Summary: Linear organizational structure. The main types of organizational structures of the enterprise - which one to choose for you

What is a functional management structure? What is it, what is connected with it, what scheme does it have? We will try to answer these questions and others in the course of this article.

The functional management structure is a type of structure that is formed based on the main areas in which an organization operates. In this case, the units will be combined into special blocks.

A lot of large and medium-sized enterprises and organizations use an approach called “functional” when forming departments. What does it mean? This means that the functional management structure implies the use of the functions of the direction in which the company operates. This may be the sale of products, their production and similar actions. The blocks will be formed according to the functions, that is, they will have the same root names that are characteristic of the direction of activity.

The functional management structure has some features: the separation of units located within the boundaries of the blocks can be carried out only according to certain approaches. Let's give a simple example: the organization of workshops takes place with an eye on the products being manufactured. At the same time, the organization of sites will be dictated by the technologies that are used in the production of products.

Structure blocks

The functional structure of management assumes the presence of three blocks.

The first is production. It includes those divisions that are in one way or another connected with the core products manufactured by the company. The connection can also be between services and their provision, and not only seen in the case of products. The production block also houses auxiliary divisions that provide all the services necessary for the functioning of the main divisions. Even in the production block there are those divisions that service both auxiliary and main processes. Well, the units of the experimental type complete this chain. They are responsible for the production of prototypes of a particular product. The role of departments can be very different. However, it will directly depend on the nature of the activities carried out by the organization. After all, prototypes are not created in every company. And the funds that are used for auxiliary production are also not available in every company.

The second block is management. The functional structure of management in this case indicates that the block will contain service, information, pre-production (that is, preparatory), administrative and advisory divisions and commissions. Let's look at this issue a little more specifically. Information departments include various kinds of archives and libraries. The service divisions will carry out their activities dealing with issues related to marketing research. Administrative commissions are nothing but legal departments and accounting departments, planning services. But advisory commissions can be represented as committees working in the field of improving technology and the organization as a whole.

The third block, which uses the functional management structure, is the units related to the social sphere. Examples include certain children's institutions and health centers, various clubs and recreation centers, and so on.

Where is the functional organizational structure of management applied?

The question of the scope to date has already been studied far and wide. There are 5 main areas where the functional organizational structure of management is applied. The first area is single-product enterprises. The second is enterprises that implement quite complex in various senses and long-term projects. They can also be innovative. The third area in which the functional structure of enterprise management is applied is large companies and firms that are focused on the production of a certain type of product, that is, which have their own specialization. The fourth area of ​​application of this management structure is the organization of design and research profile. Well, this list is completed by enterprises with a very narrow specialization.

What tasks does the functional management system solve?

In the course of using this structure, some problems arise that management faces. Let's try to list them:

1) The complexity of providing communications.

2) Leveling the load, which falls on the share of a particular unit.

3) Careful selection of personnel, specialists who will be allowed to work in functional units.

4) Assistance in coordinating units.

5) Prioritization, selection of specialists.

6) Development and implementation of motivational, special mechanisms.

7) Prevention of separatist processes within units.

What are the benefits of a functional management structure?

1) Specialists are competent enough in the implementation of certain specific functions.

2) Line managers practically do not participate in solving special issues. It is also possible to expand the opportunities that line managers will have at the same time as reducing their workload. Managers will be able to take over the operational management of production processes by redirecting questions to other relevant persons.

3) Experienced specialists participate in the role of consultants, if necessary. As a result, there is no need (well, or noticeably reduced) to involve specialists with a broader work profile.

4) The risk of erroneous decisions will not be equal to zero, but it will certainly be reduced to it.

5) When performing managerial functions, duplication will be excluded.

What are the disadvantages of a functional management structure?

1) It is quite difficult to maintain permanent mutual relations established between services.

2) Decision making requires a lot of time, it is a lengthy procedure.

3) Functional services often lack mutual understanding among themselves. Actions are uncoordinated, there is no unity in them. At the same time, the responsibility of the performers, which they must bear for the work performed, is reduced. All this is due to the fact that different performers receive instructions not just from different leaders - they receive them from several leaders at the same time.

4) In the implementation of tasks and goals, there is an excessive interest of certain departments.

5) Personal responsibility is reduced. No one wants to take responsibility for the final result.

6) The control required to monitor the process and its progress is quite complex. And this applies to individual projects, and the entire region as a whole.

7) The organizational form reacts to changes with great difficulty, it has already frozen and does not develop.

Varieties of the functional control system

One of the varieties is a linear-functional management structure. Its scheme is shown in the figures below.

The linear-functional structure is used for the division of managerial labor. At the same time, the functional units should advise and provide assistance on the development of certain issues, as well as prepare plans and programs, decisions. The entire load associated with command and control is shifted to the linear links.

The linear-functional control structure, the scheme of which was shown earlier, has its advantages and disadvantages. Actually, they will become the subject of further analysis of the topic.

Managers belonging to the divisions of the functional type have a certain influence on the divisions of production, but only in a formal sense. On their own, in most cases, they cannot do anything, that is, they are not able to give orders without the confirmation of the relevant representatives. In general, the role of functional services has a direct relationship with the scale in which the activity is carried out. They are also associated with the governance structures of an organization or enterprise. All technical training falls to the share of functional services. They should work out the questions in advance and leave options for their solutions. In this case, questions may relate to the management of the production process.

What are the advantages of a linear-functional structure?

1) Decisions and plans are prepared more carefully and deeply. Hence, they are more efficient. At the same time, plans can also be associated with the specialization of individual employees.

