them, or the task should be divided into several subtasks. But in both cases, connections between co-executors must be divided and a main person must be appointed to provide coordination connections and be responsible for solving the problem as a whole.
4. The principle of reducing the chain of serial connections, or chains of commands. This allows you to increase the reliability of connections and reduce their cost.
5. The principle of controllability and delegation of authority. To determine the degree of controllability, the labor intensity of ensuring management connections is studied, and appropriate standards are developed. Delegation of powers occurs when the manager’s controllability limit is exceeded. The transfer of powers also means the transfer of rights.
7. The principle of the limit of autonomy. Large hierarchical structures are inactive and not flexible enough to respond in a timely manner to changes in the external environment and market demands. This shortcoming is compensated by the creation of relatively independent organizations within the structure that flexibly respond to market demands by changing the range of products, services, and adequate marketing strategy and tactics.
Consistent implementation of the above principles (delegation of authority, self-organization, etc.) leads to greater automation of such organizations. At the same time, in higher-level structures, concerns arise about the ability to manage the strategic behavior of relatively independent structures. Difficulties arise in implementing a unified financial and technical policy. Decentralization of management in this case loses its advantages.
Therefore, for large enterprises, one of the solutions to optimize the organizational structure will be to superimpose a matrix on the linear structure functional connections. In this case, linear substructures can act as independent organizations, and functional connections can act as functional management connections or as functional service connections based on paid relationships with a self-governing production complex. In both cases, a unified development policy of the company is implemented through functional connections, of course, with varying degrees of rigidity depending on whether they are management or service connections [Smolkin, 57 p.].
Thus, there are not so many principles for constructing organizational structures; based on these principles, the manager must regularly analyze and modify the organizational structure at all its levels in order to find the optimal organizational form.
2. Analysis of the organizational structure of OJSC Altai-koks
2.1 Conditions and results of activities of OJSC Altai-koks
Open joint-stock company "Altai-koks" is one of the largest coke-chemical enterprises in Russia. The enterprise is one of the most modern (in terms of technical and technological indicators), producing coke (about 10% of all Russian coke) and a wide range of chemical products.
Open Joint Stock Company "Altai-Koks" was created through corporatization and privatization state enterprise"Altai Coke and Chemical Plant".
Company name: open joint-stock company "Altai-koks" (OJSC "Altai-koks").
OJSC Altai-koks was registered by the Administration of Zarinsk, Altai Territory, on October 28, 1992 No. 011. In accordance with the Federal Law “On State Registration of Legal Entities”, an entry was made in the Unified State Register of Legal Entities and OJSC Altai-koks was registered for main state registration number 1022200704712. Date of entry: August 19, 2002.
Legal, postal, actual address: 659107, Russian Federation, Altai Territory, Zarinsk.
OJSC Altai-koks is the most modern enterprise in the industry, the construction of which began in 1971. In 1981, the first coke was produced at coke oven battery No. 1. The commissioning of the first coke oven battery in 1981 is considered the date of birth of the Altai Coke and Chemical Plant. Over the next 4 years, 3 more coke oven batteries were put into operation. In 2006, a new industrial complex of coconut battery No. 5 with a capacity of 1.14 million tons of coke per year was put into operation. The new coke oven battery has no analogues in Russia in terms of technical and economic parameters; these are more powerful ovens that produce coke of the highest quality. With the commissioning of coke battery No. 5, the total capacity of the enterprise is about 5 million tons of coke per year. Currently, OJSC Altai-Koks remains one of the leading producers of coke and coke-chemical products in the Russian Federation. OJSC Altai-koks is a city-forming enterprise, as well as one of the largest employers and taxpayers in the Altai Territory. The company employs about 5.5 thousand people.
The main goal of creating a joint-stock company is to realize the social and economic interests of its shareholders and employees on the basis of effectively satisfying public consumers in its products (works, services) of the required quality, its accelerated socio-economic development, making a profit and its rational use.
The authorized capital of the Company is RUB 988,157,832. and divided into 988,157,832 ordinary registered uncertificated shares with a par value of 1 ruble. Size changes authorized capital there were none for the last 5 completed financial years. The distribution of authorized capital at the beginning of 2007 is presented in Table 2.
table 2
Distribution of authorized capital by 2007
The main shareholder of the Company since April 3, 2006 is the Open Joint-Stock Company “Novolipetsk Metallurgical Plant” (abbreviated as OJSC “NLMK”).
The share of OJSC NLMK in the authorized capital of the Company is 93.64%.
The number of shares owned by NLMK OJSC is 925,340,628.
As of June 30, 2007 the total initial cost of real estate of OJSC Altai-Koks is RUB 1,152,598,529.94. The amount of accrued depreciation is RUB 402,472,028.82.
The main activities of OJSC Altai-koks are: production and sale of coke and chemical products of coking.
The main types of products: coke, coal pitch, crude benzene, ammonium sulfate, phenol. The scheme for the production of coke and chemical coking products is presented in the Appendix.
The raw material is coal from the Kuzbass basin, which can be a plus for the company: transportation costs are minimized due to the proximity of the mining regions. The main suppliers of coking coal are Prokopyevskugol (37%), Yuzhkuzbassugol (16%) and Raspadskaya (10%).
The largest share in the structure of the main products of OJSC Altai-koks is coke with a moisture content of 6% - 92% of the entire production of the enterprise. The technological scheme for sorting coke makes it possible to ship coke products of any fraction at the request of the consumer. The range of coke products is presented in Table 3.
Table 3
Range of produced coke
The commissioning of the fifth coke battery complex allowed the enterprise to begin producing a new type of product - 80 mm grade foundry coal coke. This fraction is in high demand on the market and is used in the production of high-tech thermal insulation materials.
The share of chemical products in the enterprise's gross production volume is 8%. The main types and their applications are presented in Table 4
Table 4
Chemical products
| Products |
Application, purpose |
| Coal tar pitch |
The residue obtained from the fractionation of coal tar. Used in the aluminum industry as a binder in the production of electrode products |
| Raw coal benzene |
Used to obtain pure products used in the chemical industry in the production of organic synthesis, plastics, solvents, dyes, etc. |
| Anthracene fraction |
A mixture of aromatic compounds (anthracene, phenanthrene, carbazole, pyrene, etc.) is shipped to consumers for further processing of technical anthracene and anthracene oil for the production of dyes, carbon black, etc. |
| Naphthalene fraction |
Consists of 80-85% naphthalene (in addition, methylnaphthalenes, theonaphthene, phenols, etc.). Shipped to consumers for anhydride production. |
| Absorption fraction |
Used as coal absorption oil to capture benzene carbons for the plant's own needs. |
| Ammonium sulfate |
Used as fertilizer in agriculture |
| Phenolic fraction |
A mixture of phenols (phenols, cresols, xylenols, etc.). After processing, they are used to produce phenol-formaldehyde resins, pesticides, disinfectants, etc. |
The structure of commercial products has changed slightly over the past four years.
Production of main types of products at OJSC Altai-Koks in physical terms for 2004 – 1st half of 2007 G. presented in table 5
Table 5.
Production of products in natural
in terms of 2004 – 1st half of 2007
| Index |
thousand tons |
2005 thousand tons |
2006 thousand tons |
2007 thousand tons |
||||
| Coke 6% hydr. |
||||||||
| Coal Pitch |
||||||||
| Raw coal benzene |
||||||||
| Ammonium sulfate |
||||||||
| Total for main products |
3 014,77 |
Analyzing the table data, we observe a significant decline in the production of coke and chemical coking products in 2005 (-22.17%) compared to 2004. High coke production figures in 2004 exceeded the wildest forecasts. The year 2004 was favorable for OJSC Altai-koks in all respects. A sufficient level of demand, both in the domestic and foreign markets, in 2004 allowed the company to use production capacity more efficiently and increase production and sales volumes. Decrease in production in 2005 was due to the unstable situation on the world market. Despite the fact that the ferrous metallurgy industry is a stable one, Altai-Koks OJSC (supplier of raw materials for metallurgical plants) is directly dependent on the situation on the metal products market. In 2005 and early 2006, an acute shortage of iron ore and coke appeared on world markets, which led to an unprecedented rise in the cost of these resources, due to which the production of steel products in the world sharply increased, which led to overstocking and, as a result, to a decrease in demand and prices for ferrous metallurgy products. In 2006, the company increased coke production by almost 9% to 2.9 million tons. The main reason for the increase in production is the commissioning of the 5th coke battery with a capacity of 1.14 million tons per year, due to which coke production in 2006 increased by 173 thousand tons. Indicators of the increase in production of main products in the first half of 2007 in relation to the same period in 2006 are presented in Table 6. Table 6.
Indicators of increase in production in 2007
Based on the data in the table, in the first half of 2007 there was a tendency to increase production, which amounted to 56% compared to the same period last year. Already in the first half of 2007, OJSC Altai-koks produced 1,924 thousand tons of coke, which is 1,070.4 thousand tons more than the first half of 2006. At the same time, it is worth noting that, despite the growth in production, the price situation on the market in 2006 was not very favorable, since coke prices fell by about 40% compared to 2005 levels.
Sales of coke account for 100% of the output of Altai-koks OJSC. Until 2007, the main volume of product sales fell on the domestic market, where the company's products are in particular demand among metallurgical enterprises. In 2006, sales were carried out to such enterprises as NLMK OJSC - 27%, Ufaleynickel OJSC 6%, Metallurgical Plant named after A.K. Serov OJSC - 7%, Severstal OJSC - 6%, etc. ., in total, 61% of products were sold on the Russian market, the share of exports was 39% (Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, etc.). OJSC Altai-koks accounts for 10% of Russian coke exports.
The main competitor of OJSC Altai-Koks in the domestic market is OJSC Koks (Kemerovo).
For 1 sq. In 2007, the production volume of coke with 6% moisture content of Altai-Koks OJSC amounted to 878.9 thousand tons, which is 367.3 thousand tons more than the production of Koks OJSC (Kemerovo) for the same period in 2007.
In the foreign market, China is a serious competitor - due to competent and well-calibrated government policy. As Mysteel.net notes, the Chinese coke market is expecting supply tensions, which Lately became more and more obvious. Three factors contribute to this market situation.
Firstly, government macro control of the industry, as a result of which coke prices in Shanxi province have increased by 20–30 yuan ($2.6–4) per ton since the beginning of February. Small and medium-sized enterprises that are forced to reduce their production are under special control. Secondly, emergency situations at mines also contribute to their closure or suspension of operations. Third, there are tensions with coke transportation, especially in southern China.
The competitiveness of OJSC Altai-koks is determined by the following factors:
Quality of products and services;
Availability of an effective marketing and sales strategy;
Level of qualifications of personnel and management;
Technological level of production;
The tax environment in which the enterprise operates;
Availability of funding sources.
One of the fundamental factors that influence the competitiveness of an enterprise is the quality of products and the technological level of production. At the moment, these indicators have improved significantly due to the commissioning of KB-5.
In 2007, there was an expansion of sales markets, as well as an increase in the volume of coke products sold for export. As a result, in the first half of 2007, 845 thousand tons of coke were sold on the Russian market, and coke export shipments increased 7.5 times compared to the corresponding period in 2006 and amounted to about 1.1 million tons. It follows from this that in 2007, favorable trends emerged for the enterprise for the production and sale of coke products. In order to maintain its position in the market of coke products and most fully satisfy the expectations and requirements of consumers, the senior management of OJSC Altai-koks organizes, coordinates and controls activities for the development, implementation and maintenance of the Quality Management System of OJSC Altai-koks in accordance with international standards ISO 9001:2000. Obtaining a certificate increases the company’s authority on the international market, as well as its investment attractiveness.
The financial position of the enterprise follows from production and sales. The main indicators of the financial and economic activities of OJSC Altai-koks for the period from 2004 to 2006 are presented in Table 7.
Table 7.
Main indicators of OJSC Altai-koks for 2004-2006.
The sales revenue indicators in Table 7 indicate that in 2005 compared to 2004, revenue decreased by 6.26%, this is due to worsening demand on the world market and lower coke prices. In 2006, this also leads to a decrease in revenue (7.86%). Cost price products sold in 2005 compared to 2004 it decreased by 6.82%, and in 2006 it decreased by 16.54%. The drop in costs is due to a decrease in prices for raw materials and materials in 2005 and 2006. Gross profit indicators in 2004 and 2005 on average remain at the same level, but as a result of an increase in production volumes, already in 2006 there is a significant increase in this indicator compared to 2005 (26.4%). As a result of the deterioration of the situation on the world market, OJSC Altai-koks lost 65.08% of the enterprise’s net profit in 2005, and export supplies practically ceased. But the launch of the fifth coke battery, an increase in coke production volumes, a reduction in the cost of products sold, and expansion of sales markets contributed to an increase in net profit in 2006, which exceeded the 2005 data by almost 27 times, and also increased product profitability.
