Structure based primarily on manufacturing process

departmentalizes according to the major phases of the

process used to manufacture products. In the case of
Greene Furniture Company, the major phases are
woodcutting, sanding, glueing, and painting. Figure 3.8
is the organization chart that reflects these phases.

1
 Figure 3.8
Organization structure based
primarily on manufacturing
process

2
 If the situation warrants it, individual organization
charts can be combined to show all five of these
factors.

Figure 3.9 shows how all the factors are included on

the same organization chart for Greene Furniture
Company.

3
 Figure 3.9
Organization structure based primarily on
function, product, territory, customers, and
manufacturing process

4
 Forces Influencing Formal Structure
According to Shetty and Carlisle, the formal structure
of a management system is continually evolving.
Four primary forces influence this evolution:
•Forces in the manager
•Forces in the task
•Forces in the environment
•Forces in the subordinates.
The evolution of a particular organization is
actually the result of a complex and dynamic
interaction among these forces, as Figure 3.10
illustrates.

5
 Figure 3.10
Forces influencing the
evolution of organization
structure

6
Division of Labor
The second main consideration of any organizing effort is
how to divide labor. The division of labor is the
assignment of various portions of a particular task among
a number of organization members. Rather than one
individual's doing the entire job, several individuals
perform different parts of it. Production is divided into a
number of steps, with the responsibility for completion of
various steps assigned to specific individuals. In essence,
individuals specialize in doing part of the task rather than
the entire task.

7
Advantages and Disadvantages of Division of
Labor
Several generally accepted explanations have been offered for why
division of labor should be employed. First, because workers
specialize in a particular task, their skill for performing that task
tends to increase. Second, workers do not lose valuable time in
moving from one task to another. Because they typically have one
job and one place in which to do it, time is not lost changing tools or
locations. Third, because workers concentrate on performing only
one job, they naturally try make the job easier and more efficient.
Last, division of labor creates a situation in which workers need only
to know how to perform their part of the work rather than the
process for the entire product. The task of understanding their
work, therefore, typically does not become too much of a burden.

8
Span of Management
The third main consideration of any organizing effort is span of
management the number of individuals a manager supervises. The
more individuals a manager supervises, the greater the span of
management. Conversely, the fewer individuals a manager
supervises, the smaller the span of management.
The span of management has a significant effect on how
well managers can carry out their responsibilities. Span of
management is also called span of control, span of
authority, of supervision, and span of responsibility.

9
Designing Span of Management: A Contingency Viewpoint
As reported by Harold Koontz, several important situational factors influence
appropriateness of the size of an individual's span of management.
Similarity of Functions. The degree to which activities performed by
supervised individuals are similar or dissimilar. As the similarity of
subordinate’s activities increases, the span of management
appropriate for the situation becomes wider. The converse is also
generally accurate.
Geographic Continuity. The degree to which subordinates are
physically separated. In general, the closer subordinates are
physically, the more of them manasers can supervise effectively.

10
Complexity of Functions. The degree to which
workers' activities are difficult and involved. The more
difficult and involved the activities are, the more difficult
it is to manage a large number of individuals effectively.
Coordination. The amount of time managers must
spend to synchronize activities of their subordinates with
the activities of other workers. The greater the amount of
time managers must spend on coordination, the smaller
their management should be.

11
 Planning. The amount of time managers must spend developing

management system objectives and plans and integrating them with the
activities subordinates. The more time managers must spend on planning
activates, the fewer individuals they can manage effectively.

Scalar Relationships
The fourth main consideration of any organizing effort is scalar

relationships- the chain of command.

Organization is built on the premise that the individual at the top possesses
the most authority and that other individuals' authority is scaled downward
according to their relative position on the organization chart. The lower an
individual's position on the organization chart, the less authority possessed.
12
The scalar relationship, or chain of command, is related to the unity
of command. Unity of command means that an individual
should have only one boss. If too many bosses give orders, the
probable result is confusion, contradiction and frustration, a
situation that usually results in ineffectiveness and inefficiency.
Although the unity of command principle first appeared in more
modern management literature well over seventy-five years ago, it
is still discussed today as a critical ingredient of successful,
contemporary organizations.

13
Figure 3.11 serves to explain Fayol's rationale. If
individual F needs information from individual G and
follows the concept of chain of command, F has to go
through individuals D, B, A, C, and E before reaching G.
The information would get back to F only by going from
G through E, C, A, B, and D. Obviously`, this long and
involved process can be very expensive for the
organization in terms of time spent getting the
information.

14
 Figure 3.11
Sample organization chart showing that
to always adhere to the chain of
command is not advisable

15
To decrease this expense, Fayol has recommended that in some
situations a bridge, or gangplank, be used to allow F to go
directly to G for information, This bridge is represented in Figure
3.11 by the dotted line that goes directly from F to G.
Managers should use these organizational bridges with great care,
however, because although F might get the information from G
more quickly and cheaply, individuals D, B, A, C, and E are left
out of the communication channel.
The lack of information caused by Fayol's bridge might be more
costly in the long run than would going through the established
chain of command. If managers do use an organizational bridge,
they must be extremely careful to inform all other appropriate
individuals within the organization of the information they
received.
16
Prof. Dr. Wageeh A. Nafei
17