2) Line managers are released from resolving a number of issues, which, in turn, reduces the workload. These are issues related to logistics, financial calculations and their planning, as well as other issues.

3) The presence of a certain connection and a clear hierarchical ladder. The employee is not subject to several leaders, but only to one.

What are the disadvantages of a linear-functional structure?

1) Each individual link does not want to work for the common good of the company, to take on other people's tasks. The link in most cases works only on its own goals, performing a narrow range of functions.

2) There are no close relationships between departments. There is practically no interaction between these components. It's about the horizontal.

3) But vertically, the interaction, on the contrary, is very strongly developed. Even much more than necessary.

Scheme

The functional control structure, an example of which was given almost at the very beginning of this article, has a diagram below.

It is characterized by the creation of certain divisions. In addition, each of them will have certain tasks that must be performed.

An example of a linear-functional management structure can be demonstrated by the federal migration service. Another diagram of this control structure is presented below.

Conclusion

The advantages and disadvantages of the functional management structure were considered in the course of the article. The definition of the concept was also given, the blocks that are part of the functional structure of management are described.

Published with permission from Lanit

"The office reaches perfection just in time for the firm to decline."
12th Law of Parkinson

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

Both the Deming quality management program and the principles of Total Quality Management are actually aimed at changing the structure of the enterprise management system. Let's consider the main types of enterprise management structures from the point of view of their compliance with the ideas of modern quality management.

The term "organizational structure" immediately conjures up a two-dimensional tree diagram, consisting of rectangles and lines connecting them. These boxes show the work to be done and the scope of responsibilities and thus reflect the division of labor in the organization. The relative position of the boxes and the lines connecting them show the degree of subordination. The considered ratios are limited to two dimensions: up - down and across, since we operate with a limited assumption, according to which the organizational structure must be represented on a two-dimensional diagram drawn on a flat surface.

The organizational structure itself does not contain anything that would limit us in this respect. In addition, these constraints on organizational structure often have severe and costly consequences. Here are just four of them. First, between the individual parts of organizations of this kind, there is not cooperation, but competition. There is stronger competition within organizations than between organizations, and this internal competition takes on a much less ethical form. Secondly, the usual way of representing the structure of organizations makes it very difficult to define the tasks of individual departments and measure the corresponding indicators of performance due to the great interdependence of departments that are grouped in this way. Thirdly, it contributes to the creation of organizations that resist change, especially changes in their structure; therefore, they degenerate into bureaucratic structures that cannot be adapted. Most of these organizations learn extremely slowly, if at all. Fourth, the representation of the organizational structure in the form of a two-dimensional tree limits the number and nature of possible options for solving emerging problems. In the presence of such a limitation, solutions are impossible that ensure the development of the organization, taking into account technical and social changes, the pace of which is growing more and more. The current environment requires organizations to be not only ready for any changes, but also able to undergo them. In other words, dynamic balance is needed. Obviously, in order to achieve such a balance, the organization must have a sufficiently flexible structure. (While flexibility does not guarantee adaptability, it is nonetheless necessary to achieve adaptability.)

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

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

Hierarchical type of control structures

Management structures in many modern enterprises were built in accordance with the principles of management formulated at the beginning of the 20th 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 principle of correspondence of powers and responsibilities of management employees to their place in the hierarchy, which follows from it;
• the principle of division of labor into separate functions and specialization of workers according to the functions performed; the principle of formalization and standardization of activities, ensuring the uniformity of the performance of their duties by employees and the coordination of various tasks;
• the principle of impersonal performance by employees of their functions arising from it;
• the principle of qualification selection, in accordance with which hiring and dismissal from work is carried out in strict accordance with qualification requirements.

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

Linear organizational structure

The basis of linear structures is the so-called "mine" principle of construction and specialization of the management process according to the functional subsystems of the organization (marketing, production, research and development, finance, personnel, etc.). For each subsystem, a hierarchy of services ("mine") is formed, penetrating the entire organization from top to bottom (see Fig. 1). The results of the work of each service are evaluated by indicators characterizing the fulfillment by them of their goals and objectives. Accordingly, a system of motivation and encouragement of employees is being built. At the same time, the end result (the efficiency and quality of the work of the organization as a whole) becomes, as it were, secondary, since it is believed that all services work to some extent to obtain it.

Fig.1. Linear control structure

Advantages of a linear structure:

• a clear system of mutual relations of functions and divisions;
• 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;
• clear responsibility;
• quick reaction of the executive departments to direct instructions from superiors.

Disadvantages of a linear structure:

• lack of links dealing with strategic planning; in the work of managers at almost all levels, operational problems ("churn") dominates over strategic ones;
• a tendency to red tape and shifting responsibility when solving problems that require the participation of several departments;
• low flexibility and adaptability to changing situations;
• criteria for the efficiency and quality of work of departments and the organization as a whole are different;
• the tendency to formalize the assessment of the effectiveness and quality of the work of departments usually leads to the emergence of an atmosphere of fear and disunity;
• a large number of "management floors" between workers producing products and the decision maker;
• overload of top-level managers;
• increased dependence of the results of the organization's work on the qualifications, personal and business qualities of top managers.

Conclusion: in modern conditions, the shortcomings of the structure outweigh its advantages. Such a structure is poorly compatible with the modern philosophy of quality.

Linear - headquarters organizational structure

This type of organizational structure is the development of a linear one and is designed to eliminate its most important drawback associated with the lack of strategic planning links. The line-headquarters structure includes specialized units (headquarters) that do not have the right to make decisions and manage any subordinate units, but only help the relevant leader in performing certain functions, primarily the functions of strategic planning and analysis. Otherwise, this structure corresponds to a linear one (Fig. 2).