The material resources of OJSC Altai-koks represent its property, consisting of two parts - the material and technical base (fixed assets) and material current assets(inventory, work in progress, goods, wearing items, etc.). The main assets of the enterprise are displayed in table 8
Table 8
Main assets of OJSC Altai-koks from 2004 to 2006.
| Assets |
|||
| Fixed assets, thousand rubles. |
|||
| Intangible assets, thousand rubles. |
|||
| Construction in progress, thousand rubles. |
|||
| Long-term financial investments, thousand rubles |
|||
| Deferred tax assets, |
|||
| Inventories, thousand rubles |
|||
| VAT on purchased assets, thousand rubles. |
|||
| Accounts receivable, thousand rubles. |
|||
| Cash, thousand rubles |
|||
| TOTAL: |
5 249 811 |
4 796 047 |
5 488 193 |
According to the summary data in the table, the value of the main assets of OJSC Altai-Koks in 2006 increased slightly in relation to the two previous years. This is mainly the result of an increase in accounts receivable. The cost of fixed assets changed slightly over the three years presented.
The main assessment indicator that allows you to assess the ability of an enterprise to recoup investments in fixed assets is the capital productivity ratio, which is calculated as the ratio of sales revenue and the average cost of fixed assets. Indicators of capital productivity of the enterprise for the period 2004-2006. are presented in table 9.
Table 9
Capital productivity indicator.
Increase in capital productivity in 2005 by 2.39 points suggests a more efficient use of fixed assets in the enterprise. But if for 1 rub. investments in fixed assets in 2005 accounted for 13.13 rubles. revenue from the sale of goods, then already in 2006. this figure decreased by 2.29 rubles.
The effectiveness of investing in inventory can be characterized by turnover indicators, measured in revolutions or days (Table 10).
Table 10
Turnover rate
As can be seen from Table 10 in 2005. there was an increase in inventory turnover by 1.14 or 3.2 days. These indicators indicate the efficient use of reserves during this period. In 2006, turnover rates decreased slightly. From which we can conclude that the company's reserves are used efficiently.
We can trace how the main labor indicators changed for the period 2004-2006 at OJSC Altai-Koks using the data in Table 11.
Table 11
Labor indicators
According to the table, we observe a change in the average number of personnel, the largest number of which occurred in 2005 (Diagram 1).
Diagram 1
As can be seen from the diagram, the maximum number of workers at the enterprise (5,807 people) reached in the 3rd quarter of 2005. The reason for the increase in the average number of personnel in 2005 compared to 2004 and 2006 was the construction of the 5th coke oven battery. After its construction was completed and put into operation in 2006, some of the hired personnel's contracts expired, and accordingly, there was a reduction in the number in 2006.
As can be seen from Table 11, the average wage of workers increases annually, which is associated with many factors, primarily with the indexation of wages, in order to improve the material well-being of the enterprise’s employees.
In general, the conditions and results of financial-economic and financial-economic activities at the enterprise by 2007 were developing satisfactorily.
2.2 Organizational structure of OJSC Altai-koks
The organizational structure of OJSC Altai-koks is the composition of divisions of main production, auxiliary production, and functional departments.
The management structure of OJSC Altai-koks is the composition of management bodies and individual management positions, reflecting the nature of the subordination between them.
The year 2005-2006 was a period of structural changes for OJSC Altai-Koks. The previous organizational structure (Appendix A, B) turned out to be unadapted to new market conditions. It had a large management team and was overloaded with functional units. A new organizational structure was needed that would become a means to achieve the strategic goals of OJSC Altai-Koks, ensuring stability and sustainability, while at the same time changing as the business environment changes.
After conducting diagnostics of the enterprise, invited specialists proposed a new organizational structure of the enterprise, which was accepted and approved in February 2007. A diagram of the organizational management structure of OJSC Altai-koks is presented in Appendices B, D.
The supreme management body of OJSC Altai-koks is General Meeting of Shareholders. The board of directors of OJSC Altai-koks acts as the executive body.
Board of directors of the enterprise carries out general management of the activities of OJSC Altai-koks, with the exception of resolving issues referred by the Charter to the competence of the general meeting of shareholders. The Board of Directors currently consists of nine members, who were elected on May 16, 2006.
Management of the current activities of the enterprise is carried out by the sole executive body - General Director and collegial executive body - The board. The General Director also performs the functions Chairman of the Board of the Company.
Governing body operates on the basis of the Federal Law “On joint stock companies", the Charter of OJSC Altai-koks and the Regulations on the Management Board of OJSC Altai-koks, approved by the general meeting of shareholders.
The structure and composition of the Management Board are approved by the Board of Directors upon the recommendation of the General Director
The composition of the Management Board of OJSC Altai-koks was formed and approved at the meeting of the Board of Directors held on July 19, 2006. Members of the Management Board are: General Director of OJSC Altai-Koks, First Deputy General Director of OJSC Altai-Koks, Commercial Director of OJSC Altai-Koks, Director of Economics and Finance of OJSC Altai-Koks.
The enterprise has a vertical division of labor. The General Director reports to several top-level functional managers: commercial director, director of economics and finance, director of personnel and social issues, director of construction, reconstruction and repairs, director of general affairs, director of security and line manager - technical director. - chief engineer. This group of management employees ensures the interests and needs of the owners of the Company's shares, develops the organization's policy, and also ensures the implementation of the organization's operating policy. They have great freedom of decision-making, are responsible for bringing more detailed tasks to divisions (shops, departments, bureaus), as well as for their implementation. These managers subordinate to several middle managers representing various functional areas - these are the heads of workshops, departments, and bureaus.
The area of control of the commercial director is the commercial activities of OJSC Altai-koks, the executors are the heads of the following departments: the logistics department, the raw materials department, the sales department, the market analysis department, the foreign economic activity department, the chief specialist in railway transportation, subordinate to which houses the railway workshop and transport bureau. The commercial service provides raw materials and material resources, studies market conditions, prepares customs declarations. Direct cooperation with consumers is carried out by the sales department, and its responsibilities include: drawing up contracts for the supply of products, planning and selling products, preparing accompanying documents, assessing the satisfaction of key consumers, etc.
Subordinate to the Director of Economics and Finance are: Chief Accountant, Head of the Economics Department and Head of the Financial Department.
The Director of Personnel and Social Affairs oversees the provision of human resources - qualified personnel. The executors are the heads of the labor department subordinate to him and wages, HR department, personnel training and retraining department.
The purpose of the activities of the divisions subordinate to the director for construction, reconstruction and repairs is to identify, provide and maintain capital construction projects. Performers: capital construction department, repair and construction department, repair and construction shop, bureau of the caretaker of buildings and structures, bureau of general plan and land management.
The Director of General Affairs controls social infrastructure facilities - these are the medical and sanitary unit, the nutrition department, preschool educational institutions, etc.
The heads of the information and analytical bureau and the security service are subordinate to the Security Director.
The technical director - chief engineer coordinates the production environment of the enterprise. Subordinate to him are five main technological workshops and auxiliary workshops (household workshop), as well as departments that carry out work on continuous improvement and monitoring of compliance with the requirements of technological processes (Appendix D).
The structure of the enterprise includes headquarters departments that are directly subordinate to the general director and his deputy - these are the legal department, the internal audit department, the press service, information technology management, etc.
The lowest level of management at OJSC Altai-Koks is the heads of groups and subdepartments, shop foremen, and foremen responsible for bringing specific tasks to the immediate executors.
In addition to the vertical division of labor , The enterprise also operates a specialized horizontal division of labor. An example of this is the division of labor for coke production into numerous operations: receiving coal and preparing the charge for coking is carried out in the coal preparation shop, quenching the coke, i.e. its direct production is carried out in coke shops, the capture of coke oven gas and its subsequent processing is carried out in the gas recovery shop, etc. The horizontal division of labor is due to the peculiarities of the production technology of a given enterprise.
Purposeful coordination and integration of the activities of all elements of OJSC Altai-koks are enshrined in the standards of the enterprise's Quality Management System.
Regulation of activities, determination of status, internal organization, appointment of a structural unit, as well as assignment of functions to a structural unit of an enterprise are indicated in the regulations on structural units. The official, professional and numerical composition of the structural unit is determined in the staffing table.
The functions and specialization of each position in the enterprise are specified in job descriptions.
2.3 Assessment and conclusions
organizational structure of OJSC Altai-koks
Based on the above points, we can conclude that OJSC Altai-Koks operates a hierarchical organizational structure, which is a type of linear-functional structure. Senior managers - the general director and his deputy, as well as division directors carry out their activities on the principles of unity of command. To provide necessary competence Their management decisions create functional units (departments, bureaus, workshop management), which are headed by leading experts in their field.
The standard of control at an enterprise is acceptable, but depending on the division (department) and the work it performs, it is not the same. The top management of OJSC Altai-koks generally has a wide range of controllability. The control levels, as well as the controllability rate, are different and on average equal to seven to eight steps. For an enterprise of the size of OJSC Altai-Koks, this is quite optimal.
The management structure of OJSC Altai-koks ensures a clear division of functions of the Board of Directors, the Management Board and the General Director for strategic and operational management of the enterprise. The distribution of powers and delimitation of areas of activity allows us to fix responsibility for the development and adoption of decisions at all levels of management.
Heads of all structural divisions are responsible for:
For subordinates’ understanding of the policies of OJSC Altai-Koks, operational goals and objectives;
For efficient operation and continuous improvement of production processes.
There is both horizontal and vertical division of labor in an organization. Vertical division of labor is necessary to coordinate and integrate the activities of all elements of the organization. Horizontal division of labor occurs in the process of technological production.
The duties, rights and responsibilities of every manager, specialist, every employee that affect product quality are defined and documented in the official and production instructions, developed taking into account the regulatory documents that guide personnel when performing their activities.
The positive aspects in the current organizational structure of the enterprise are:
A clear system of mutual connections between functions and departments;
A clear system of unity of command - one leader concentrates in his hands the management of the entire set of processes that have a common goal;
Clearly expressed responsibility;
Quick response of executive departments to direct instructions from superiors.
The analysis of the organizational structure of OJSC Altai-koks was carried out on the basis of financial, economic and economic indicators, which indicate that the enterprise is at the stage of growth (increased production volumes, expansion of sales markets, increase in net profit, etc.) . Considering the current situation at the enterprise, the transformed structure of the organization currently meets the business objectives, because it combines such factors as the goals and strategies of the enterprise, features of technological processes, and personnel qualifications.
But, in our opinion, despite the optimization of the management structure of OJSC Altai-Koks, it still has side effects associated with its implementation.
2.4 Side effects of optimization
organizational structure of the enterprise.
Before optimization, the enterprise had had an organizational structure in place since 2000, to which some additions were constantly being made. The organizational structure cannot but change, but the first significant restructuring of the organizational structure of OJSC Altai-Koks occurred at the beginning of 2007.
Despite the fact that the new organizational structure contributed to the implementation of the enterprise strategy and achievement of goals. The process of its implementation was painful for the workforce of OJSC Altai-Koks. Top management chose an authoritarian method of implementation, the so-called “hard” tools for working with the structure - interaction regulations, job descriptions, clear distribution of responsibilities, increased workload on staff, etc., which disrupted the usual work order, and this in turn instilled to rejection on the part of the team and its resistance to change.
The changes that arose were incomprehensible not only to ordinary employees, but also to some managers. Staff motivation began to decline and internal conflicts increased.
A side effect of the optimization of the organizational structure was the departure of some capable personnel due to rejection of the new situation, because some of the oldest workers were relegated to the lower level of the hierarchy, and no moral or material incentives were provided to the team.
Thus, it is very important to take into account the personal aspect of the problem. The reason, of course, is people. After all, a structure is a set of elements that make up a system and stable connections between them. Accordingly, if we are talking about the structure of an organization, then it is a set of elements that make up the organization and stable connections between them. The main elements of an organization are people. Therefore, before approving a new structure, it is worth assessing how it will be perceived by key people in the organization, taking into account their motives and abilities, and enlisting support.
organizational structure of OJSC Altai-koks
The implementation of changes differs significantly from the “normal” functioning of the enterprise. In order to make the optimization process easier for the personnel of OJSC Altai-Koks, it is necessary to follow a number of the recommendations listed below.
The initial stage of optimization at an enterprise should include the priority removal or mitigation of problems associated with optimization of the organizational structure.
It is impossible to abandon “hard” implementation methods, but along with them it is important to use another type of tools (let’s call them “soft”) - patiently explaining to company employees the goals of changes, new operating principles, joint discussion of possible problems and search for solutions - in a word, everything which creates trust.
