COMMUNICATION AND ORGANIZATIONS COMMUNICATION AND ORGANIZATIONS THE PARADOXES OF ORGANIZING: STRUCTURING LATERAL COMMUNICATION Lecture 9b

FUNDAMENTAL PARADOX OF ORGANIZING FUNDAMENTAL PARADOX OF ORGANIZING Machine Bureaucracies divide work Machine Bureaucracies divide work -First by function then by job type They take work apart to get control over it and over the workers They take work apart to get control over it and over the workers -Many simplified, specialized jobs -Each easy to learn to do quickly All tied together by Vertical Coordination All tied together by Vertical Coordination -By management decision-making, rules and direct supervision Why? Why?

FUNDAMENTAL PARADOX OF ORGANIZING FUNDAMENTAL PARADOX OF ORGANIZING

FUNDAMENTAL PARADOX OF ORGANIZING - AT UNIT LEVEL FUNDAMENTAL PARADOX OF ORGANIZING - AT UNIT LEVEL The more divided the work becomes, the more controllable it is The more divided the work becomes, the more controllable it is -The more each department focuses on doing it’s work it’s own way to achieve efficiency But, the harder it becomes to coordinate flow (throughput) between units But, the harder it becomes to coordinate flow (throughput) between units -More struggling between departments about whose causing delays, higher costs -Cost of management efforts to control struggle begins to rise reducing profits from unit efficiencies

FUNDAMENTAL PARADOX OF ORGANIZING - AT INDIVIDUAL LEVEL FUNDAMENTAL PARADOX OF ORGANIZING - AT INDIVIDUAL LEVEL The more divided the work becomes, the more controllable it is, the easier and faster it is to do The more divided the work becomes, the more controllable it is, the easier and faster it is to do But, the more each worker becomes bored, disconnected from the work But, the more each worker becomes bored, disconnected from the work -The more repetitious, the less they care Alienation Alienation -Symptoms: mistakes, carelessness, sabotage, absenteeism, work actions, strikes

FUNDAMENTAL PARADOX OF ORGANIZING FUNDAMENTAL PARADOX OF ORGANIZING THE OVERALL RESULT IS: THE OVERALL RESULT IS:

FUNDAMENTAL PARADOX OF ORGANIZING FUNDAMENTAL PARADOX OF ORGANIZING

CONTROL THE WORK TO GET INCREASED EFFICIENCY AND IN THE END GET DECREASED EFFICIENCY CONTROL THE WORK TO GET INCREASED EFFICIENCY AND IN THE END GET DECREASED EFFICIENCY IT’S CALLED SUB-OPTIMIZATION IT’S CALLED SUB-OPTIMIZATION -EACH UNIT OPTIMIZES IT’S OWN EFFICIENCY BUT AT A COST TO OTHERS AND THE LARGER EFFICIENCY GOALS OF THE ORGANIZATION

MANAGING THE PARADOX OF ORGANIZING - AT THE UNIT LEVEL MANAGING THE PARADOX OF ORGANIZING - AT THE UNIT LEVEL SO PUT WORK BACK TOGETHER TO REGAIN OVERALL EFFICIENCY SO PUT WORK BACK TOGETHER TO REGAIN OVERALL EFFICIENCY CROSS FUNCTIONAL COORDINATION MUST HAPPEN TO ACHIEVE ORG.’S OUTPUT GOALS CROSS FUNCTIONAL COORDINATION MUST HAPPEN TO ACHIEVE ORG.’S OUTPUT GOALS HOW? HOW?

MANAGING THE PARADOX OF ORGANIZING - AT THE UNIT LEVEL MANAGING THE PARADOX OF ORGANIZING - AT THE UNIT LEVEL LATERAL COORDINATION USE STRUCTURE TO ENCOURAGE MUTUAL ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN UNITS USE STRUCTURE TO ENCOURAGE MUTUAL ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN UNITS TASK FORCES (ADHOCRACIES) TASK FORCES (ADHOCRACIES) MATRIX STRUCTURES: EACH INDIVIDUAL HAS TWO BOSSES MATRIX STRUCTURES: EACH INDIVIDUAL HAS TWO BOSSES -ON-GOING PROJECT TEAM LEADER AND FUNCTIONAL MANAGER LIAISON (INTEGRATIVE) ROLES LIAISON (INTEGRATIVE) ROLES BRAND ACCOUNT MANAGERS BRAND ACCOUNT MANAGERS INTEGRATOR - MANAGERS INTEGRATOR - MANAGERS

ADMINISTRATIVEADHOCRACY

MANAGING THE PARADOX OF ORGANIZING - AT THE UNIT LEVEL SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF USING MUTUAL ADJUSTMENT FOR INTERDEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF USING MUTUAL ADJUSTMENT FOR INTERDEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION IMPROVING THE MANAGEMENT FUNCTION IMPROVING THE MANAGEMENT FUNCTION