Fig.2. Linear - headquarters management structure

Advantages of a linear - staff structure:

• deeper than in the linear, study of strategic issues;
• some unloading of top managers;
• the possibility of attracting external consultants and experts;
• in empowering headquarters units with functional leadership, such a structure is a good first step towards more effective organic management structures.

Disadvantages of a linear - staff structure:

• insufficiently clear distribution of responsibility, since the persons preparing the decision do not participate in its implementation;
• tendencies towards excessive centralization of management;
• similar to a linear structure, partially - in a weakened form.

Conclusion: a linear - staff structure can be a good intermediate step in the transition from a linear structure to a more efficient one. The structure allows, although to a limited extent, to embody the ideas of the modern philosophy of quality.

Divisional management structure

By the end of the 1920s, the need for new approaches to the organization of management became clear, associated with a sharp increase in the size of enterprises, the diversification of their activities (diversification), and the complication of technological processes in a dynamically changing environment. In this regard, divisional management structures began to emerge, primarily in large corporations, which began to provide some independence to their production units, leaving the development strategy, research and development, financial and investment policy, etc. to the management of the corporation. In this type of structures an attempt was made to combine centralized coordination and control of activities with decentralized management. The peak of the introduction of divisional management structures occurred in the 60s - 70s (Fig. 3).

Fig.3. Divisional management structure

The key figures in the management of organizations with a divisional structure are no longer the heads of functional departments, but managers who head production departments (divisions). Structuring by divisions, as a rule, is carried out according to one of the criteria: by manufactured products (products or services) - product specialization; by focusing on certain groups of consumers - consumer specialization; on served territories - regional specialization. In our country, similar management structures have been widely introduced since the 60s in the form of the creation of production associations.

Advantages of a divisional structure:

• it provides management of diversified enterprises with a total number of employees of the order of hundreds of thousands and territorially remote divisions;
• provides greater flexibility and faster response to changes in the enterprise environment in comparison with the linear and linear - staff;
• when expanding the boundaries of the independence of the departments, they become "profit centers", actively working to improve the efficiency and quality of production;
• closer relationship between production and consumers.

Disadvantages of the divisional structure:

• a large number of "floors" of the management vertical; between the workers and the production manager of the unit - 3 or more levels of management, between the workers and the company's management - 5 or more;
• disunity of headquarters structures of departments from company headquarters;
• the main connections are vertical, therefore, there are shortcomings common to hierarchical structures - red tape, congestion of managers, poor interaction in resolving issues related to departments, etc.;
• duplication of functions on different "floors" and as a result - very high costs for the maintenance of the management structure;

in departments, as a rule, a linear or linear-headquarters structure with all their shortcomings is preserved.

Conclusion: the advantages of divisional structures outweigh their disadvantages only during periods of fairly stable existence; in an unstable environment, they risk repeating the fate of dinosaurs. With this structure, it is possible to embody most of the ideas of the modern philosophy of quality.

Organic type of management structures

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

Brigade (cross-functional) management structure

The basis of this management structure is the organization of work in working groups (teams). The form of the brigade organization of work is a fairly ancient organizational form, it is enough to recall the worker artels, but only from the 80s did its active use begin as an organization management structure, in many respects directly opposite to the hierarchical type of structures. The main principles of such a management organization are:

• autonomous work of working groups (teams);
• independent decision-making by working groups and horizontal coordination of activities;
• replacement of rigid managerial ties of a bureaucratic type with flexible ties;
• involvement of employees from different departments to develop and solve problems.

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

In an organization built according to these principles, functional units can be preserved (Fig. 4) or absent (Fig. 4). In the first case, employees are under double subordination - administrative (to the head of the functional unit in which they work) and functional (to the head of the working group or team in which they are a member). This form of organization is called cross-functional , in many respects it is close to matrix . In the second case, there are no functional units as such, we will call it proper brigade . This form is widely used in organizations. project management .

Fig.4. Cross-functional organizational structure

Fig.5. The structure of the organization, consisting of working groups (brigade)

Benefits of a brigade (cross-functional) structure:

• reduction of the administrative apparatus, increase in management efficiency;
• flexible use of personnel, their knowledge and competence;
• work in groups creates conditions for self-improvement;
• the possibility of applying effective methods of planning and management;
• reducing the need for generalists.

Disadvantages of the brigade (cross-functional) structure:

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

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

Project management structure

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

Benefits of a project management structure:

• high flexibility;
• reduction in the number of managerial personnel in comparison with hierarchical structures.

Disadvantages of the project management structure:

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

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

Matrix (program - target) management structure

Such a structure is a network structure built on the principle of dual subordination of executors: on the one hand, to the direct head of the functional service, which provides personnel and technical assistance to the project manager, on the other hand, to the project or target program manager, who is endowed with the necessary authority to carry out the management process. With such an organization, the project manager interacts with 2 groups of subordinates: with permanent members of the project team and with other employees of functional departments who report to him temporarily and on a limited range of issues. At the same time, their subordination to the direct heads of subdivisions, departments, and services is maintained. For activities that have a clearly defined beginning and end, projects are formed, for ongoing activities - targeted programs. In an organization, both projects and targeted programs can coexist. An example of a matrix program-target management structure (Toyota) is shown in Fig. 6. This structure was proposed by Kaori Ishikawa in the 70s and, with minor changes, still functions today not only at Toyota, but also at many other companies around the world.