If this is not done, the enterprise, having experienced a stage of rapid growth, will gradually enter a phase of stagnation followed by decline. By implementing changes harshly, senior management increases the costs and risks associated with the outflow of qualified personnel.
The explanatory work of senior management and its “openness” - availability to any employee at any time of the working day will help relieve tension. Some resignations submitted during this period should be ignored.
The success of optimization implementation largely depends on the ability to use “reference points” and methods. The most competent and authoritative employees and managers can act as support points. A separate approach is applied to them: a preliminary discussion of the planned activities is held with them. Support from key people for change is almost a guarantee of success.
As supporting methods, it is necessary to use technologies that are largely familiar to personnel, and at the same time allow for regulating new interactions. The most convenient way is to consolidate new technologies through automation. The improvement of the software package is perceived by the staff as a normal evolutionary process, and at the same time, the technology “hardwired” into the program can be implemented in the only way, i.e. going back to old ways of working is simply not possible.
Another supporting method is document flow. If the enterprise “before perestroika” used a regulated document flow system, providing for a sequence of certain procedures for approving decisions, then some of the new interactions can be consolidated by document flow. The staff's perception of it is somewhat negative, as routine and "bureaucracy", but they tolerate it as a necessary evil.
During the implementation process, shortcomings in the technological development of changes are necessarily identified. Some techniques do not bring the expected results, while some may improve. In these cases, you should not stick to the planned schemes, but rather take appropriate measures. The difficulty is to determine whether the methodology is truly suboptimal, or whether the failures are caused by poor staff performance.
Another feature of implementation is the gradual change in the situation under the influence of evolutionary processes. The application and improvement of some technologies and techniques causes changes in another part not affected by optimization. If the implementation process is long enough, previous developments require adjustments, and partially cannot be applied. This process is positive; optimization is partly intended to give the enterprise flexibility and the ability to respond to market changes. The most adequate solution here is to analyze the situation developing before each stage of implementation, and make a decision on the application, modification, or cancellation of changes planned during diagnosis.
With any optimization, over time there is a partial return to old methods of work and interactions. This is an objective process that is difficult to correct. The amount of “rollback” can be insignificant or critical, depending on the quality of development and the quality of implementation. A critical rollback must not be allowed, i.e. nullifying all improvements, because a repeated attempt at optimization will not have the credibility of the staff. A minimum rollback indicates high-quality work.
The tendency to increase costs and lag in changes is typical for any organization. Therefore, any work with the structure should be carried out in close connection with the goals, strategy and business plans of the company. An effective tool for this is the “Structure and Personnel Plan”. The company's management must approve it during annual planning as part of the annual business plan. This document takes into account the company's goals, changes in structure, tasks in the field of personnel management, and budgetary parameters. The structure and people plan can be detailed and included in the individual plans of individual managers. This will involve them in the change process and create additional interest in the results.
One cannot hope that the structure of Altai-Koks OJSC, once developed, will always be ideal. Moreover, there is not a single ideal structure without flaws. Its development and improvement should be approached in the same way as putting a house in order.
It is difficult to find the optimal organizational structure. Find a sample - difficult task, but even more difficult to use. The management of OJSC Altai-koks has come as close as possible to the required type of structure for the enterprise.
Thus, in order for the organizational structure to continue to correspond to the goals and strategy of the enterprise, it is necessary to regularly analyze and modify it.
Conclusion
Having studied the theoretical aspects of constructing organizational structures, we identified:
The concept of organizational structure, its meaning and role in the organization;
Classification and types of organizational structures;
Principles of building organizational structures.
The theory of constructing organizational structures provides managers with rich material for effective practical management activities.
The analysis of the organizational structure of the enterprise under study, OJSC Altai-koks, was carried out on the basis of the existing conditions and results of the activities of this organization.
Based on the economic analysis carried out at OJSC Altai-koks, the following aspects of the economic activity of the enterprise were identified - the work of this organization is profitable, the financial and economic situation is stable.
An analysis of the organizational structure showed that the enterprise has a linear-functional organizational management structure with a vertical and horizontal division of labor.
In the structure of OJSC Altai-Koks, the division of rights and responsibilities is split between different bodies. There is a special management apparatus consisting of functional units (directorates, departments, groups, bureaus). Such units carry out their decisions either through the top manager, or (within the limits of special powers) directly convey them to specialized services or individual performers at a lower level. Functional departments, as a rule, do not have the right to independently give orders to production departments. The activities of the departments are strictly controlled by the responsible management.
Optimization of the organizational management structure of OJSC Altai-koks, carried out at the beginning of 2007, was accompanied by positive changes in the economic indicators of the enterprise. This indicates that the organizational structure was one of the components contributing to the improvement of the performance results of OJSC Altai-koks.
But the optimization carried out using “hard” methods had a negative impact on the company’s personnel, namely:
Lack of understanding of changes by employees of the organization;
Decreased motivation;
Increasing internal conflicts;
Resignation of some capable personnel.
In order to make the optimization process less painful for enterprise personnel, the following recommendations were proposed:
Along with “hard” implementation methods, use “soft” ones - patiently explaining to staff the goals of the change, new operating principles, joint discussion of problems and search for solutions, etc.;
Top management must become “open” to any employee at any time of the working day for outreach;
Strengthen the new interaction technology through enterprise automation and document flow;
In order to reduce the outflow of qualified personnel, try to ignore resignation letters;
Conduct material and moral incentives for employees.
Further work with the structure at the enterprise should be carried out in close connection with the goals, strategy and business plans of OJSC Altai-koks. To do this, it is necessary to annually develop a “Structure and Personnel Plan” and approve it as an annual financial plan by management. At the same time, the “Structure and Personnel Plan” should be detailed and included in the individual plans of individual managers, thus creating additional interest in the results.
If deficiencies in the technological development of changes are identified, appropriate corrective measures must be taken. Conduct an analysis of the situation developing before each stage of implementation and make decisions on the application, modification, or cancellation of planned activities when diagnosing the optimization of the organizational structure.
Thus, the implementation of the proposed recommendations should have a positive impact on management activities, increase the efficiency of the organizational structure of OJSC Altai-koks and thereby have a positive impact on the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization.
Bibliography:
1. Vesnin V.R. Management: textbook. – 2nd ed., revised. and additional – M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2005. – 504 p.
2. Vikhansky O.S., Naumov A.I. Management: Textbook. – 3rd ed. – M.: Gardariki, 2000. – 528 p.
3. Gerchikova I.N. Management: Textbook for universities. – M.: UNITI-Dana, 2005. - 511 p.
4. Doyle P. Management: strategy and tactics / Transl. from English Ed. Yu.N. Kapturevsky - St. Petersburg: Publishing House "Peter", 1999. - 560 p.
5. Kabushkin N.I. Fundamentals of management: textbook. allowance – 8th ed., stereotype. M.: New knowledge, 2005. – 336 p.
6. Management. Textbook / Under. ed. V.V. Tomilova. – M.: Yurait-Izdat, 2003. – 591 p.
7. Management (Modern Russian management): Textbook / Ed. F.M. Rusinova and M.L. Razau. – M.: FBK-PRESS, 1999. – 504 p.3
8. Management of the XXI century / Ed. S. Choudhary: Trans. from English – M.: INFRA-M, 2002. – XIV, 448 p.
9. Meskon M.H., Albert M., Khedouri F. Fundamentals of management: Trans. from English – M.: Delo, 2005. – 720 p.
10. Miloserdov D.O. Model for reengineering business processes of the organizational and managerial structure of industrial enterprises // Management in Russia and abroad. – 2006.-№4
11. Milner B.Z. Organization Theory: Textbook. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional – M.: INFRA-M, 2002. – 480 p.
12. Smolkin A.M. Management: basics of organization: Textbook. – M.: INFRA-M, 2002. – 248 p.
13. Udalov F.E., Alekhina O.F. Centralization and decentralization of economic and enterprise management through the eyes of managers // ECO. – 2007.-№2
14. Udalov F.E., Alekhina O.F. Centralization and decentralization of economic and enterprise management through the eyes of managers // ECO. – 2007.-№2
15. Khokhlova T.P. Evolution of organizational design methodology: dynamic horizontal structuring // Management in Russia and abroad. – 2006.-№4
16. Shushkin M.A., Zabaeva M.N. Assessing the competitiveness of enterprises with a divisional management structure // Management in Russia and abroad. – 2006.-№1
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………...3
1.1.Importance and objectives of organizational design……………………….7
1.2.Basic metalogical principles……………………………………………………….9
1.3.The process of forming an organizational structure…………………….11
1.4.Assessing the effectiveness of organizational decisions………………………17
1.5.Adjustment of organizational structures……………………………..21
2.1. The concept and principles of constructing 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 references……………………………………………………….….60
Appendix No. 1………………………………………………………………………………..62
Appendix No. 2…………………………………………………………………………………..63
Appendix No. 3………………………………………………………………………………..64
Appendix No. 4…………………………………………………………………………………..65
Appendix No. 5………………………………………………………………………………..…66
Appendix No. 6………………………………………………………………………………..…67
Appendix No. 7…………………………………………………………………………………..68
Appendix No. 8…………………………………………………………………………………..69
Appendix No. 9…………………………………………………………………………………..70
Appendix No. 10…………………………………………………………………………………71
Glossary…………………………………………………………………………………...72
Management is a special intellectual activity that employs a huge number of people armed with modern computing and organizational technology. Organizational management acts as one of the factors in the transformation of the economy; through it the action of the objective laws of market functioning is realized; it is the organizational beginning of the entire system of factors for radical reform of economic management.
The key problem in organizing management is the structure of the management system (organizational structure). Knowing the structure, you can purposefully influence the composition and content of individual elements of the management system, bringing it into line with changing production conditions, and this is the basis for relevance of the problem.
Scientifically based formation of organizational management structures is an urgent task of the modern stage of adaptation of economic entities to market economy. In the new conditions, it is necessary to widely use the principles and methods of designing a management organization based on a systems approach.
An important function of management is the function of the organization, which is to establish permanent and temporary relationships between all divisions of the company, determine the order and conditions for the functioning of the company. The function of the organization is implemented 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 divisions, 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 of 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 a company is understood as its organization from separate divisions with their relationships, which are determined by the goals set for the company 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 company's executives responsible for the activities of the structural divisions that make up the company's organization. The problem of improving the organizational structure of management involves clarifying the functions of departments, determining the rights and responsibilities 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, first of all, at establishing clear relationships between the individual divisions of the company and distributing rights and responsibilities between them. It implements various requirements for improving management systems, expressed in certain principles. The 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); 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 management levels and functional areas, ensuring optimal achievement of the organization’s goals under given conditions; “organizational management structure” is one of the key concepts of management, closely related to the goals, functions, management process, work of managers and distribution between them powers.
Within the framework of this structure, the entire management process takes place (the movement of information flows and management decisions), in which managers of all levels, categories and professional specialization participate.
The structure can be compared to the frame of a management system building, built to ensure that all the processes occurring in it are carried out in a timely manner and with high quality.
Hence, the attention that organizational leaders pay to the principles and methods of constructing organizational structures, the selection of their types and types, the study of changing trends and assessments of compliance with the objectives of organizations - this shows the relevance and importance of this topic in modern conditions.
Management structure is understood as an ordered set of steadily interconnected elements that ensure the functioning and development of the organization as a single whole.
The organizational structure of management is also defined as a form of division and cooperation of management activities, within the framework of which the management process is carried out according to the relevant functions aimed at solving the assigned tasks and achieving the intended goals.
From these positions, the organizational structure is presented as a system of optimal distribution of functional responsibilities, rights and responsibilities, order and forms of interaction between its governing bodies and the people working in them.
The purpose of this work is to analyze the organizational structure of enterprise management.
Subject of research: 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 successful work enterprises.
2. Consider ways to improve the organizational structure of the enterprise.
This work discusses a topic that is relevant today - “Analysis of the organizational structure of enterprise management.”
The course work consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion, a list of references, ten appendices, and a glossary.
Chapter I. Analysis and formation of organizational structures
1.1.Importance 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 because:
Firstly; in 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 the 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 implementation and use of automated management systems.
Thirdly, the creation of a structure should be based not only on experience, analogy, familiar patterns and intuition, but also on scientific methods of organizational design;
Fourthly, the design of a highly complex mechanism - a management mechanism - should be entrusted to specialists who are proficient in the methodology for the formation of organizational systems.
When developing principles and methods, design the structure as a frozen set of organs corresponding to each specialized management function. It, first of all, includes a system of goals and their distribution between various units. 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; it is 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, it is necessary to combine scientific methods and principles for the formation of structures (system approach) with extensive expert and 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 approach to structure formation is manifested in the following:
1. Do not lose sight of any of the management tasks, without the solution of which the implementation of goals will not be complete;
2. To identify and interconnect, in relation to these tasks, the entire system of functions, rights and responsibilities along the management vertical - from the general director of the enterprise to the site foreman;
3.Research and organize all connections and relationships along the management horizon;
4.Ensure an organic combination of vertical and horizontal management.
