journal article Show
The Academy of Management Journal Vol. 49, No. 3 (Jun., 2006) , pp. 501-518 (18 pages) Published By: Academy of Management https://www.jstor.org/stable/20159778 Abstract Integrating and extending literature on international management and team effectiveness, we examined how macro context in multinational organizations (MNCs) influences work team learning and how team learning influences task performance and interpersonal relations. We examined these influences in a multimethod study of 115 teams in 20 subsidiaries of five MNCs. Controlling for micro contextual features, including team type, training, feedback, and autonomy, we found that organizational contexts emphasizing global integration reduced team learning, but those emphasizing responsiveness and knowledge management increased team learning. Team learning in turn positively influenced both task performance and the quality of interpersonal relations. Journal Information The Academy of Management Journal presents cutting edge research that provides readers with a forecast for new management thoughts and techniques. All articles published in the journal must make a strong empirical and/or theoretical contribution. All empirical methods including (but not limited to) qualitative, quantitative, or combination methods are represented. Articles published in the journal are clearly relevant to management theory and practice and identify both a compelling practical management issue and a strong theoretical framework for addressing it. For more than 40 years the journal has been recognized as indispensable reading for management scholars. The journal has been cited in such forums as The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Economist and The Washington Post. The journal is published six times per year with a circulation of 15,000. Publisher Information The Academy of Management (the Academy; AOM) is a leading professional association for scholars dedicated to creating and disseminating knowledge about management and organizations. The Academy's central mission is to enhance the profession of management by advancing the scholarship of management and enriching the professional development of its members. The Academy is also committed to shaping the future of management research and education. Founded in 1936, the Academy of Management is the oldest and largest scholarly management association in the world. Today, the Academy is the professional home for more than 18290 members from 103 nations. Membership in the Academy is open to all individuals who find value in belonging. Rights & Usage This item
is part of a JSTOR Collection.
The Four Major Types of Organizational Structures in Business
The types of organizational structures in business are just as important as its products, marketing plan and long-term strategy. Businesses need a sturdy structure to attract and retain talented employees, as well as create a workable organizational hierarchy. Typically, businesses choose from four types of organizational structure. Each comes with its own set of advantages and disadvantages. Choosing the right one for your business is imperative because poor organizational structure leads to confusion among employees, poor decision-making among managers and, ultimately, less than ideal results for a business. Students in Point Park University’s online Bachelor of Arts in Organizational Leadership classes learn about management strategies and approaches to organizational design as part of a curriculum that prepares them for success as business leaders. Picking The Right Organizational StructureWhile there are variations, most companies are created based on one of the following four organizational structures. The goal for business leaders is picking the structure that works best for their particular situation. FunctionalA functional structure is the most traditional approach. It calls for grouping together people who do similar tasks based on their area of specialty. In other words, you’ll find all the accountants in finance and all the marketers in marketing. Managers led each area and report up to a director or executive who may oversee multiple departments. The advantage here is clear: it provides those with similar abilities the ability to easily communicate and work on projects together. That’s also the reason this is the most popular business structure. The disadvantage is that teams may get “siloed,” unaware of what is happening in other areas of a company. DivisionalIn a divisional structure, people are grouped together based on the product or service they provide, not the work they do. For example, a large corporation such as General Electric has divisions for electronics, transportation, and aviation, each with its own team of accountants, marketers, etc. Global corporations may have divisions based on different geographic areas. On a smaller scale, a restaurant that also provides catering services may have separate divisions to oversee weddings, corporate events and business within the main restaurant. MatrixA matrix structure is a hybrid of the functional and divisional structures. It may involve employees reporting to different bosses depending on their current assignment. For example, a software design specialist may report to her boss in IT, but she’s also brought onto specific projects because of her expertise. When that happens, she will report to a different boss as long as that project continues. The disadvantage is that employees may find it confusing to report to multiple bosses. But clear communication on priorities at all levels can eliminate these issues. The matrix structure requires a great deal of planning but can allow for the creation of the best possible teams to tackle the biggest challenges. FlatThe flat structure dispenses with the usual hierarchy of a functional structure, decentralizing management and doing away with the need for middle manager bosses. Employees essentially act as their own boss, giving them the ability to communicate directly with peers on ideas and projects. The advantage is a lot more freedom for employees, which requires a group of self-starters who don’t need managers checking up daily on their work. A flat structure is common in incubators and startups where the focus is on product and services design, not production or top-down management structures. All four types of organizational structures in business can work well in the right situations. While most companies will choose from the functional or divisional approaches, a flat approach is becoming increasingly popular with modern companies. Share This StoryWhich of the following statements are true about the organizational mechanisms used by Toyota in the worldwide integration of product development?Which of the following statements are true about the organizational mechanisms used by Toyota in the worldwide integration of product development? Complex forms and bureaucratic procedures are employed in the development process.
Is an organization structure that organizes worldwide operations primarily based on function and secondarily on product?Global Functional Division
This structure is to primarily organize global operations based on function; product orientation is secondary for firms using global function division structure. Managing multiple product lines can be challenging, as production and marketing are not integrated.
Which of the following is the strongest coordination mechanism?As the strongest formal coordination mechanism across units, the matrix structure aligns organizational subunits to two separate units at the same time, e.g., to a product-marketing division, to a functional division and/or a geographic division.
Is an organizational management system in which important decisions are made at the top?Centralization is a management system in which important decisions are made at the top.
|
In the context of control mechanisms used in select multinational organizational structures
zusammenhängende Posts
Urheberrechte © © 2024 WIKIFI Inc.