Target programs are managed at Toyota through functional committees. For example, when creating a functional committee in the field of quality assurance, an authorized quality management representative is appointed as the chairman of the committee. From the practice of Toyota, the number of committee members should not exceed five. The committee includes both employees of the quality assurance department and 1-2 employees of other departments. Each committee has a secretariat and appoints a secretary to conduct business. The main issues are considered by the committee at monthly meetings. The committee can also create groups working on individual projects. The Quality Committee determines the rights and obligations of all departments related to quality issues and establishes a system of their relationships. On a monthly basis, the quality committee analyzes the quality assurance indicators and understands the reasons for complaints, if any. At the same time, the committee is not responsible for quality assurance. This task is solved directly by each department within the framework of the vertical structure. The responsibility of the committee is to combine the vertical and horizontal structures to improve the performance of the entire organization.

Fig.6. Matrix management structure at Toyota

Advantages of the matrix structure:

• better orientation to project (or program) goals and demand;
• more efficient day-to-day management, the ability to reduce costs and increase the efficiency of resource use;
• more flexible and efficient use of the organization's personnel, special knowledge and competence of employees;
• the relative autonomy of project teams or program committees contributes to the development of decision-making skills, managerial culture, and professional skills among employees;
• improving control over individual tasks of the project or target program;
• any work is organizationally formalized, one person is appointed - the "owner" of the process, serving as the center of concentration of all issues related to the project or target program;
• the response time to the needs of the project or program is reduced, since horizontal communications and a single decision-making center have been created.

Disadvantages of matrix structures:

• the difficulty of establishing clear responsibility for the work on the instructions of the unit and on the instructions of the project or program (a consequence of double subordination);
• the need for constant monitoring of the ratio of resources allocated to departments and programs or projects;
• high requirements for qualifications, personal and business qualities of employees working in groups, the need for their training;
• frequent conflict situations between heads of departments and projects or programs;
• the possibility of violating the rules and standards adopted in the functional units due to the isolation of employees participating in the project or program from their units.

Conclusion: the introduction of a matrix structure gives a good effect in organizations with a sufficiently high level of corporate culture and qualifications of employees, otherwise management can be disorganized (at Toyota, the introduction of a matrix structure took about 10 years). The effectiveness of the implementation of the ideas of the modern philosophy of quality in such a structure has been proven by the practice of Toyota.

Multidimensional organizational structure

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

Traditionally, the organizational structure covers two types of relationships:

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

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

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

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

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 activity can be used directly by the same activity, programs and other activities, as well as by the executive body and the external consumer.

General programs may be subdivided into private 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 subdivided.

Fig.7. Scheme of interaction between activities and programs

Rice. 8. Scheme of interaction of activities

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

If the number of programs and core and support activities (operations and services) is so large that the manager is not able to effectively coordinate, then there may be a need for coordinators within specific managerial functions (Fig. 9). Each line of action may require more than one coordinator or coordinating unit. In cases where the number of coordinators turns out to be too large, the use of higher coordinators or coordinating units ( in this context, "coordination" means precisely coordination but not management). To carry out coordination, a group consisting of the heads of coordinating departments and leaders is quite sufficient.

Fig.9. Structure of coordination in large organizations

Programs, as well as functional units, have certain requirements. Programs and functional units may be grouped by product, customer type, geographic area, etc. If there are too many and highly dispersed customers for a program unconventional the use of characteristics of geographical location as an additional dimension of the volumetric scheme of the organizational structure (Fig. 10). In this case, there is a need in regional representatives whose duty it is to protect the interests of those who consume the product or are affected by the activities of the organization as a whole. Regional representatives play the role of external intermediaries who can evaluate the programs and various activities of the organization in each particular region from the point of view of those whose interests they represent. In the future, this information can be used by the governing body, coordinators and heads of departments. By receiving such information simultaneously from all regional representatives, the manager can get a complete picture of the effectiveness of his program throughout the service area and in each region. This allows him to more rationally distribute the available resources across regions.

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

Fig.10. 3D organizational chart

Sharing of responsibility. The considered "multidimensional" organization has something in common with the so-called "matrix organizations". However, the latter are usually two-dimensional and lack many of the important features of the organizational structures discussed, especially in terms of funding. In addition, all of them have one common drawback: employees of functional units are in double subordination, which, as a rule, leads to undesirable results. It is this most commonly noted deficiency in matrix organizations that is the cause of so-called "occupational schizophrenia".
A multidimensional organizational structure does not give rise to the difficulties inherent in a matrix organization. In a multidimensional organization, the functional unit personnel whose outputs are purchased by the program manager are treated as an external client and are accountable only to the functional unit manager. However, when evaluating the activities of his subordinates, the head of the functional unit, of course, should use the assessments of the quality of their work given by the program manager. The position of the person leading the functional unit team that does the work for the program is much like that of a project manager in a construction and consulting firm; he has no uncertainty as to who the owner is, but he has to deal with him as a client.

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

Benefits of a Multidimensional Organizational Structure

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

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

Disadvantages of a Multidimensional Organizational Structure

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

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

Forms and methods of implementing the principles of formation of organizational structures make it possible to distinguish several types of them. So, according to the level (degree) of differentiation and integration of management functions, two classes of structures are distinguished:

• mechanistic, or bureaucratic, pyramidal, based on the centralist type of integration;
• organic, or adaptive, multidimensional, based on a combination of centralist and free types of integration.

Mechanistic (bureaucratic) pyramidal structures

Sustainability and rationalism were the priority parameters for the formation of bureaucratic structures for managing organizations already at the beginning of the 20th century. The concept of bureaucracy, formulated then by the German sociologist Max Weber, 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 the performance of their duties by employees and the coordination of various tasks;
• formal impersonality of performance of official duties by officials;
• recruitment in strict accordance with qualification requirements; protection of employees from arbitrary layoffs.