Study of the influence of the external environment on the design of an organization
I. Stage - identification and description of elements of the external environment (input, output, technology, knowledge)
II. Stage - identifying the main relationships between 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 - formation of a management mechanism, taking into account the specifics of the elements of the organizational structure and its external environment.
1.2.Basic metalogical principles
Until recently, methods of building management were characterized by an overly normative nature and insufficient diversity, which led to a mechanical transfer of organizational forms used in the past to new conditions. Often the management apparatus at various levels repeated the same patterns. From a scientific point of view, the initial factors in the formation of structures themselves received too narrow an interpretation: the number of personnel instead of the goals of organizations; a constant set of organs instead of changing their composition and combination in different conditions.
One of the main disadvantages of the methods used was their functional orientation, strict regulation of management processes, and not their results. Therefore, the goals and relationships of various parts of the management system are of greater importance than the strict establishment of their functional specialization. This is especially clearly manifested when solving problems related to the creation of corporations, joint-stock companies, financial and industrial groups, orders and contracts to consumer requests, with a comprehensive solution to problems of product quality.
A systematic approach, giving a scientifically based definition of the management function and headcount standards as part of general process formation of an organizational and managerial structure, orients researchers and developers to more general principles designing organizations. Those. it presupposes the initial definition of the system of organizational goals, 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 market needs for the products and services produced. At the same time, the correspondence between the system of goals and the organizational structure of management cannot be unambiguous.
Various methods of forming organizational management structures should also be considered in a unified system. These methods are of a different nature; each of them individually does not allow solving all practically important problems and must 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, here it is necessary to take into account the extent to which the structure ensures that the organization achieves results that correspond to its production and economic goals, 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 final criterion for effectiveness when comparing different options for organizational structure is the most complete and sustainable achievement of goals. However, bringing this criterion to practically applicable simple indicators is usually extremely difficult. Therefore, it is advisable to use a set of normative characteristics of the management apparatus: its productivity in processing information; efficiency of making management 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, according to which the maximization of results in relation to management costs should be ensured. The number of management staff must be objectively justified in order to fully ensure the solution of tasks arising from the goals of the organizational system.
1.3.The process of forming an organizational structure
The process of forming an organizational structure includes the formulation of goals and objectives, determination of the composition and location of departments, their resource provision (including the number of employees), the development of regulatory procedures, documents, regulations that consolidate and regulate the forms, methods, and processes that are carried out in the organizational management system.
This whole process can be organized into three large stages:
1. The formation of a general structural diagram in all cases is of fundamental importance, since this determines the main characteristics of the organization, as well as the directions along which more in-depth design should be carried out, both the organizational structure and others. the most important aspects systems (ability to process information).
2. Development of the composition of the main divisions and connections between them is that it provides for the implementation of organizational decisions not only as a whole for large linear-functional and program-targeted blocks, but also down to independent (basic) divisions of the management apparatus, the distribution of specific tasks between them and building intra-organizational connections. Basic units are understood as independent structural units (departments, bureaus, administrations, sectors, laboratories), into which linear-functional and program-targeted subsystems are organizationally divided. Basic 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: determining the composition of the internal elements of basic units (bureaus, groups and positions); determination of the design number of units; distribution of tasks and work among specific performers; establishing responsibility for their implementation; development of procedures for performing management work in departments; calculations of management costs and performance indicators of the management apparatus in the conditions of the designed organizational structure.
When interaction between many links and levels of management is required, specific documents are developed called organigrams.
The organigram is a graphic interpretation of the process of performing management functions, their stages and the work included in them, describing the distribution of organizational procedures for development and decision-making between departments, their internal structural bodies and individual employees. The construction of an organigram allows us to link the process of rationalization of technological routes and information flows with the streamlining of relationships between the structural elements of control systems that arise when organizing the coordinated implementation of its tasks and functions. They record only the organization of the management process in the form of distribution of powers and responsibility for ensuring, developing and making management decisions.
Structure Design Methods
It combines technological, economic, informational, administrative and organizational interactions, which are amenable to direct analysis and rational design, as well as socio-psychological characteristics and connections.
The specificity of the problem of designing an organizational management structure is that it cannot be adequately presented in the form of a problem of formal selection of the best variant of the organizational structure according to a clearly formulated, unambiguous, mathematically expressed optimality criterion. 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 activities of responsible managers, specialists and experts in selecting and evaluating the best options for organizational solutions.
The process of organizational design consists of a sequence of approaching a model of a rational management structure, in which design methods play a supporting role in the consideration, evaluation and adoption of 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 designed organization. The method of analogies includes the development of standard management structures for production and economic organizations and the determination of the boundaries and conditions of their application.
The use of the analogy method is based on two complementary approaches. The first of these is to identify for each type production and economic organizations and for various industries the values and trends in changes in the main organizational characteristics and the 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 management apparatus units and individual positions in clearly defined operating conditions of organizations of this type in specific industries, as well as the development of individual normative characteristics of the management apparatus for these organizations and industries.
Typification of solutions is a means of increasing the overall level of production management organization. Standard organizational decisions should be, firstly, variant, and not unambiguous, and secondly, reviewed and adjusted at regular intervals and allowing deviations in cases where the operating conditions of the organization differ from clearly defined conditions for which the corresponding standard form of organizational structure is recommended. management structures.
2. The expert-analytical method consists of a survey and analytical study of the organization by qualified specialists with the involvement of its managers and other employees. In order to identify specific features and problems in the work of the management apparatus, as well as develop rational recommendations for its formation or restructuring based on quantitative assessments of the 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 construction and functioning of the management apparatus, processing of the obtained expert assessments using 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 for the formation of organizational management structures are a concretization 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, separating strategic and coordination functions from operational management, combining functional and program-targeted management and a number of others.
A special place among expert methods is occupied by the development of graphic and tabular descriptions of organizational structures and management processes, reflecting recommendations for their the best organization. This is preceded by the development of options for organizational solutions aimed at eliminating identified organizational problems that meet scientific principles and best practices in organizing management, as well as the required level of quantitative and qualitative criteria for assessing the effectiveness of organizational structures.
3. The method of structuring goals involves developing a system of organizational 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 represents 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 from the point of view of organizational support for achieving each of the goals, compliance with the principle of uniformity of goals set for each division, determination of the relations of management, subordination, cooperation of divisions based on the interrelationships 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 is regulated (products, resources, labor, information, production and management resources); specific results for which achievements responsibility is established; rights vested in order to achieve results (coordinate, confirm, control).
4. The method of organizational modeling is the development of formalized mathematical, graphic, computer and other displays of the distribution of powers and responsibilities in an organization, which are the basis for constructing, analyzing and evaluating various options for organizational structures based on the relationship of their variables. There are several main types of organizational models: .
1.Mathematical-cybernetic models of hierarchical management structures, describing 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 graphical displays of the distribution of functions, powers, responsibilities, and organizational connections. They make it possible to analyze their direction, nature, causes of occurrence, evaluate various options for grouping interrelated activities into homogeneous units, “play out” options for the distribution of rights and responsibilities between different levels of management, etc. Examples include “meta-scheme” descriptions of material, information, and cash flows together with management 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 built on the basis of collecting, analyzing and processing empirical data about organizations operating in comparable conditions.
The process of designing an organizational management structure should be based on the joint use of the methods described above.
The choice of method for solving a particular organizational problem depends on its nature, as well as the possibilities for conducting appropriate research.
1.4.Assessing the effectiveness of organizational decisions
Efficiency assessment is an important element in the development of design and planning decisions, which makes it possible to determine the level of progressiveness of the current structure, projects being developed or planned activities, and is carried out with the aim of choosing the most rational option for the structure or a method for improving it. The effectiveness of the organizational structure should be assessed at the design stage, when analyzing the management structures of existing organizations to plan and implement measures to improve management.
A comprehensive set of criteria for the effectiveness of the management system is formed taking into account two directions for assessing its functioning: .
1. According to the degree of compliance of the achieved results with the established goals of the production and economic organization;
2. According to the degree of compliance of the process of system functioning with the objective requirements for its content of the organization and results.
The criterion for effectiveness when comparing different options for an organizational structure is the possibility of the most complete and sustainable achievement of the final goals of the management system at relatively lower costs for its operation.
Of fundamental importance for assessing the effectiveness of a management system is the choice of a basis for comparison or determination of the level of effectiveness, which is accepted as normative. One of the differentiation approaches comes down to comparison with indicators characterizing the effectiveness of the organizational structure of the reference version of management systems. A reference design can be developed and designed using all available control system design methods and tools. The characteristics of this option are accepted as normative. A comparison with performance indicators and characteristics of the management system selected as a standard that determines the acceptable or sufficient level of efficiency of the organizational structure can also be used.
Often, instead of methods, an expert assessment of the organizational and technical level of the analyzed and designed system, as well as its individual subsystems and adopted design and planning decisions, or a comprehensive assessment of the management system, based on the use of a quantitative-qualitative approach, which allows assessing the effectiveness of management based on a significant set of factors, is used.
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 characterizing the effectiveness of the management system, expressed through the final results of the organization’s activities and management costs. When assessing efficiency based on indicators characterizing the final results of an organization’s activities, volume, profit, cost, volume of capital investments, product quality, timing of introduction of new equipment, etc. can be considered as an effect caused by the functioning or development of a management system. .
1. A group of indicators characterizing the content and organization of the management process, including the immediate results and costs of managerial labor. Management costs include current costs for maintaining the management apparatus, operating technical equipment, maintaining buildings and premises, training and retraining of management personnel.
When assessing the effectiveness of the management process, indicators are used that can be assessed both quantitatively and qualitatively. These indicators acquire a normative nature 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 efficiency indicators without changing (deteriorating) the others. The normative characteristics of the control apparatus may include the following: productivity, efficiency, adaptability, flexibility, efficiency, reliability.
1. The productivity of the management apparatus can be defined as the quantity of final products produced by the organization or the volume of information generated in the management process.
2. The efficiency of the control apparatus refers to the relative costs of its operation. To assess efficiency, indicators such as the share of costs for maintaining the management apparatus, the share of managerial employees in the number of industrial production personnel, and the cost of performing a unit of volume of certain types of work can be used.
3. The adaptability of a 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 ability of management apparatus bodies 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 a given structure.
5. The efficiency of making management decisions characterizes the modernity of identifying management problems and the speed of their solution, which ensures maximum achievement of the set goals while maintaining the sustainability of established production and support processes.
6. The reliability of the control apparatus as a whole is characterized by its trouble-free operation. If we consider the quality of defining goals and setting problems as 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 fulfillment of planned tasks 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 level of management system, the level of centralization of management functions, accepted standards of controllability, and a balanced distribution of rights and responsibilities.
To assess the effectiveness of management, it is necessary to determine the compliance of the management system and its organizational structure with the management object. This is expressed in the balance of the composition of management functions and goals, the correspondence of the number of employees to the volume and complexity of work, the completeness of provision of the required information, the provision of technological means management processes, taking into account their nomenclature.
Important requirements are the ability to adequately reflect the dynamism of managed processes, balance and consistency of indicators. When assessing the effectiveness of individual measures to improve the management system, it is allowed to use the basic requirements for their selection - maximum compliance of each indicator with the target orientation of the activity being carried out and completeness of reflection of the achieved effect.
1.5.Adjustment of organizational structures
In most cases, decisions to adjust structures are made by senior leaders in the organization as part of their core responsibilities. Significant organizational undertakings are 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 need to develop a new project for an organization 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, and the development of special programs. But the reason for the unsatisfactory performance of the enterprise lies in certain shortcomings in the organizational management structure.
Top management overload. If measures to change management methods and procedures do not reduce the burden or lead to long-term 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. The future development of the enterprise requires more and more attention from senior managers to strategic objectives. 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 into the future. The senior manager must recognize that his most important responsibility is to enable the enterprise to develop and implement the 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, etc. When deep and persistent disagreements about organizational structure arise, the only solution is to thoroughly examine the structure. A change in management often triggers a decision to reorganize. The replacement group may find this form completely inconsistent with its approach to the problems of the enterprise.
Trends in changes in organizational structure
In the conditions of production processes and sales, with a continuous increase in the enterprise of the organization, there is a need to increase the scale of activity and it is possible to adapt to small changes in the structure, but if the basic structure remains unchanged, then the functioning of the enterprise deteriorates.
Increased diversity. Expanding the range of products or services, entering various markets, and additional development of new production processes introduce completely new aspects to the organization, including structural changes in the enterprise.
