Last month’s blog drew much attention from readers who were interested in moving their organisation from the old hierarchical, mechanistic structure to one which is more in keeping with the fast-moving business environment of today. From my studies many years ago, the answer was found in the elementary work and research by Burns and Stalker, which is summarised here.
Burns and Stalker proposed two contrasting types of organisational structures: mechanistic and organic. Here are the key differences between them.
Mechanistic Organisational Structure
Hierarchical
Mechanistic structures are highly hierarchical with clear lines of authority and control. Decision-making is centralised at the top levels of the organisation.
Specialisation
Tasks and roles are clearly defined and specialised. Employees have specific job descriptions and responsibilities.
Formalisation
There are strict rules, procedures, and protocols that govern the operations of the organisation. Communication follows formal channels.
Stability and Efficiency
This structure is designed for stability and efficiency, making it suitable for environments that are stable and predictable.
Organic Organisational Structure
Flexibility and Adaptability
Organic structures are more flexible and adaptable to changes in the environment. Decision-making is decentralised, allowing for quicker responses to changes.
Collaboration
Roles and tasks are less rigidly defined, promoting collaboration and teamwork. Employees may take on multiple roles and responsibilities.
Informal Communication
Communication is more informal and can flow in multiple directions, not just top-down. This encourages the sharing of ideas and innovation.
Innovation and Change
This structure is designed to foster innovation and is better suited for dynamic and uncertain environments.
Summary
Mechanistic structures are characterised by rigidity, specialisation, and centralised control, making them suitable for stable environments. In contrast, organic structures are flexible, collaborative, and decentralised, making them ideal for dynamic and changing environments.
If you need to transition or even develop a Matrix organisation, please email at [email protected]
Burns and Stalker proposed two contrasting types of organisational structures: mechanistic and organic. Here are the key differences between them.
Mechanistic Organisational Structure
Hierarchical
Mechanistic structures are highly hierarchical with clear lines of authority and control. Decision-making is centralised at the top levels of the organisation.
Specialisation
Tasks and roles are clearly defined and specialised. Employees have specific job descriptions and responsibilities.
Formalisation
There are strict rules, procedures, and protocols that govern the operations of the organisation. Communication follows formal channels.
Stability and Efficiency
This structure is designed for stability and efficiency, making it suitable for environments that are stable and predictable.
Organic Organisational Structure
Flexibility and Adaptability
Organic structures are more flexible and adaptable to changes in the environment. Decision-making is decentralised, allowing for quicker responses to changes.
Collaboration
Roles and tasks are less rigidly defined, promoting collaboration and teamwork. Employees may take on multiple roles and responsibilities.
Informal Communication
Communication is more informal and can flow in multiple directions, not just top-down. This encourages the sharing of ideas and innovation.
Innovation and Change
This structure is designed to foster innovation and is better suited for dynamic and uncertain environments.
Summary
Mechanistic structures are characterised by rigidity, specialisation, and centralised control, making them suitable for stable environments. In contrast, organic structures are flexible, collaborative, and decentralised, making them ideal for dynamic and changing environments.
If you need to transition or even develop a Matrix organisation, please email at [email protected]
RSS Feed