Pyramid bureaucratic structures include: linear, functional, linear-functional, linear-staff, divisional organizational structures.

Linear organizational structure of management

The linear structure implements the principle of unity of command and centralism, provides for the performance by one head of all management functions, subordination to him on the rights of unity of command of all lower units (Fig. 11.1).

This is one of the simplest organizational management structures. Hierarchy is clearly manifested in linear structures: at the head of each structural unit there is a head endowed with all powers, who exercises sole management of subordinate employees and concentrates all management functions in his hands.

With linear management, each link and each subordinate has one leader, through whom all control commands pass through one channel at a time. In this case, management links are responsible for the results of all activities of managed objects. We are talking about the allocation of managers per object, each of which performs all types of work, develops and makes decisions related to the management of this object.

Since in a linear management structure decisions are passed down the chain from top to bottom, and the head of the lower level of management is subordinate to the head of a higher level above him, a kind of hierarchy of heads of this particular organization is formed (for example, head of a section, head of department, store director, site foreman, engineer , head of the shop, director of the enterprise). In this case, the principle of unity of command applies, the essence of which is that subordinates carry out the orders of only one leader. In a linear management structure, each subordinate has his own boss, and each boss has several subordinates. Such a structure functions in small organizations, and in large ones - at the lowest level of management (section, brigade, etc.).

The linear organizational structure of management has its advantages and disadvantages (Table 11.1).

Table 11.1

In the functional structures, functional units are created, endowed with authority and responsibility for the results of their activities. Linear links differ from functional ones by the integration of object management functions, a set of powers and responsibilities. The bottom line is that the performance of certain functions on specific issues is assigned to specialists, i.e. each management body (or executor) is specialized in the performance of certain types of management activities. In an organization, as a rule, specialists of the same profile are combined into specialized structural units (departments), for example, a planning department, accounting, etc. Thus, the overall task of managing the organization is divided, starting from the middle level, according to the functional criterion. Hence the name - functional management structure (Fig. 11.2). Instead of universal managers who must understand and perform all management functions, there is a staff of specialists with high competence in their field and responsible for a certain area (for example, planning and forecasting).

The functional structure implements the principle of separation and consolidation of management functions between structural divisions, provides for the subordination of each lower-level linear division to several higher-level managers who implement management functions. The advantages and disadvantages of this structure are presented in Table. 11.2.

Table 11.2

Experts point to a close relationship between the size of the firm and the organizational structure of management. The expansion of the size of the enterprise, the complication of internal relationships create conditions, and also necessitate the adoption of comprehensive decisions aimed at restructuring the organization of intra-company management, an increase in the size of the company leads to a deepening of structural differentiation (branches, levels of management, organizational units).

In turn, this leads to an increase in administrative and management costs, as well as costs associated with coordination, but does not reduce the advantage of homogeneity of large firms, which is due to the fact that these firms are managed from a single center. However, the structural differentiation inherent in large firms requires the use of indirect (economic) methods of management and coordination of the activities of various organizational units.

Types of committees

There is no doubt about the advantage of using committees in such work, which requires the coordination of actions of management units, consultation in decision-making, the definition of powers and responsibilities, and the development of a work schedule.

New types of organizational structures

Currently, such types of structures are developing as network and virtual organizations, organizations with "internal" markets, multidimensional organizations, market-oriented organizations, entrepreneurial organizations, participatory, adhocracy, intellectual, learning organizations, circular corporations, etc.

A network structure means that an organization disaggregates its core functions (manufacturing, sales, finance, research and development) between individual contracting companies brokered by a small parent organization. The organizational chart of a hypothetical network organization is shown in fig. 11.10.

Network organizations differ from organizations of other types in a number of ways. First, network organizations rely more on market mechanisms than on administrative forms of resource management. Second, many of the networks that have recently been developed involve a more active and motivated role for participants. Thirdly, in an increasing number of industries, networks represent an association of organizations based on cooperation and mutual ownership of shares by group members - manufacturers, suppliers, trading and financial companies.

The so-called virtual organization or structure is closely related to the network structure. Unlike traditional mergers and acquisitions, partners in virtual organizations share costs, use each other's production experience and access to international markets.

The hallmarks of networked virtual organizations of the future can be summarized as follows:

1. the use of information technology to establish strong contacts;
2. joining forces to realize new opportunities;
3. lack of traditional boundaries - with close cooperation between manufacturers, suppliers, customers, it is difficult to determine where one company begins and another ends;
4. the main advantages and disadvantages of such organizations are given in Table. 11.7;
5. trust - partners share a sense of "common destiny", realizing that the fate of each of them depends on the other;
6. Excellence – Since each partner brings their “core competencies” to the union, it is possible to create an organization that is modern in every way.

Table 11.7

Multidimensional organization. This term was first used in 1974 by W. Goggin when describing the structure of Dow Corning Corporation. Multidimensional organizations are an alternative to the traditional type of organizational structures. As we know, in traditional organizational structures, the allocation of organizational units occurs, as a rule, according to one of the following criteria:

• functional (finance, production, marketing);
• grocery (for example, factories or production units that produce various goods and services);
• market (say, by regional principle or by type of consumer).

Depending on the specifics of the activity, one or another criterion prevails in the construction of the organizational structure. Over time, under the influence of external changes and changes in the company itself (its size, scale of activities, other internal factors), the very organizational structure of the company and the prevailing principle of division divisions may change. For example, with access to regional markets, the traditional linear-functional structure can be transformed into a regional divisional one. At the same time, reorganization is a rather lengthy and complicated process.

In a dynamic external environment, the company must be able to respond instantly to changes, so a structure is required that would not need to be rebuilt. Such a structure is a multidimensional organization.