Association of economic entities. The merger of several enterprises necessarily introduces some changes in the organizational structure. Problems of overlapping functions, redundant personnel, and confusion in the distribution of rights and responsibilities require immediate solutions; therefore, major structural changes should be expected.
Changes in control technology. Scientific achievements in the field of management are beginning to have an increasing impact on organizational structures and processes (advanced methods of information processing). New positions appear and decision-making processes change. Some industries—mass manufacturing, some financial institutions—have actually changed dramatically due to advances in management technology.
Impact of production process technology. The rapid development of industrial research, the growth of scientific institutions, the ubiquity of project management, and the growing popularity of matrix organizations all indicate the spread of the influence of the exact sciences on industrial organizations.
External economic situation. Most industrial enterprises are located in a constantly changing economic environment. Some changes are made abruptly, causing the normal functioning of the enterprise to suddenly become unsatisfactory. Other changes, which occur more slowly and are more fundamental in nature, force enterprises to switch to other areas of activity, which means a new organizational structure appears.
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 operating at a volume that is no longer economical;
3. It is not possible to organize the production of new products or products that cannot be sold are produced in the wrong place;
4. Firms with one sales market are not able to diversify production.
Redistribution of tasks, rights and responsibilities, and information flows increases the efficiency of the organization by increasing productivity and, at least temporarily, curbs the growth of costs and increases profitability. Improving organizational forms often contributes to the development of new and better strategic decisions.
In almost every large enterprise, you can find examples where the implementation of well-conceived strategic plans was hampered by an organizational structure that delayed their implementation or gave priority to the resolution of 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 enterprise strategy is an integral element of adjustments in the structure. The analysis methods used generally consist of five steps.
1. Consists of clarifying the enterprise’s mission, areas of uncertainty and the most likely development alternatives. In the case of completely new enterprises, the definition of the problem may be limited to the establishment of design parameters.
2.Organizational structure analysis involves identifying variables that significantly affect task performance. At this stage, an in-depth analysis of the economic and production structure of the enterprise and its main components is necessary.
3. The goals and development programs of the enterprise are studied. It is important to ensure that current goals are consistent with the main objective of the enterprise, and programs are aligned with key factors for successful operation. This is significant because goals and plans have a direct impact on the organizational structure by determining priorities and the meaning of previously made decisions.
4. Assess how well the organization’s structure meets the tasks, goals and factors on which the success of its functioning depends. To do this, it is necessary to carefully study the existing formal structure, determine all its strengths and weaknesses, find out what shortcomings in the formal structure are compensated by informal elements and how effectively.
A difficult but inevitable moment in the analysis of an organization is the assessment of the human resources of the enterprise. The researcher studies the basic management processes - planning, resource allocation, operational control - in order to determine the extent to which they contribute to the accomplishment of the mission, goals and strategic programs. Organizational and environmental analysis represents a tremendous amount of information that must be assessed so that design decisions can be made, which is the final stage of the analytical process.
Coming to such a decision is a very difficult, almost entirely empirical process. The structure of large organizations has become unusually confusing due to numerous changes. The rate of change is increasing so much that they are looking not so much for a specific, permanent structure, but rather a temporary one, which reflects a certain stage of development of the organization.
Chapter II. Organizational structure as the key to a successful enterprise
2.1. The concept and principles of constructing an organizational structure
Organizational structure is one of the main elements of organization management. It is characterized by the distribution of management goals and objectives 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 connections established between them. It expresses a certain technology of management activities, processes of division and cooperation of labor in the field of management, and 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 interrelation and subordination, performing various management functions 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 the product.
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 changes in the production structure, since the complication of the first leads to the creation of redundant workshops, sections and services.
The organizational structure of the management body (apparatus) is a unity of divisions, each of which is designed to perform certain functions in managing the organization and is interconnected and subordinate to other divisions. Organizational system presented (Appendix No. 1).
The management apparatus is organized organizationally in such a way that links and steps can be distinguished in its structure.
The management apparatus link is a structural unit that performs a specific function in implementing the management process.
A stage is a set of management links at one hierarchical management level.
The organizational management structure can be two- or multi-stage (Appendix No. 2; Appendix No. 3).
The number of links and steps in the management apparatus of an organization is determined by the following factors: production structure; the nature, range and volume of products produced (services provided); number of employees; the level of mechanization and automation (computerization) of the work of managers and specialists; the complexity of the production process; 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 communication of decisions made to 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 must be: firstly, promptly 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 production and economic activities of the organization through their multivariate elaboration; finally, fourthly, it is economical, i.e. efficiently perform the functions assigned to it at the lowest cost, while ensuring a reduction in administrative and management costs for the production and sale of products (services).
By 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 interconnected - the philosophy of quality sets the goal and direction of the organization's activities, the philosophy of management determines the organizational means to achieve this goal.
The foundations of management philosophy, as well as quality philosophy, 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 chart" immediately conjures up in our mind a two-dimensional tree diagram consisting of rectangles and lines connecting them. These rectangles show the work performed and the scope of responsibilities and thus reflect the division of labor in the organization. The relative position of the rectangles and the lines connecting them show the degree of subordination. The relationships discussed are limited to two dimensions: up - down and across, since we operate with the limited assumption that the organizational structure must be represented on a two-dimensional diagram drawn on a flat surface.
The organizational structure itself contains nothing that would limit us in this regard. Moreover, these restrictions on organizational structure often have serious and costly consequences.
Here are just four of them.
Firstly, competition, rather than cooperation, arises between individual parts of organizations of this kind. There is stronger competition within organizations than between organizations, and this internal competition takes on much less ethical forms.
Secondly, the usual way of representing the structure of organizations seriously complicates the definition of the tasks of individual units and the measurement of corresponding indicators of performance due to the great interdependence of units combined in this way.
Third, 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 they learn at all.
Fourthly, representing the organizational structure in the form of a two-dimensional tree limits the number and nature of possible solutions to emerging problems. In the presence of such a limitation, solutions are impossible to ensure the development of the organization taking into account technical and social changes, the pace of which is increasing more and more. The current environment requires that organizations are not only prepared for any changes, but also capable of undergoing them. In other words, a dynamic balance is required. Obviously, to achieve such a balance, the organization must have a fairly flexible structure. (Although flexibility does not guarantee adaptability, it is nevertheless necessary to achieve the latter.)
Building an organizational structure that is flexible or has any other advantages 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 basic 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 a democratic principle of management.
Hierarchical type of management structures
Management structures in many modern enterprises were built in accordance with management principles formulated at the beginning of the 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 is subordinate to it.
The resulting principle is that the powers and responsibilities of management employees correspond to their place in the hierarchy; .
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 employees’ performance of their duties and the coordination of various tasks.
The resulting principle of impersonality in the performance of their functions by employees;
The principle of qualification selection, according to which hiring and dismissal from work is carried out in strict accordance with qualification requirements.
An organizational structure built in accordance with these principles is called a hierarchical or bureaucratic structure. The most common type of such structure is linear-functional (linear structure).
2.2.Types of organizational structures
Types of organizational management structure have gone through a complex path of development under the influence of improving the production structure of enterprises, concentration and specialization of activities, and scientific and technological progress. The beginning of this path is characterized by the emergence of a linear organizational management structure, the replacement of its functional one, then the replacement of the last by a linear-functional management structure, etc. .
Variety of internal and external relations organizations, a high organizational and technical level and the complexity of production technology, the development of concentration, deepening specialization, dynamic changes in the external environment have led to the formation of various types of organizational management structures.
In modern management, there are two types of organizational management structures - bureaucratic and organic, each of which has its own specific features and, therefore, areas of its development.
The bureaucratic type of organizational structure of management was historically the first to be formed. The main conceptual provisions of a rational bureaucracy are the following:
1. Organization is, first of all, order, the starting point of which is the labor behavior of personnel, directed in a certain direction.
2. The necessary behavior of personnel is achieved by regulation: distribution of tasks, dissemination of relevant information, delimitation of powers.
3. The general order of regulation is achieved as a result of the creation of management levels, which leads to the formation of hierarchy levels (hierarchical connections).
4. The advantages of a hierarchical organization are achieved:
Long period of use effective methods labor organization common at different levels of management;
Predictability of the behavior of members of the organization, both in their internal communication and in contacts with the external environment.
5. Limiting the behavioral range of employees by current rules (instructions), which creates the preconditions for uniform behavior of personnel.
6. The use of general (standard) rules of organizational behavior increases the effectiveness of coordination actions in the organization.
The main thing in bureaucratic organizational structures of management is the “position”, and not the “person” with his individuality. As a result, an organization using bureaucratic organizational management structures becomes “rigid”; its development is possible exclusively thanks to activities carried out from the outside.
In addition, the functional specialization of elements of the bureaucratic type is characterized by unevenness and at different speeds changes in its development, which leads to contradictions between individual parts of the organization, to inconsistency of their actions and interests.
The bureaucratic type of organizational management structure has varieties, among which the most common ones can be identified: linear, functional, linear-functional, line-staff, divisional management structures of the organization.
In the 60s More flexible organizational structures have emerged, which, compared to bureaucratic ones, are better adapted to rapid changes in economic conditions and the introduction of technical and technological innovations. They are called organic, or adaptive, structures.
The organic type of management organizational structures 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 authority. In addition, the integrating goal of this type of organization is the development strategy of the organization, the rules of work of the management staff are the principles, the distribution of responsibilities and work between personnel is determined by the nature of the problems being solved and, finally, there is a constant readiness for progressive changes in the organization.
This type of organizational management structure is effective in conditions where the organization’s activities are associated with active work to improve the products and services produced, 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, cause 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 ensures the 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-oriented temporary systems that are combined into a single whole with the help of managers and specialists who formulate, 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 management decisions at 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, which was impossible when using rigid traditional structures, began to acquire special importance.
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, line-staff, divisional management structures of the organization.
And now about each structure in more detail.
The linear management 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 a linear management structure are relative simplicity selection of managers and implementation of management functions. This organization of management ensures the speed of adoption and implementation of management decisions, the unity and clarity of management and eliminates duplication of powers and inconsistency of orders.
The disadvantages of this type of structure include the disconnection of horizontal connections and the possibility of excessive rigidity. In modern production conditions, they require a high level of universal training from the manager. Which in turn limits the scale of the department being headed and the manager’s ability to effectively manage it. In addition, a large overload of information, a multiplicity of contacts with subordinates, superiors and related organizations leads to the fact that most of the manager’s time is spent on solving operational problems, and not enough attention is paid to promising issues.
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 cooperative ties between organizations. The linear structure is presented in (Appendix No. 4).
In the functional structure, each senior manager is delegated authority 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 mandatory for production units. Thus, along with the linear one, a functional organization also operates. The performers are in double subordination. Thus, the worker is obliged to simultaneously follow the instructions of his line manager and 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 fulfilling their duties is reduced due to depersonalization. The functional structure is presented in (Appendix No. 5)
In a linear-functional organizational structure, combining 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 management tasks.
This structure is based on the regulation of linear and functional connections. In it, line managers have linear powers, and functional ones have functional powers in relation to subordinate line managers and linear ones 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 promote effective production of standardized goods and services, focused on price competition. They have the advantages of both linear and functional.
The disadvantages of a linear-functional structure are violation of the principle of unity of command, difficulties in making and implementing agreed management decisions. A strict division of labor enhances the interest of each management body in performing only “its” function, which is typical for functional divisions. Therefore, when new, non-standard, complex, cross-functional tasks arise, there is a need for frequent approval of draft solutions 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 a linear-functional structure is supplemented by a headquarters body, a linear-staff organizational management structure is formed.
The line-staff (staff) organizational structure of management is also built on the principle of functional specialization of managerial labor, however, the main task of managers is to coordinate the actions of functional services in headquarters at various levels and thereby direct these actions in accordance with the general interests of the organization
The headquarters reports to the line manager (LR). It is not endowed 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).
This 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 practically eliminates conflicting orders and allows line managers to be freed from coordinating the work of various services.
The main advantages of a line-staff management structure are a significant increase in the efficiency of using management potential to solve emergency problems.
However, management systems with a line-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, and commissions for coordination and decision-making.
A line-staff management structure is created to eliminate the consequences of natural disasters and promptly solve extraordinary problems.
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 only 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 expansion 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 companies, 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 manage the funds belonging to them not strictly according to instructions, but in accordance with the rapidly changing external environment and internal capabilities. Local initiative has increased, which is implemented by those who come forward with it, while at the same time being fully responsible for the result obtained. It became possible to respond more quickly and effectively to changing situations and to take into account new needs.