3 HIGH PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONS AND THEIR ENVIRONMENTS CONTAINER ORGANIZATION: CONTAINER ORGANIZATION: -SIMPLE / STABLE ENVIRONMENT FOOD PROCESSING ORGANIZATION: FOOD PROCESSING ORGANIZATION: -MORE COMPLEX / DYNAMIC ENVIRONMENT PLASTICS ORGANIZATION: PLASTICS ORGANIZATION: -COMPLEX / DYNAMIC ENVIRONMENT

LAWRENCE AND LORSCH: COMPARISON OF INTEGRATIVE DEVICES LAWRENCE AND LORSCH: COMPARISON OF INTEGRATIVE DEVICES PLASTICSFOODCONTAINER DEGREE OF DIFFERENTIATION LOW LOW MAJORINTEGRATIVEDEVICES 1. DIRECT MANAGERIAL MANAGERIAL CONTACT CONTACT 2. MANAGERIAL HIERARCHY HIERARCHY 3. PAPER SYSTEM

LAWRENCE AND LORSCH: COMPARISON OF INTEGRATIVE DEVICES LAWRENCE AND LORSCH: COMPARISON OF INTEGRATIVE DEVICES PLASTICSFOODCONTAINER DEGREE OF DIFFERENTIATION MEDIUM LOW MEDIUM LOW MAJORINTEGRATIVEDEVICES 1. INDIVIDUAL 1. DIRECT 1. INDIVIDUAL 1. DIRECT INTEGRATORS MANAGERIAL INTEGRATORS MANAGERIAL CONTACT CONTACT 2. MANAGERIAL 2. MANAGERIAL 2. MANAGERIAL 2. MANAGERIAL FUNC’T TEAMS HIERARCHY FUNC’T TEAMS HIERARCHY 3. DIRECT MGT 3. PAPER SYSTEM 3. DIRECT MGT 3. PAPER SYSTEMCONTACT 4. MGT HIERARCHY 4. MGT HIERARCHY 5. PAPER SYSTEM 5. PAPER SYSTEM

LAWRENCE AND LORSCH: COMPARISON OF INTEGRATIVE DEVICES LAWRENCE AND LORSCH: COMPARISON OF INTEGRATIVE DEVICES PLASTICSFOODCONTAINER DEGREE OF DIFFERENTIATION HIGH MEDIUMLOW MAJORINTEGRATIVEDEVICES 1. INTEGRATIVE 1. INDIVIDUAL1. DIRECT DEPARTMENT INTEGRATORS MANAGERIAL DEPARTMENT INTEGRATORS MANAGERIAL CONTACT CONTACT 2. PERMANENT 2. TEMP. CROSS 2. MANAGERIAL CROSS-FUNC’T FUNC’T TEAMS HIERARCHY CROSS-FUNC’T FUNC’T TEAMS HIERARCHY TEAMS TEAMS 3. DIRECT MGT 3. DIRECT MGT 3. PAPER SYSTEM CONTACT CONTACT CONTACT CONTACT 4. MGT HIERARCHY 4. MGT HIERARCHY 5. PAPER SYSTEM 5. PAPER SYSTEM

MANAGING THE PARADOX OF ORGANIZING - AT THE INDIVIDUAL LEVEL NEXT STEP: NEXT STEP: USE MUTUAL ADJUSTMENT IN THE OPERATING CORE TO ACTUALLY DO WORK USE MUTUAL ADJUSTMENT IN THE OPERATING CORE TO ACTUALLY DO WORK IMPROVE THE PRODUCTION FUNCTION IMPROVE THE PRODUCTION FUNCTION BUILD ON THE NATURAL TENDENCY OF PEOPLE IN THE CORE TO TALK WITH EACH OTHER BUILD ON THE NATURAL TENDENCY OF PEOPLE IN THE CORE TO TALK WITH EACH OTHER

INFORMAL COMMUNICATION INFORMAL COMMUNICATION COMMUNICATION NETWORKS COMMUNICATION NETWORKS -SOMETIMES CHALLENGES FORMAL STRUCTURE -GRAPEVINE, GOSSIP -SOMETIMES SUPPORTS FORMAL STRUCTURE -BETTER INFO FLOW TOOK 100 YEARS TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO REORGANIZE WORK IN WAYS TO USE INFORMAL COMMUNICAITON EFFECTIVELY TOOK 100 YEARS TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO REORGANIZE WORK IN WAYS TO USE INFORMAL COMMUNICAITON EFFECTIVELY SHIFT FROM INDIVIDUAL TO TEAM-CENTERED ORGANIZATION OF WORK SHIFT FROM INDIVIDUAL TO TEAM-CENTERED ORGANIZATION OF WORK -LET WORKERS LEARN MORE THAN ONE JOB -TALK TO EACH OTHER ABOUT THE WORK TO INCREASE EFFICIENCY -RE-CONNECT WITH THE WORK ITSELF -REDUCE ALIENATION