Multidimensional organizations are organizations in which structural units simultaneously perform several functions (as if in several dimensions) (Fig. 11.11), for example:

• provide their production activities with the necessary resources;
• produce a specific type of product or service for a specific consumer or market;
• ensure the sale (distribution) of their products and serve a specific consumer.

The basis of a multidimensional organization is an autonomous working group (subdivision) that implements all three functions: supply, production, distribution.

Such a group may be a "profit center". Sometimes these can be independent companies.

Units are easily included in the organizational structure and can leave it, their viability depends on the ability to produce goods and services that are in demand. Product or service-oriented units pay internal and external suppliers on a contractual basis. Functional divisions (production, warehouse, personnel, accounting) provide services mainly to other divisions of the company, being their suppliers. Thus, there is an internal market within the organization. Divisions respond flexibly to changing needs of internal and external customers. Consumers automatically control their suppliers. At the same time, the performance of the unit does not depend on the performance of another unit, which facilitates the control and evaluation of the unit's performance.

Features of multidimensional organizations are as follows:

• departmental budgets are developed by the departments themselves, the company invests in them or gives loans;
• in multidimensional organizations there is no dual subordination, as in a two-dimensional matrix model, the leadership of the group is one;
• many divisions within a multidimensional organization can also be multidimensional. Divisions can also be multidimensional, even if the organization as a whole is not multidimensional (for example, a regional branch of a large corporation may be multidimensional, while the corporation as a whole is a divisional structure);
• there is no need to carry out any reorganization of the organizational structure as a whole and the relationship of autonomous groups, units can simply be created, eliminated or modified;
• each division of the organization can be completely autonomous, engaging in both recruitment and sales of finished products, etc .;
• the main indicator of the effectiveness of the work of autonomous groups is the profit received; this simplifies the analysis and control over the activities of groups, reduces bureaucratization, and the management system works more efficiently.

The main advantages and disadvantages of multidimensional organizations are given in Table. 11.8.

Table 11.8

Circle organization. The basic principle of the circular organization is the democratic hierarchy. Leaders are not commanders, but act more like leaders. Unlike the hierarchical structure of traditional organizations, a circular organization has such features as the lack of undivided authority of leaders, the possibility of participation of each member of the organization in management, collective decision-making by the management of each member of the organization. These principles are implemented through the features of the structure of the circular organization, the main of which is that a council is formed around each leader (Fig. 11.12).

Each council, in addition to the head of the unit, includes his subordinates, as well as third-party representatives - heads of other structural units, external clients and consumers, public representatives. Participation in the council is mandatory for managers, but is voluntary for subordinates.

virtual organization. The emergence of the concept of a virtual organization is associated with the publication in 1992 of the monograph "Virtual Corporation" by W. Davidow and M. Malone.

A virtual organization is a network that includes the union of human, financial, material, organizational, technological and other resources of various enterprises and their integration using computer networks. This allows you to create a flexible and dynamic organizational system, the most adapted to the rapid creation of a new product and its introduction to the market. A virtual organization does not have a geographical center; the functioning of its divisions is coordinated with the help of modern information technologies and means of telecommunications.

The development of information technology has made it possible to make the physical presence of managers in the workplace unnecessary. Virtual associations are grouped according to the design principle, i.e. on a temporary basis.

as the need arises to create a certain product, implement a project, make a profit. The concept of a virtual organization creates fundamentally new business opportunities and is widely used in the 21st century.

An organization with an "internal market". The evolution of organizational structures is gradually evolving from hierarchical bureaucratic structures to matrix and project structures, and in recent decades to decentralized networks and business units.

The concept of "internal markets" is in stark contrast to the hierarchical structure. On the one hand, it allows you to use the potential of entrepreneurship within the organization, on the other hand, it has the disadvantages of market relations.

The basic principle of such organizations is the broad autonomy of departments (both linear and functional). Divisions are viewed as autonomous "internal businesses" that buy and sell goods and services and engage in intra- and inter-firm communications.

We list the principles of formation and functioning of organizations with "internal markets":

1. Transformation of the hierarchy into internal business units. All divisions are transformed into autonomous "internal enterprises", becoming responsible for the results of activities.

2. Creation of economic infrastructure, including common systems of accountability, communications and incentives.

3. Purposeful stimulation of synergy.

4. All departments are accountable for results, creative entrepreneurship is encouraged. Each division is treated as a small separate company that independently manages its activities and manages resources. Divisions are given the freedom to conduct business operations within and outside the organization.

5. Auxiliary functional divisions are commercial centers that sell their services to both other divisions of the firm and external customers.

So, considering the development trends of organizations and organizational structures, it can be noted that a modern organization is:

• market oriented organization. They are organic, rapidly adaptable divisional or matrix organizations in which all of their parts (R&D, manufacturing, human resources, marketing, sourcing, sales, finance, service) are clustered around a market or markets. These are organizations "driven by the market";
• entrepreneurial organization, i.e. an organization more focused on growth and on available opportunities and achievements than on controlled resources;
• participatory organization - an organization that maximizes the participation of employees in management;
• adhocracy organization - an organization that uses a high degree of freedom in the actions of employees, their competence and ability to independently solve emerging problems. This is an organic structure of a matrix, project, network type, with a predominance of informal horizontal connections. Often the structure of the organization is completely absent, the hierarchical structure is constantly changing, vertical and horizontal connections are predominantly informal;

An analysis of the experience of building organizational structures shows that the formation of management units is significantly influenced by the external and internal environment of the organization. This is the main reason for the impossibility of applying a single model of the management structure for all organizations. In addition, this impossibility is due to the specific features of a particular organization. The creation of a modern effective management structure should be based on scientific methods and principles for building organizational structures.