But divisional structures, like functional ones, are not free from shortcomings. Thus, the process of monitoring the actions of new structures has become significantly more complicated. Negative results of work can only appear over time, when it is too late to correct the situation from above. The expansion of horizontal connections, for all its positiveness, brings a weakening of vertical connections. Difficulties may arise due to duplication and confusion in the network of commands and management decisions. Excessive autonomy of parts of the organization can lead to a complete loss of influence on the part of central structures, and, consequently, subordination to common goals and objectives.
2.4.Types of organic management structures of an organization
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 structure. Management is built vertically (linear structure) for individual areas of activity (production, supply, sales, etc.). Horizontally (program-target structure) management of programs, projects, and topics is carried out.
When determining horizontal connections, a program (project) manager and his deputies for individual topics are appointed, a responsible executive in each specialized unit is appointed, and a special program management service is organized.
The work is ensured by creating targeted units where leading specialists unite to jointly develop the program. The program manager determines what should be done and when, and who and how will do 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 managers' creative initiative in increasing production efficiency. Matrix management structures facilitate the restructuring of production based on the latest technological processes and more productive equipment.
The advantages of the matrix structure are significant opportunities for the effective use of the organization’s personnel potential when setting and solving new problems.
Matrix structures, like other organizational structures, also have disadvantages. There are often tendencies towards anarchy in them due to unclearly defined rights and double subordination of workers. Groupism and struggle for leadership in the field of science, technology and technology are emerging. There may be snobbery and hostility between the “upper” and “lower” links of the matrix during the work.
Project organizational management structures are used in organizations engaged in targeted changes in the existing or created management system. 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 of a special unit that works for the time necessary to implement a specific problem (project), for example, the development of new technologies in training and production. With this form of organizational management structure, the project manager is vested with project powers and is responsible for business planning, spending allocated funds, material and moral motivation of workers, and most importantly, developing a project management concept - priorities, distribution of tasks and responsibility for their implementation.
The project type of management organizational structure has great flexibility and versatility, simplicity, efficiency, and most importantly, it allows you to simultaneously develop several problems (projects). To carry out 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 international market goods and services have sharply intensified, competition among enterprises and life has demanded from enterprises high efficiency and quality of work and a quick response to market changes. And on the other hand, the inability of hierarchical structures to meet these conditions became obvious. The main property of organic type 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 relationships between the divisions of the enterprise. If you maintain the system of planning, control, distribution of resources, leadership style, methods of motivating staff, and do not support the desire of employees for self-development, the results of the implementation of such structures may be negative.
Brigade (cross-functional) management structure
The basis of this management structure is the organization of work into working groups (teams). The form of brigade organization of work is a fairly ancient organizational form, it is enough to recall workers’ artels, but only in the 80s did its active use begin as a structure for managing an organization, in many ways directly opposite to the hierarchical type of structures. The basic principles of such a management organization are: autonomous work of working groups (teams); independent decision-making by working groups and horizontal coordination of activities; replacing rigid bureaucratic management ties with flexible ties; attracting employees from different departments to develop and solve problems.
These principles are destroyed by the rigid distribution of employees inherent in hierarchical structures among production, engineering, technical, economic and management services, which form isolated systems with their own goals and interests.
In an organization built according to these principles, functional divisions may or may not be present. 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 work group or team to which they belong). This form of organization is called cross-functional; in many ways it is close to a matrix one. In the second case, there are no functional units as such; we will call it a brigade unit. This form is quite widely used in organizing project management.
Advantages of a brigade (cross-functional) structure: reduction of the management apparatus, increased management efficiency; flexible use of personnel, their knowledge and competence; work in groups creates conditions for self-improvement; the ability to apply effective planning and management methods; the need for general specialists is reduced.
Disadvantages of a team (cross-functional) structure: increased complexity of interaction (especially for a cross-functional structure); difficulty in coordinating the work of individual teams; highly qualified and responsible personnel; high requirements for communications.
Conclusion: this form of organizational structure is most effective in organizations with a high level of specialist qualifications and their good technical equipment, especially in combination with project management. This is one of the types of organizational structures in which ideas are most effectively implemented modern philosophy quality.
Project management structure
The basic principle of constructing 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 an 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 disintegrates, its components, including employees, move to a new project or are fired (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 a project management structure: high flexibility; reduction in the number of management personnel compared to 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 project’s place in the company’s network of projects; fragmentation of resources between projects; the complexity of interaction between a large number of projects in the company; complication of the process of development of the organization as a whole.
Bottom line: The benefits outweigh the drawbacks in businesses with a small number of simultaneous projects. The possibilities of implementing the principles of modern quality philosophy 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) whose purposefulness 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 provision of services (output values), which should be of greater value to the consumer than the resources used. Resources consumed 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, with responsibilities represented by rectangles, the relative location of which shows the level of authority, and the lines connecting these rectangles indicate the distribution of authority. However, such a representation of the organizational structure does not contain any information regarding at what cost and with the help of the organization’s means it was possible 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 an 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 this organization are called programs and are designated P1, P2,. . . , Pr. The funds used by programs (or activities) can usually be divided into operations and services.
An operation is an activity that directly affects the nature of the product produced or its availability. Typical operations (O1, O2,..., Om) are the purchase of raw materials, transportation, production, distribution and sales of products.
Services are activities required to support programs or perform an operation. Typical services (S1, S2,..., Sn) are work performed by departments such as accounting, data processing, technical services, labor dispute resolution, finance, human resources, and 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 external consumers.
General programs can be divided into specific ones, 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 divided.
In a similar way, you can detail the types of activities of the types of activities. For example, the operations for manufacturing a product may include the production of parts, assemblies, and assembly, and each of these operations may be broken down into smaller operations.
If the number of programs and core and support activities (operations and services) is so large that the manager is unable to coordinate effectively, then there may be a need for coordinators within specific management functions. Each activity may require more than one coordinator or coordination unit. In cases where the number of coordinators is too large, it is possible to use higher-level coordinators or coordination units (in this context, “coordination” means coordination, not leadership).
To carry out coordination, a group consisting of heads of coordinating departments and managers is quite sufficient. Programs, as well as functional departments, are subject to certain requirements. Programs and functional units can be grouped by product type, customer type, geographic area, etc. If customers for a program's products are too numerous and dispersed, an unconventional use of geographic location characteristics may be possible as an additional dimension to the organizational structure's overall design. In this case, there is a need for regional representatives whose duty is to protect the interests of those who consume the products or are affected by the activities of the organization as a whole.
Regional representatives play the role of external intermediaries who can evaluate the programs and various activities of the organization in each specific 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 this information simultaneously from all regional representatives, the manager can gain a complete picture of the effectiveness of his program throughout the service territory and in each region. This allows him to more rationally distribute available resources across regions.
However, geographical location is not the only criterion for organizing the activities of external intermediaries; Other criteria may be used. For example, for an organization that supplies various industries with lubricants, it is advisable to have representatives not by region, but by industry (this could be automotive, aerospace, machine tool and other industries). A utility organization may determine the responsibilities of its representatives based on the characteristics of the socioeconomic status of users.
Sharing of responsibilities. The considered “multidimensional” organization has something in common with the so-called “matrix organizations”. However, the latter are usually two-dimensional and do not share many of the important features of the organizational structures discussed, especially in matters of financing. In addition, they all have one common drawback: employees of functional departments are in double subordination, which, as a rule, leads to undesirable results. It is this most frequently noted shortcoming of matrix organizations that is the cause of the so-called “occupational schizophrenia.”
A multidimensional organizational structure does not create the difficulties inherent in a matrix organization. In a multidimensional organization, the personnel of the functional unit whose performance the program manager buys treats him as an external client and is accountable only to the head of the functional unit. However, when assessing the performance of his subordinates, the head of a functional unit, naturally, must use assessments of the quality of their work given by the program manager. The position of the person leading a functional unit group that performs work on behalf of a program is much like the position 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 financing. Usually practiced (or traditional) program financing is only a way of preparing cost estimates for functional departments and programs. It is not about providing resources and choice to program units or requiring functional units to independently pursue markets within and outside the organization. In short, program funding generally does not take into account the specifics of organizational structure and does not affect its flexibility. This method of distributing funds between functional units ensures only the implementation of programs, while providing a more efficient than usual determination of the cost of their implementation. A multidimensional organizational structure allows you to retain 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 organization's flexibility 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 at competitive prices the goods in demand and provide the services that customers need. Such a structure creates a market within the organization, whether it is private or public, commercial or non-profit, and increases 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 the divisions. Even the work of the executive body can be assessed autonomously in all aspects of its activities.
A multidimensional structure prevents the development of bureaucracy due to the fact that functional units or programs cannot become victims of service units, the procedures of which sometimes become an end in themselves and become an obstacle to achieving the goals set by the organization. Customers inside and outside the organization control internal suppliers of products and services; suppliers never control consumers. Such an organization is focused on goals, not means, while bureaucracy is characterized by the subordination of goals to means.
Disadvantages of a Multidimensional Organizational Structure
However, a multidimensional organizational structure, although lacking some significant shortcomings inherent in organizations of the usual type, however, cannot eliminate all shortcomings completely. Such a structural organization in itself 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 at an enterprise is not the only way to increase the flexibility of an organization and its sensitivity to changes in conditions, but serious study of this allows one 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 an enterprise
The process of managing economic activities in an organization is associated with the organizational management structure adopted by it, which predetermines the entire management cycle. The basic activities associated with organizational structure - the creation of departments and services, the definition of the scope of management, the distribution of rights and responsibilities - are based on one or another theory of organization, according to which the organization is considered designed to achieve prescribed goals.
The main characteristic of an organization, as we already know, is the formal organizational structure of the organization’s management, the consciously established composition of divisions, the hierarchy of positions, the set of job descriptions, internal organizational regulations, manuals, etc. .
Organizational structure depends on the external environment of the organization. It is built in accordance with the strategic goals of the organization and is determined by the nature of the production process and the characteristics of the technology used. Therefore, it is not fixed, given once and for all, it can and should change. The organizer must be able to sense 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, but should be carried out purposefully. It is assumed that it is possible to obtain all the necessary information and increase its effectiveness through pre-planned changes in the combinations of individual elements of the organization, in their internal structures, and in the interrelation 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 the following: the presence of a person (a person makes decisions); multi-purpose nature (multi-criteria); multiply connected elements (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 technical 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 and delegation of authority to lower levels. Linear structures are turning into flatter ones by reducing the number of management levels with the simultaneous (usually) consolidation of functions and the reduction of divisions 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 a mechanistic structure, for example, by creating venture innovation departments, business centers, brigade structures, project groups, etc.;
Creation of conglomerate structures. In this case, senior management retains only finances. Most conglomerates arise through external mergers;
Formation of structures of the future (modular and atomistic organizations), ensuring a general focus on the mass economy while simultaneously allowing for the production and release of non-standard products focused on individual ordering and serving the individual consumer. The introduction of these structures can be realized during the transition from the industrial phase of production organization to the information phase.
Improving the organizational structure of management takes the form of searching for an alternative solution between centralization and decentralization of power functions. The desire to find an acceptable agreement between centralized and decentralized management leads to the need to create a management system that is characterized by centralized development of enterprise improvement and economic policy with decentralized operational management.
To strengthen the management function, the following are used: groups of innovations, program-targeted approach, matrix structures. But the use of the concept of strategic business units of an organization when designing organizational management structures deserves the most attention. Here the principles are fully implemented: centralizing the development of strategy and decentralizing the process of its implementation, ensuring flexibility and adaptability of management, involving 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).
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. Free the management of the association from the daily routine work associated with the operational management of the research and production complex.
4. Increase the efficiency of decisions made.
5. Involve entrepreneurial activity all divisions of the association capable of expanding the range of products and services, increasing flexibility and competitiveness.
The upper level of management in this model can be represented by a standard management structure or another organizational and legal form. As we transition to a new management structure, the functions of senior management will change significantly. It is gradually freed from the operational management of divisions 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 group of directions of scientific, production and economic activity with a clearly defined specialization, their competitors, and markets. Each independent unit must have its own goal, relatively independent of the others.
An independent business unit can be a department, a branch, a group of workshops or a separate workshop, and be located at any level of the hierarchical structure. Responsibility for each area is assigned to one manager - the director. The director is responsible for strategy; he must be ready to defend, within his powers, interests in the field of technology, production, and capital investments. At the same time, when distributing resources between various independent divisions, the plan of each of them must be clarified in order to balance the interests of the organization as a whole.
The choice of a 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 the question has to be resolved: whether such a unit should be line or headquarters. There cannot be a definite 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 government through which strategic management is implemented; at the lower level of management there are profit centers created on the basis of the production and functional divisions of the organization. Operational production management is implemented through these centers.
This structure will allow for the gradual transition of managers and specialists from senior management to independently operating divisions and profit centers. This is due to the constant transfer of a number of management functions from top echelons to lower echelons and the need to staff them qualified personnel managers and specialists.
