Up until about 20 years ago, companies experienced organizational redesign every few years or even decades. Most top executives would have the experience perhaps only a few times in their careers. However, automation and competitive pressures had begun to accelerate the pace of organizational change. Show
By 2015, organizational change had become a way of life. In a McKinsey study, 60% of organizations had redesigned themselves within the past two years. Another 25% had done so three or more years ago. Then the 2020 pandemic hit, pushing massive change. Most companies experienced in a few months what once would usually have happened in a decade. We once had time to adjust to a change before the next one began, but today’s successful organizations have embraced change as a way of life. We’re not talking about moving the furniture around. The new changes are completely altering the way we work. True, many businesses are only coping and hoping to survive, waiting for pre-COVID conditions to return. On the other hand, the most successful are adopting new organizational design models that anticipate change and embrace it, spontaneously changing how they work. In this article, we explore traditional organizational models and how they have been used to align structure and operations to business strategies. We will show how those models can still operate as diagnostic tools to understand where various organizational factors can be out of balance. The Organization Development Process Cheat SheetWant to add Organizational Development skills to your HR toolkit? Download this concise introduction to OD. Written by HR, for HR. Download Cheat Sheet Then, we will show how organizations have shifted from static models for diagnostics and alignment to flexible models that help organizations adapt to continuous, dynamic change. Contents What is organizational design?Organizational design refers to how an organization is structured to execute its strategic plan and achieve its goals. This means that the optimal type of organizational design is determined by the organization’s strategy. Organizational design is creating the best structure for:
There are no organizational design best practices. Every organization has different needs. Following another organization’s methods and approach is not likely to lead to lasting success. As a result, organization designers use frameworks, not prescriptions. Help Your Organization Thrive Organizational Development Download Syllabus What is the purpose of organizational design models?An organizational design model is a conceptual framework that an organization uses to:
Diagnostic modelsMost of the well-known organization models in use today originated in the 70s and 80s. Their creators were moving organizations from the industrial age hierarchical models to flatter, more responsive structures. Organizations have different priorities and challenges in organizational design. Understanding the traditional organizational design models can help you choose the right tools for diagnosing and changing your operating models. McKinsey’s 7S Design ModelProbably the most well-known and used design model has been the McKinsey model. Its purpose is to analyze organizational effectiveness through the interactions of seven key elements. You do that not by examining any one element or viewing them only in relation to strategy but as they balance and align together as a whole. First, the “hard” elements of structure, strategy, and systems:
These elements are easier to manage than the “soft” elements of skills, staff, style, and shared values: HR Career PathToolPlanning out your HR career path is key to achieving your professional & personal goals. Map your own HR Career path with our new tool. Get Started
Advantages of the 7s Model
Disadvantages of the 7s Model
The 7s model has been criticized for not being specific in identifying gaps in strategy or execution. We should bear in mind that McKinsey, like other consulting firms, developed its models as frameworks for organizational design consulting. We doubt that its original intent had anything to do with do-it-yourself organizational change. Jay Galbraith’s Star Model™The Star Model is a framework for influencing employee behavior through a “series of design policies” controllable by management:
Advantages of the Star Model
Disadvantages of the Star Model
Weisbord’s Six Box ModelMarvin Weisbord’s model, presented in 1976, comes from his work on creating “a working tool which anybody can use.” He wrote that it helped him to rapidly expand his diagnostic framework “from interpersonal and group issues to the more complicated contexts in which organizations are managed.” By envisioning the six elements as blips on a radar screen, he shows how to manage the relationship, just as air traffic controllers work aircraft distance, altitude, and velocity. Like other organizational design models, the Six-Box model is a diagnostic tool designed to understand relationships and balance elements.
Weisbord’s approach is similar to Galbraith’s. Either can be helpful as a diagnostic tool. Like Galbraith, Weisbord supports the use of their models through an extensive body of writings and guides. Advantages of the Six Box Model
Disadvantages of the Six Box Model
Transformational modelsAs the practice and methods of organizational design have matured, the focus has been on managing successful change more than diagnostics. While change models can still be excellent diagnostic tools, they are more concerned about the journey to greater effectiveness. They are also more likely to concentrate on the human factors of organizational performance. Transformation ModelThe Center for Organizational Design created the Transformational Model in 1995. It is an organizational design framework with two purposes: to help leaders understand their organizations and guide a successful redesign. The model comprises eight variables that form the context of an organization. The objective is to understand and manage the variables to achieve balance. Environment. The organization is a living system that can only survive if it maintains “harmony with its external environment.” That environment includes the competition and “the legal, social, and political climates.” Strategy is about how the organization will compete by adding value for customers. It includes performance targets and a system for growth. It’s about where the organization is going. Core Process is the flow of work in the organization and all enabling technology and resources. It organizes all other business activities around core processes. Structure describes how the business organizes people around business processes. It helps us understand boundaries, roles, responsibilities, and reporting relationships. Systems are the activities and tasks that organize and coordinate work. We are probably more accustomed to calling them functions. Interestingly, the Center’s something of a side note: “the most effective systems are often the simplest.” Culture is how the organization really operates and how well it translates strategy into practice. Results are the measures of how well the organization functions. Well-designed metrics are the basis for understanding performance. Leadership sets goals and monitors results, defines the vision and strategy, and designs the organization. Advantages of the Transformation Model
Disadvantages of the Transformation ModelThe one-way flow doesn’t emphasize the way all eight elements interact. The Congruence ModelThe Nadler-Tushman model presents a six-step plan for closing the gaps in how the elements of an organization work together. It examines communications and information flow to understand the congruence of four components.