The main characteristic feature of the new systems of intra-company management should be: orientation to the long term; conducting fundamental research; diversification of operations; innovative activity; maximum use of the creative activity of the staff. Decentralization, reduction of levels in the administrative apparatus, promotion of employees and their payment depending on real results will become the main directions of changes in the administrative apparatus.

The process of modification of organizational management structures is developing in a number of specific areas. The main ones are the following.

1. Implementation of decentralization of production and marketing operations. To this end, within the largest companies, semi-autonomous or autonomous branches have already been created or are being created, fully responsible for profit and loss. These departments are entrusted with full responsibility for the organization of production and marketing activities. Each department fully finances its activities, enters into partnerships with any organizations on a commercial basis.

2. Innovative expansion, search for new markets and diversification of operations. This direction is implemented through the creation of innovative companies within large companies focused on the production and independent promotion of new products and technologies on the markets and operating on the principles of "risk financing". The widespread practice of large companies is the creation of small enterprises in the most promising areas, aimed at gaining a strong position in the market in the shortest possible time.

3. Debureaucratization, constant increase in the creative production efficiency of the personnel. To this end, a wide variety of measures are being taken, including the distribution of shares among the staff and the formation of enterprises collectively owned by their employees.

In modern conditions, not only fundamentally new forms of organization for our country are required, not only radically different methods of management, but also transitional modes of activity, a gradual transformation of one structure into another. In order to comprehensively take into account both the internal characteristics of organizations and dynamically changing external circumstances, as well as emerging progressive trends, it is necessary to use a systematic approach to the formation and reorganization of enterprises.

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

• do not lose sight of any of the management tasks, without which the implementation of the goals will be incomplete;
• to identify and interconnect, in relation to these tasks, a system of functions, rights and responsibilities along the vertical of management;
• explore and institutionalize all connections and relationships along the horizontal of management, i.e. to coordinate the activities of different links and management bodies in the performance of common current tasks and the implementation of promising cross-functional programs;
• provide an organic combination of vertical and horizontal management, meaning finding the optimal ratio of centralization and decentralization in management for the given conditions.

All this requires a carefully developed step-by-step procedure for designing structures, a detailed analysis and definition of a system of goals, a thoughtful selection of organizational units and forms of their coordination, and the development of relevant documents.

Hierarchical organizational structures for managing operational enterprises

3. Linear-functional organizational structure of management.

Hierarchical organizational structures for managing operational enterprises.

Rice.

Rice. 2. Line-staff organizational structure of management.

Rice. 3. Functional organizational structure of management. Solid horizontal lines show horizontal control (mandatory) links.

• line units that carry out the main work in the organization;
• specialized service functional units.

Rice. 4. Linear-functional control structure.

Rice. 5. Line-staff management structure.

Fig.6. Divisional (divisional) management structures. Dashed horizontal lines show horizontal control (recommendatory) links.

1. by type of activity performed (operation of facilities, provision of additional services, construction, design);
2. by consumer orientation (consumer specialization);
3. by served territories (regional specialization)

The linear management structure is the most appropriate only for simple forms of organizations. A distinctive feature: a direct impact on all elements of the organization and the concentration in one hand of all management functions. The structure works well in small organizations with high professionalism and authority of the leader.

In small organizations with a clear distribution of functional responsibilities, structures in the form of a ring, a star and a wheel have also become widespread. organizational structure linear matrix

Linear control structure: ring

R - leader;

I - performer

Linear control structure: star

R - leader;

I - performer

Linear control structure: wheel

R - leader;

I - performer

The linear-functional management structure is based on the so-called "mine" principle of building and specializing the management process, depending on the duties assigned to the deputy heads - functional managers. These include: commercial director, deputy directors for personnel, production, heads of the information department, marketing department, etc.

Linear-functional management structure

The line-staff management structure is a combined structure that combines the properties of linear and linear-functional structures. It provides for the creation of special units (headquarters) to help line managers to solve certain problems. These headquarters prepare draft decisions on relevant issues for the head. Headquarters are not endowed with executive power. The leader himself makes the decision and brings it to all departments. The staff scheme is most appropriate if it is necessary to carry out linear management (one-man management) for the key positions of the organization.

Line-staff management structure

The matrix management structure is a lattice organization built on the principle of dual subordination of performers: on the one hand, to the direct head of the functional service, which provides personnel and technical assistance to the project manager, on the other hand, to the project (target program) manager, who is endowed with the necessary authority to implement the process management in accordance with the planned deadlines, resources and quality. The matrix scheme is used in complex, science-intensive production of goods, information, services, knowledge.

The program-target management structure provides for the creation of special management bodies for short-term and long-term programs. It is focused on ensuring the fullness of linear powers within the framework of ongoing programs.

Matrix control structure

The product management structure is one of the options for the program-target structure. It provides for the assignment to the manager responsible for the release program of a particular product, all responsibility for the quality and timing of the work. This manager is endowed with all the rights of disposal in terms of production, marketing and ancillary activities related to the manufacture of a particular product or range of products.

The project management structure is formed when an organization develops projects, which are understood as any processes of purposeful changes in the management system or in the organization as a whole, for example, the modernization of production, the development of new technologies, the construction of facilities, etc. Project management includes defining its goals, forming a structure, planning and organizing work, and coordinating the actions of performers. One of the forms of project management is the formation of a special unit - a project team working on a temporary basis.