CONCLUSION
When studying this topic, we considered the following:
1. The concept of the organizational structure of an enterprise and its determining factors is given. An 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 forming structures, choosing the type and combinations of types of structures, and studying the principles of their construction. The study of the varieties of structure types made it possible to note their main advantages and disadvantages, which must be taken into account when improving organizational management structures.
3. Possible ways to improve the organizational structure of the enterprise are described. An assessment of possible ways to improve the management structure was carried out. A clear organizational mechanism is necessary in the context of perestroika to improve management efficiency.
It is obvious that each organization represents 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 between the parties characterize the system under consideration in a certain way and allow us to judge how effectively it copes with its main task - organizing 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 existing theory and practice, interaction at the “unit-unit” or “group-group” level is implemented through 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 structures that are most adapted to modern life requirements. In conclusion, it is important to emphasize that experimentation with the development and implementation of new management structures has become a characteristic feature of the last decade. During these experiments, a wide variety of combinations of known types and types of structures are often used, adapted by organizations to the specific conditions of their functioning. However, the main trend is that each subsequent structure becomes simpler and more flexible compared to the previously existing ones. In this case, the following ten requirements and characteristics of the formation of effective management structures are named: Reducing the size of departments and staffing them with more qualified personnel. Reducing the number of management levels. Group labor organization as the basis of a new management structure. Orientation of ongoing work, including schedules and procedures, to customer requests. Creating conditions for flexible product packaging, minimizing inventories. Quick response to changes. Flexible equipment, high productivity and low costs. Impeccable product quality and focus on strong connections with consumers. There is no doubt that in the near future we will encounter a wide variety of structures, each of which will meet the needs of a specific organization.
LIST OF REFERENCES USED
1. Blyakhman L.S., Galenko V.P., Minkin A.V. Introduction to management. - Tutorial. - St. Petersburg. : SPbUEF, 1994 - 650 p.
2. Vachugov D.D. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook. 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. -256 p.
4. Vikhansky O.S., Naumov A.I. Management: Textbook. M.:Gardariki, 2001.- 528 p.
5. Gamzhin V.T., Sidorov P.I. Guide to self-management. Ecology of business destiny. - St. Petersburg: Publishing house "AGMA", 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. - 290 p.
8. Klimovich L.Kh. Fundamentals of management: a textbook for secondary school students. 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 management psychology in everyday work. -M.: Delo, 1996.-380 p.
11. Ladanov I.D. "Practical Management". M.: Elnik, 1995.-320 p.
12. Meskon M.Kh., Albert M., Khedouri F. Fundamentals of management: Transl. from English - M.: Delo, 1995. – 704 p.
13.Molnar Y.F. Fundamentals of management: Methodological recommendations for completing a course project. - Arkhangelsk: ASTU Publishing House, 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. Organization Theory: Textbook. allowance. - M.: Publishing house of Moscow State University of Commerce, 1998.-180s
17. Rumyantseva Z.P., Filinov N.V., Shramchenko G.B. General management organization: principles and processes. Modular program for managers. - M.: INFA-M, 2000.-150 p.
18. Samkov V.M. Organization Theory: Textbook. allowance. At 2 o'clock - Ekaterinburg, 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, management mythology, enterprise management: Textbook. for medium specialist. textbook establishments. M.: Higher. school, 1999; -304 s.
21. Yanchevsky V.G. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook. allowance. Mn.: TetraSystems, 2004.; - 224 p.
Glossary
1.Horizontal division of labor- This is the division of labor by 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 in implementing the management process.
3. Linear management structure- this is a system of organizing the management apparatus, which assumes that at the head of each division there is a single manager, who manages his employees and concentrates all management functions in his hands.
4. Organigram- this is when interaction between many links and levels of management is required, and specific documents are developed.
5.Organizational structure- This is one of the main elements of organizational management.
6.Organizational management structure- this is the totality of all elements and links of the management system and the permanent connections established between them.
7.Organization structure is a way of building a relationship between management levels and functional areas, ensuring optimal achievement of the organization’s goals under given conditions.
8.Managment structure– is an ordered set of steadily interconnected elements that ensure the functioning and development of the organization as a single whole.
9.Control is the process of foresight, planning and organization, motivation, control and analysis necessary for the optimal achievement of organizational goals.
An organization is a complex system that includes many interrelated elements of varying degrees of importance, impact on the organization, resource intensity, productivity, and so on. Analysis of any company allows you to get an idea of how this organization operates, identify weaknesses in the organizational structure and take measures to eliminate them.
In order to understand how any mechanism works, you need to understand how it works. This is exactly what they do to a company when they analyze the organizational structure. The result of this analysis is a company management scheme that gives a clear picture of who reports to whom and reports to whom. After conducting such a study, it becomes much easier to manage the organization, as well as introduce any changes regarding the management structure.
As a rule, when conducting analysis, they come to one or three types of structures: linear, matrix and functional. The linear structure implies strict subordination from top to bottom: there is a boss, there are subordinates, and the same employees always report to the same boss. A functional organization takes a slightly different approach: in an organization with a functional structure, subordinates report to different bosses depending on what work they do. The matrix structure combines the features of the two previous structures, and each subordinate has two superiors - one direct in the hierarchy, and one functional. This structure is typical for analyzing the organizational structure of which is the most difficult to carry out.
By analyzing the structure of a company, it is possible to determine which areas of its structure are ineffective, and how the work of certain problem areas can be improved. This is precisely the purpose of a procedure such as analysis. The following types of areas may be ineffective:
A subordinate who has three or more superiors will not work effectively because he cannot satisfy the demands of everyone at the same time, and also receives too many tasks.
An employee who submits only formally, while the boss does not have significant leverage - this employee is not motivated to work more efficiently, and therefore will hinder the development of the company.
Departments with too few employees are the so-called “bottlenecks” - areas of the organizational structure that, due to their low capacity, cannot cope with the full volume of responsibilities assigned to them.
Departments in which there are too many employees, on the contrary, cope with tasks perfectly, but are characterized by inefficient use of resources. In such departments there are almost always one or two notorious lazy people, whose working day comes down to browsing social networks and endless tea parties. As a rule, such employees are transferred to departments where there is a shortage of personnel, where they fit into the work perfectly and begin to work for the benefit of the company. Such a transfer extremely rarely causes dissatisfaction among employees - usually people try to be useful to the company and perceive the transfer normally.
The sooner and the more detailed the analysis of the organizational structure is carried out, the sooner all problem areas are found and eliminated, the faster the company will develop, and the more profit it will bring. Good luck, effective work and high profits, dear entrepreneurs!
Full name of the Company: Limited Liability Company "Orbita".
The location of the Company and its postal address: Russia, 156026, Kostroma region, Kostroma district, Kostroma, Severnaya Pravda street, house 41/21.
Form of ownership - private property.
Orbita LLC belongs to the enterprises of the clothing and textile industry, which is based on the production of garments (without tailoring according to orders from the population), including children's clothing.
The factory produces various children's clothing, mainly outerwear.
Purpose of the organization: Making a profit from textile activities and meeting the needs of society for textile goods.
Mission of the organization: To achieve and maintain the highest customer satisfaction, meaning satisfactory product quality at an acceptable price to the buyer.
The organizational structure of the company is considered to be a linear-functional structure. Linear-functional structure - a structure in which specialists of the same profile are united into structural units and make decisions that are mandatory for production units.
The organization is headed by director Maxim Nikolaevich Yakubovsky, who has 656 workers under his command. The director of the enterprise is assigned the following functions:
1. General management of the production, economic and financial and economic activities of the enterprise.
2. Organization of interaction between all structural divisions, workshops and production units.
3. Ensuring the fulfillment of all obligations assumed by the enterprise, including obligations to budgets of various levels and extra-budgetary funds, as well as under contracts.
4. Creation of conditions for the introduction of the latest equipment and technology, progressive forms of management and labor organization.
5. Taking measures to ensure healthy and safe working conditions at the enterprise.
6. Monitoring compliance with the legislation of the Russian Federation in the activities of all services.
7. Protection of the property interests of the enterprise in court and government bodies.
Subordinate to the General Director are the production director, factory director, financial director, organizational director, head of the business protection service, development director, head of the logistics department, technical control department, secretary-assistant and QMS specialist.
The production director is subordinate to the experimental workshop 1 and 2, the order placement department (Russian placement group, foreign placement group), the chief economist's department, the production planning engineer, the raw material rationing department, and the supply department. The Production Director is responsible for:
Proper organization of production work in accordance with approved programs (plans) of the Company;
Performance and labor discipline of employees of production departments;
Security of information (documents) containing information constituting a trade secret of the Company, other confidential information, including personal data of the Company’s employees;
Ensuring safe working conditions, maintaining order, complying with fire safety rules in production premises.
Subordinate to the director of the factory are the production planning engineer, the chief mechanic's department, the equipment engineer, and the production manager (sewing threads 6, scrap conversion area, cutting shop, cut warehouse, printing shop). It performs the following functions:
1. Generalized report for the week, month, quarter.
2. Distribution of received funds and other resources, control over their use.
3. Profit.
4. Develop a motivation system.
5. Distribution of responsibilities, formation of corporate culture.
6. Creation competitive advantages.
7. Organization of execution of decisions made by the company’s management.
8. Development of client orientation.
9. Organization of personnel development.
10. Organization of internal processes.
The financial department and accounting department report to the financial director. The functions of the financial director are to manage his own financial department and coordinate the cross-functional interaction of the entire company structure. Organizing the work of a financial service consists not only of its creation, but also of regularly adapting to changes within the business and its external environment. The structure and staff of the financial service, the distribution of functions, powers and responsibilities, the processes of interaction with production, marketing, personnel and all other departments, methodological support and control of activities - all these components of the company’s financial system are kept up to date by the financial director, which should effectively ensure achieving your goals.
The personnel development department, legal department, IT department, HSE engineer, canteen, and administration department are subordinate to the head of organizational issues. He recruits and trains new employees.
The control group reports to the head of the business protection service. The head of the business protection service creates security units, organizes work to protect the organization’s business from unlawful attacks on its property and other rights: security of facilities, personal security of management, engineering and technical protection, information and analytical support for decision-making by the organization’s management, economic and information security, interaction with law enforcement agencies, legal entities and individuals.
The Director of Marketing (Marketing Department) and the Design Laboratory report to the Development Director. The Development Director performs the following functions:
1. Study of all commercial and production processes of the enterprise, a full assessment of the potential of the enterprise.
2. Identification of negative and positive trends in processes at the enterprise, development of measures to eliminate the former and stimulate the latter.
3. Justification of the goal of the overall development of the enterprise, determination of the general concept and policy for the development of the enterprise.
4. Development of an effective development strategy and the main provisions of the enterprise development plan.
5. Adoption and implementation of plans and decisions for the development or restructuring of the enterprise.
The commercial director is subordinate to the franchising department, the branded retail development department, the merchandising department, a group of order managers, the project manager, the online sales department, the sales market department (operating directors, stores), the wholesale sales department (regional wholesale sales department, wholesale pavilion ). The Commercial Director is responsible for:
Proper organization of work on sales of products in accordance with the approved programs (plans) of the Company;
Performance and labor discipline of commercial service employees;
Security of information (documents) containing information constituting a commercial secret of the Company, other confidential information, including personal data of the Company’s employees;
Ensuring safe working conditions, maintaining order, and complying with fire safety rules in the sales premises.
The logistics manager is subordinate to the transport department, the receiving and picking warehouse, the warehouse logistics manager (group of operators, GP5 warehouses, shipping warehouse), and the warehouse logistics manager (returns warehouse, accessories warehouse, fabric warehouse). The head of logistics department performs the following functions:
1. Management of logistics services to consumers;
2. Forecasting demand for products (production consumption of material resources);
3. Inventory management;
4. Procurement management;
5. Warehousing management;
6. Transportation management;
7. Management of consumer orders;
8. Selection of locations for production and logistics infrastructure elements;
9. Management of providing consumers with spare parts and providing them with assistance during maintenance;
10. Organization and provision of logistics communications;
11. Input transportation;
12. Reception, sorting, placement and storage of inventories;
13. Cargo handling;
14. Order picking (commissioning);
15. Packaging;
16. Output transportation;
17. Return flow logistics and waste disposal.
The main task of the technical control department is to prevent the occurrence of defects, i.e. The technical control service must constantly influence technological process all types of maintenance and repair of rolling stock.
The assistant secretary performs technical functions to support and service the work of the General Director of the Company or its divisions.