Advantages of the congruence model
Disadvantages of the Congruence Model
The Burke-Litwin Organizational Change FrameworkThe organizational change framework could be used as a diagnostic tool, but its primary purpose is to guide organizational change. Burke-Litwin is a causal change model designed to show where change happens and flows through the organization. The framework is much more complex and complete than most organizational design models. It groups twelve factors into five groups. Each group is affected by the group above and below it.
Advantages of the Burke Litwin Organizational Change Model
Disadvantages of the Burke Litwin Organizational Change Model
Experimental modelsThe science of organizational design is advancing as rapidly as change itself. Here, we present two organizational design models we think deserve your consideration. McKinsey Helix ModelWhen McKinsey discovered in 2020 that modern matrix and agility models made businesses too complicated, slow, and inflexible, they developed the helix organizational model. They named the model on the concept of the double helix structure of a DNA molecule. It entails creating two distinct, parallel lines of accountability that are equal and intertwined but different. The device people leadership into two sets of tasks: The first is value creation (what gets done), overseeing day-to-day work, and satisfying the customer. This idea makes us wonder if Sandy Ogg’s Talent to Value concept influenced their thinking. Ogg’s vision is that the organization’s highest priority is to provide the best possible talent wherever the organization creates value. The second is capabilities (how work gets done). Develop people and resources, set standards, and drive excellence. As in matrix organizations, a person reports to two managers, but the managers are not in conflict with regard to that person’s time and attention. They have separate functions. The helix is an advanced design to most organizations, and we think to a degree experimental, but there have been early successes. McKinsey offers four recommendations to ensure success:
Advantages of the Helix Model
Disadvantages of the Helix Model
Holonic Enterprise ModelThe holonic model serves global virtual organizations by allowing self-directed information and resource management linked through the internet. The theoretical framework isn’t new: it originated in the work of Arthur Koestler in 1968, published in 1970 as Beyond Atomism and Holism—The concept of the holon 1. Koester studied the self-organizing tendencies of social and biological systems. He coined the word holon to describe a state where an entity is both a self-contained whole and a part of a more extensive system. Or a subsystem of a greater system. It combines the Greek holos meaning ‘whole’ with the suffix -on ‘a particle or part.’ The holonic enterprise operates on three levels: The Global Inter-Enterprise Collaborative LevelIn the enterprise meaning of the word, companies enter a collaborative hierarchy to produce products or services. We have traditionally regarded this as a supply chain moving from the customer to the producer. However, when we regard the construct as a holonic enterprise, we see that each holon seeks to optimize its efficiency. It operates as an independent entity in collaboration with the extended enterprise. A customer in the chain seeks to work with the most efficient and responsive supplier. The supplier aims to sell to the most profitable customer. The result is an optimization of the whole collaborative inter-enterprise. The Intra-Enterprise LevelEach enterprise in the holocracy must organize its internal resources to deliver according to the coordination requirements of the collaborative cluster. This organization requires planning and dynamic scheduling of resources, including functional reconfiguration. A failure such as machine downtime requires a re-clustering of enterprise resources (see Task Distribution Pattern). The Machine (Physical Agent) LevelThe third level manages the distributed control of the machines that perform the work. The distribution is done through agile manufacturing using self-reconfiguring, intelligent distributed automation elements. The Flexible Organization ModelWe don’t include the flexible organization in our experimental organizational design models because it is not an experiment–it is a proven set of practices that innovators and lean startups use to disrupt markets. It’s the force that accelerates the pace of organizational change. By adopting these innovative practices, your organization becomes a disrupter. In the report Unlocking the flexible organization: Organization design for an uncertain future, Deloitte presents a model and path that traditional companies, or any other, can use to become agile and quick to market. Traditional organizations have based their structure on organizational silos that produce repeatable results in predictable markets. They are bureaucratic, multi-layered hierarchies that resist change. That model will no longer suffice. In today’s markets, things change quickly, and rigid models will fall behind more agile competitors. The organization of the future is a network of self-managed teams that organize themselves around a specific outcome. Radical interventions usually fail, but Deloitte has found a method that unleashes the agility of empowered teams without upending the organization. In the report, they offer four steps to unlocking the flexible organization. Advantages of the Flexible Model
Disadvantages of the Flexible Model
This description is only a quick overview. We recommend reading the whole report before you take any action. We do not recommend trying this on your own. Find an experienced partner who has helped organizations achieve tangible results in creating autonomous teams. Choosing an organizational design modelWe have a few recommendations on how you can get the most from your efforts:
Over to youWe hope this article has given you sufficient information to think through how you want to approach redesigning your organization and how you can use organizational design models to navigate this change process. At AIHR, we see one thing as a certainty: the pace of organizational change will not slow down. We urge you to develop the flexibility that will enable you to find opportunities in the change happening around you and in your organization. What are the 4 frames of organizations?Summary. The four frames -- structures, symbols, people, and power -- are different lenses for understanding an organization (Bolman & Deal, 2008).
Which organizational frames focuses on group roles and responsibilities of project in organization?The structural frame focuses on the architecture of the organization. This includes goals, structure, technology, roles and relationships.
What is the structural frame of an organization?The structural frame deals with how work gets done. It is rational in that it assumes that organizations exist primarily to accomplish established goals. Likewise, their structures should be designed around those goals. We call this "technical rationality."
What is the symbolic frame in organizations?The Symbolic Frame focuses on how humans use meaning, belief, and faith to create a culture. In any organization, there are certain values, rituals, ceremonies, and stories that make up the environment and symbols of the group and attract members that support the cause.
|