The functional-object structure of management provides for the allocation of the most qualified specialists in the functional units, who, in addition to their functional duties, are appointed as managers of specific works or objects in this unit. Within the unit, these specialists are senior in the performance of the assigned work, not only within the framework of the functions permanently assigned to them, but also on all other issues.

A variety of the hierarchical type of management organization is a very complex and branched structure, called the divisional management structure (from the English word division - branch), the first developments of which date back to the 20s, and the peak of practical use - to the 60-70s of the twentieth century .

The need for new approaches to the organization of management was caused by a sharp increase in the size of enterprises, the diversification of their activities and the complication of technological processes in a dynamically changing external environment. The first to restructure the structure according to this model were the largest organizations, which, within the framework of their gigantic enterprises (corporations), began to create production departments, giving them a certain independence in carrying out operational activities. At the same time, the administration reserved the right to strict control over corporate-wide issues of development strategy, research and development, investment, etc. Therefore, this type of structure is often characterized as a combination of centralized coordination with decentralized management (decentralization while maintaining coordination and control).

The key figures in the management of organizations with a divisional structure are not the heads of functional departments, but managers who head production departments. The structuring of the organization by departments is carried out, as a rule, according to one of three criteria:

• - by products or services provided (product specialization);
• - by consumer orientation (consumer specialization);
• - by served territories (regional specialization).

As a result of the expansion of the boundaries of operational and economic independence, departments can be considered as "profit centers", actively using the freedom granted to them to increase work efficiency.

At the same time, divisional management structures lead to an increase in hierarchy, i.e. vertical management associated with the need to form intermediate levels of management to coordinate the work of departments, groups, etc., in which management is based on a linear-functional principle. Duplication of management functions at different levels leads to an increase in the cost of maintaining the administrative apparatus.

The transition to a divisional OSU was a significant step forward in creating conditions for accelerating the scientific and technical development of production. Top managers began to pay more attention to the issues of long-term development of production. The decentralization of operational management of production began to be combined with a strict system of financial control and with the centralization of R&D. However, along with the positive aspects, the negative aspects of divisional structures also appeared. The opportunities that have opened up for expanding the range of products have caused a number of firms to increase the diversification of production. This process, in its extreme form, has led to the emergence of conglomerate firms engaged in the production of completely different types of products, guided only by the desire to ensure the greatest profits. Many of them, in the face of a worsening general economic situation and increased competition, lost control and went bankrupt. Also, a serious drawback of the divisional OSU was the increase in the cost of maintaining administrative and managerial personnel. The experience of many large companies has shown that a divisional OSU can only improve management efficiency up to certain limits, after which more and more difficulties begin to be felt. Their main reason is the slowness of the process of preparation and decision-making, which is also typical for the linear-functional type of OSU. The process of formation of divisional structures in large companies was accompanied by the creation of divisions, which were endowed with significant economic independence.

Such subdivisions were called departments and were formed mainly on a product basis, less often on a regional or market basis. In American management, this approach is called "centralized coordination - decentralized administration". Such departments, gradually developing, served as the basis of modern centers. That is, first of all, profit centers, sales centers, investment centers, etc. With the development of the concept of strategic management, such centers gradually began to transform into strategic economic centers (SHC) - intra-company divisions that are simultaneously responsible for the development of future potential. The main problem in creating SCC is the distribution of responsibility, that is, organizations are responsible not only for planning and implementing the strategy, but also for the final result - making a profit.

One of the main problems of OSU gradually became the problem of flexibility. They tried to solve this problem by creating new variants of combined structures by introducing new elements into the main backbone (for example, a linear-functional) structure, which gave rise to new OSS, such as with temporary (created for a period) bodies, with committees, project management (product, object), matrix structures, etc. All these variants of OSU received the general name of program-target structures. At the same time, the role and place of the program manager varies depending on the conditions in which management is carried out. It is necessary to note the essential difference between the OSS of the program-target type and structures of the mechanistic type, which consists in the fact that, for example, the linear-functional one is based on the integrated management of objectively developing subsystems, while the program-target structures are based on the integrated management of the entire system in as a whole, as a single object focused on a specific goal.

Modern modifications of program-targeted OSU are venture and innovative ones. Large firms integrate such structures into their management. This is the most promising way to mobile respond to rapidly changing market conditions. The principles of construction and operation of the venture department in the company are the same as in an independent venture enterprise. Venture (innovative) structures in large firms have several varieties depending on a number of factors:

• - the significance of the projects under development;
• - their target orientation and complexity;
• - on the degree of formalization and independence of activity.

Thus, the evolution of OSU in the 20th century clearly shows that there is no perfect, universal structure, and the search process will continue into the new century. It should be noted that there is another point of view, which consists in the fact that there is no perfect, ideal OSU and cannot be. This is the so-called concept of "unfrozen system" or organization without OSU. The followers of this concept believe that the time of "organized organizations" has passed and that the modern economy in the 21st century is entering a stage where self-organization is of particular importance. Without denying the importance of self-organization, the task of finding effective OSUs remains relevant.

2) analysis of technical equipment and management methods.

An economic analysis of technical equipment and management methods characterizes the breadth of use in management of the achievements of scientific and technological progress, new methods and efficiency of organization management, the level of independence of departments.

Includes:

• - degree of mechanization and automation of managerial work
• - coefficient of management efficiency
• - analysis of management methods
• 3) analysis of the composition and organization of labor of management employees.

The objectives of the analysis of the organizational structure of management are:

identification of correspondence between production and organizational structures; compliance of managerial staff with the nature and content of management functions. For this, the following are produced:

analysis of the production structure of the enterprise;

analysis of the structure of governing bodies;

analysis of the number of management apparatus;

analysis of specialization and centralization of managerial functions.