The responsibilities of a QMS specialist include developing a quality management system (QMS) and monitoring its implementation. He works with a large number of documents: draws up instructions, quality manuals, monitors statistics on customer satisfaction with the company’s goods and services, develops an action plan for the implementation or implementation of an already implemented QMS and monitors its timely implementation at each stage. The QMS specialist also draws up reports for submission to senior management. He monitors the compliance of the developed QMS with international standards and actively contributes to the company obtaining a certificate of compliance with them. In addition to the above responsibilities, this specialist must advise company employees on all issues related to the quality of goods or services, and make presentations in order to train them in new points of the QMS.
There is no sufficiently developed methodology for analyzing the organizational structures of enterprise management in market conditions, which could serve as the basis for a project for the necessary organizational changes. The need to develop strategically effective solutions that maximally contribute to the adaptation of the enterprise to the external environment, developing tactical tasks based on them requires consideration as an object of analysis not only of the existing results of work, but also development prospects, justification of goals, and strategies for achieving them. The effectiveness of the organizational structure depends on its compliance with the system of enterprise goals, adopted strategies and the mechanism for distributing minimal 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 organizational management structure adequate to the prevailing conditions 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 focus of analysis.
The functional focus of the analysis assumes 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 goals, which turns it into the basis of management technology. A qualitative forecast regarding possible directions of development of an enterprise is made on the basis of scanning, monitoring and forecasting, which requires special information and analytical, legal, organizational and technical support. This is the so-called strategic decision support system. The totality of those external to the organization predictive factors , essential for the purpose of the forecast are called forecast background. Analysis of the forecast background and potential of the organization is the essence prognostic analysis , the result of which is the development of a direction of development, provided with potential that an enterprise can count on in the competition 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. This systematization of performance indicators predetermines a 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 assessing the predictive capabilities of the management system, which, through its structural blocks, ensures long-term orientation and stability of the organization’s development based on an adequate response to changes in the external environment, develops realistic 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 goals;
c) justification of measures to improve the organizational structure of management and its individual links (elements).
Monitoring the OS DPE indicators allows us to identify facts of critical discrepancy between their specified and observed values. In the context of this study, under problem a critical discrepancy between the real and desired state of the system is understood when there is a threat to the realization of the set goals. Diagnosing a problem involves identifying the causes of its occurrence, determining the magnitude of the discrepancy between indicators due to the influence of external and internal factors (5.2). There are correlations between changes in the degree of influence of factors, their combinations and the discrepancy between the given and observed values of indicators. A diagnostic analysis of performance indicators provides information about the positive or negative dynamics of individual aspects of the management system and shows whether it was able to identify all the impacts that were significant for it and how appropriate and conscious the response to them was. It also creates a field for a detailed analysis of its individual links, which characterizes the individual state of each block of the control system and solves the following problems:
a) identifying block problems;
b) opening reserves and developing directions for their mobilization;
c) justification of options for the development of management units;
d) ranking them according to the degree of influence on 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 discrepancy 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 the basis 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. Problem identification, investigation, and resolution can be done within specific programs or problem-oriented organizational structures. The most common method for identifying problems is diagnostic interviews, the number of which for medium-sized organizations is about 30, which helps to identify 40–50 problems.
A general indicator of the effectiveness of the control mechanism K mu characterizes the degree to which the system's goals are achieved at the actual costs of maintaining the control apparatus. Particular indicators of the K mu block are the degree of implementation of the target settings of individual links at the actual costs of their implementation. The solution to the identified problem lies in the area of adjusting the values of indicators (adjusting the management 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 the organizational structure, and therefore significant resources. The relationship between individual types of analysis and their results, which are used to substantiate the development plan for the organizational management structure, is presented in Diagram 9.
Generalized information can be obtained on the basis of a comprehensive analysis of the K mc indicators and the indicators of the K mu goal-setting mechanism.
It is advisable to analyze the organizational structure of an enterprise’s management in the sequence presented in Diagram 10.
Stage 1. Analysis of organizational and regulatory support for the management system.
Purpose of 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 establishment of regular management.
Method of analysis – normative. Of the main structure-forming documents that form the basis for establishing regular management at an enterprise, the most common are staffing schedules and job descriptions. At domestic enterprises, the Regulations on the organizational structure are an extremely rare document. The lack of basic organizational and regulatory documents does not allow the construction effective system 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 normative and regulatory documents that define the tasks of each structural block, its functions, connections 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 divisions of a production organization, which ensure their interaction in achieving the goal of the system, generation of information on the feasibility of identifying target economic objects.
Scheme 9. Relationship between individual types of analysis and their results
Scheme 10. Methodology for analyzing organizational management structure
Analysis methods: method of projections (correspondence matrix), method of structuring goals.
Only compatible elements can interact, therefore a matrix analysis of the expedient compatibility of various areas of activity in performing 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. Based on this analysis, incompatible elements of the system receive autonomy, legally secured by the corresponding organizational and legal form. Interdependence is revealed at the stage of constructing a tree of system goals.
Stage 3. Analysis of the effectiveness of the goal setting system.
Purpose of analysis– assessment of the forecasting 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 organization’s potential.
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 assessment 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 for achieving them, ensuring the implementation of goals and strategies, as well as adjusting them if necessary, the organizational structure must include a forecast block.
The majority of domestic enterprises do not develop a tree of goals with an adequate system of indicators. The main goal of the enterprise as a system is not defined. Systematically unordered planned indicators are not consistent with the structure of economic objects, do not correspond to the directions of using resources and obtaining material results, therefore it is impossible to assess 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 of use by the organization external opportunities).
Purpose of 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 discrepancy 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 an enterprise from the arsenal of strategic planning.
At this stage, the main factors of the external environment that most significantly influence the final results of the functioning and development of the organization are clarified, the factors that limit the achievement of particular indicators included in the general indicator K MC DPE OS are determined, the gaps between real and planned indicators are recorded, the reasons for the discrepancy are identified, which could lead to a crisis situation.
The initial economic standards used in the development of the marketing, financial, supply and sales, pricing, accounting, production and technical, 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 is fairly well covered in the literature, the quality of the analysis increases.
Highlight:
a) liquidity crisis (real loss of solvency);
b) crisis of success (deviation of actual performance indicators from planned ones);
c) strategic crisis (diagnosed emerging gap between probable and desired results).
The external environment of domestic enterprises is characterized by a high degree of complexity, mobility, and 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 ineffective goal-setting system.
The position of enterprises in the market for their products characterizes them product and market potential. The main problems affecting the formation of product and market potential are:
insufficient information about the forecast and current state of the market, significant efforts required to obtain the required information;
discrepancy between the type and structure of the production program and the structure of demand;
incorrect marketing and sales policies;
the emergence of high-tech and high-quality competitive products on the market;
instability of conditions of material and technical supply.
The degree to which an organization uses external opportunities 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 the vast majority remains severe. Accounts receivable are a burden on the financial and economic condition of the enterprise. A high percentage of barter payments remains, and the quality of supplies decreases.
Stage 5. Analysis of the internal efficiency of the organization (analysis of the degree to which the organization uses its internal capabilities, characterizing the potential of the organization).
Purpose of analysis: assessment of the ability of the organizational management structure to ensure the achievement of set goals at minimal and necessary costs (correspondence of the organization’s actual use of internal capabilities to the “control mechanism” block of the conceptual model, formalized in the form of a general indicator K mu DPE OS).
Analysis methods: all methods of analysis and forecasting of the internal environment of an enterprise used in strategic planning. Methods of financial analysis and planning, functional-cost analysis are of particular importance.
The construction of a logical diagram of the main problems of the enterprise determines the structure of the problem field, the main areas of which are structural and technological(reduction in sales markets for products, uncompetitiveness of products due to moral and physical wear and tear of fixed capital, rising costs above the planned level) and organizational and economic(low level of organization of production and management) problems. Even S. Young noted that the viability of an organization and the well-being of its members is determined by their ability to promptly detect, recognize and solve problems. Constructing a problem field within diagnostic analysis allows you to identify the cause of control failures and the conditions for their elimination. According to V. Sh. Rapoport’s definition: “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.
A diagnostic analysis of performance indicators provides information about the positive or negative dynamics of individual aspects of the management system and shows whether it was able to identify all the impacts that were 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. Private performance indicators carry some information about positive or negative dynamics in the activities of individual blocks of the control system, which allows:
specify the problems identified as part of the diagnostic analysis;
identify problems with the block (element) itself;
uncover 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. A general indicator of the effectiveness of the control mechanism K mu characterizes the degree to which the system's goals are achieved at the actual costs of maintaining the control apparatus. Particular indicators of the K mu block are the degree of implementation of the target settings of individual links at the actual costs of their implementation. Generalized information can only be obtained on the basis of a comprehensive analysis of K mu indicators and indicators of the K mu goal-setting mechanism.
But identifying, accurately 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 of solving them. The connection between prognostic and diagnostic analysis is realized through the forecast of the development of problems. Building a logical diagram 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. DPE analysis is predictive in nature, as it involves clarifying the desired system model. The attention to the problem orientation of the analysis is explained primarily by the extreme instability and mobility of the external and internal environment of the enterprise, associated with the transitional nature of the domestic economy. Analysis of a problem situation can lead to changes in intermediate, key goals and even the main goal of the economic system.
The degree to which an organization uses its internal capabilities is characterized by the state technical and technological, property and financial, development, social and other potentials. A specific service is responsible for the state of each of these potentials, and top management is responsible for their coordination 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 feasible to have a system of interconnected and interconnected potentials.
Stage 6. Analysis of the compliance of the organizational management structure with the production structure.
Purpose of analysis: assessment of the compliance of the two main subsystems with each other, generation 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.
An assessment of the effectiveness of the management organizational structure can only be carried out 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: 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 analyzing 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 of 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 provide solutions to the problems facing the managed object, when existing structures are a reflection of 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 feasibility of identifying target economic objects when the predicted efficiency of their functioning outside the enterprise is higher than within it (the presence of demand for the products of individual divisions);
the presence of a discrepancy between the existing organizational management structure and the peculiarities of interaction and forms of integration with other enterprises;
discrepancy between the organizational and economic, and possibly also the organizational and legal form of the units with the actual 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 entire system into elements (compliance of the existing composition of the system, grouping of types of work and distribution of management functions with the “system composition” block of the conceptual model, formalized in the form of a general indicator K ss DPE OS ).
Analysis methods: structuring goals, matrix, expert.
At this stage, based on the data from the previous stages, it is specified functional model enterprise, 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 clarified; unrealizable ones (the so-called blind spots in the distribution of functions) and duplication of functions by two or more services are identified. In parallel, using the matrix, defects in the implementation of delegated decision-making powers are identified (with varying degrees of detail of management actions - preparation of a decision, approval at the preparation stage, 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 do not have the authority to do so, but also do not have reliable information.
Stage 8. Identification of defects in the structure of connections (lack of connections, breakage, irrationality of connections) and methods for their implementation.
Purpose of analysis: assessment of the degree of reliability (operability) of the organizational management structure, characterized by the degree of rationality of the structure of relations between elements (interconnection and interaction), which determines the ability of organizational management structures to import, process and export information (compliance with the existing system of connections, their relative location in space and interaction in time with the block " system of connections” of the conceptual model, formalized in the form of a general indicator K St DPE OS).
Analysis methods: matrix, network, expert.
At this stage, certain parameters of their appropriate 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 divisions (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 decision-making powers with varying degrees of detail of management actions makes it possible to analyze the pattern of information flow (its routing).
Stage 9. Analysis of the quality of implementation of functions and the costs of their implementation.
Purpose of analysis: generation of information on management costs, taking into account the degree of participation of each division in achieving the goal of the production organization in order to optimize the costs of performing functions.
Analysis methods: matrix, functional-cost.
Functional-cost and functional-qualitative diagnostics of the organizational management structure are described in the literature in sufficient detail. Functions are ranked using a scoring matrix, which assigns them a numerical value that reflects their relative weight and role in achieving the organization's overall goal.
Stage 10. Determination of the integral indicator K ef (zero level of indicators), complex K os and K ohm (first level), generalizing K ss, K st, K mc, K mu and comparing them with the corresponding indicators of DPE OS.
Purpose of analysis: identifying the extent and causes of non-conformity of 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 st, K mc, 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 management structure Keff is derived on the basis of a formal procedure for applying the principle of sequential resolution of uncertainty, which is the key to understanding and using in practice the principles of its construction when forming an organizational management structure. It is known that the structure of an organization is determined by the complexity and degree of uncertainty of its functioning, therefore this approach to synthesizing indicators makes its hierarchy clear.
The main goal of the system, formulated in the category of profit, also makes it possible to use this method for a comparative analysis of the organizational structure of management at similar objects 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 procedure for measuring indicators. A specially developed industry average, corporate, regulatory standard, formed from several objects according to their standard level, can be used as a basis for comparison.
Stage 11. Adjustment of indicators of the conceptual model in the form of OS DPE, development of measures to improve the efficiency of the organizational management structure.