SBenegaL

Category: Organizational Development ವ್ಯವಹಾರಿಕ ಉನ್ನತಿ

  • Organization Theory – 27 (Centralization, Complexity and Formalization)

    In the earlier blog, we learnt about
    the importance of centralization and decentralization in the context
    of an organization. In today’s blog, we would discuss the relation between
    the three dimensions of organization structure – centralization, complexity
    and formalization.     
    Centralization and Complexity: When
    decisions are decentralized, there would be a lot of overhead in terms
    of coordination to ensure that the organization is in the intended direction
    towards achieving the goal. This also has an implication in terms of
    the professional training that needs to be imparted to the employees
    – this is visible highly in a small shop where the owner of the shop
    would make most of the decisions while the support staff would have
    very little decisions to make!      
    Centralization and Formalization:
    To begin with it would definitely help to understand that if we simply
    look only at the relation between these 2 terms it would be really hard
    to find a relation between centralization and formalization. It would
    become clear if we look at the kind of employees the organization has.      
    When the employee is rather unskilled
    it would be mandatory to have lot of procedures, rules and regulation
    if in such a scenario, if there is a centralized decision making or
    decentralized decision making it would only depend on the scenario in
    question.     
    If the employee is a professional,
    it would mandate that the decision making being delegated to the employee
    would act as a motivator.  It also means that the employee would
    need to enjoy a lower formalization to really act on his work!
    Read in Kannada:

  • Organization Theory – 26 (Sales rep, Law suit and centralization)

    In the last blog, we looked at the decision making process, and understood the concept of centralization using the process. It would be interesting to discuss where  centralization and decentralization are going to play an important role – this is exactly what we are looking at in this blog.
    In the current context, there is usually information at the click of a button. If anything, we have an information overload! Managers or any decision maker needs to make sense out of this huge information repository. 
    Let us now take 2 different situations 
    1. A sales representative on a sales visit negotiating with a customer
    2. A law suite on an organization

    How should the decision making be placed in these situations?
    In the first case, a quick on the spot decision is the best response to this scenario. Taking time to go back to the sale person’s  manager and then making the decision on price could mean loosing the customer! In such a situation it is obvious that the decision has to be decentralized.
    In the second case, when a law suit is filed against the organization. The response the organization has to give and the way it reacts in every one of its activities mean that the situation has be controlled. This mandates a single point decision making instead of a denaturalized decision making process!
    In many a situation, it is pretty interesting to note that having a decentralized decision making process would also result in a means to motivate the organization.
    It has to be noted that there is no one right choice for an organization! It is extremely situational choice that the organization needs to take.
    Read in Kannada:

  • Organization Theory – 25 (Decision Making Process)


    In the last blog, we asked question related to centralization and concluded with a more comprehensive definition of centralization. In today’s blog, we look at centralization more as a decision making process and understand it better – this in fact answers the question of “degree of centralization”.

    We defined management to be synonymous to decision making early in our blog series. We could look at the process of decision making as represented in the diagram below (more relevant to a larger organization):

    This picture is adapted from the T.T Paterson’s Management Theory Book 

    As shown in the diagram, a decision making process begins with a situation, where a decision needs to be taken. The necessary relevant information is got in relating to the situation, depending on what can be done to influence the situation, this information is interpreted and various advices regarding what is to be done is provided. Finally a choice is made out of these advices which define what is intended to be done. This is then authorized to an individual who would then execute the choice into action.

    It is the decision choice that establishes what the decision maker desires or intends to have done. If the decision making has all the different stages shown in the above figure done by the decision maker, it would be highly centralized! If the decision maker comes at the stage of making a choice alone, then it is what we could assume to be highly decentralized decision making.

    Read in Kannada:

  • Organization Theory – 24

    Continuing from our last blog on centralization where begun questioning the common understanding of centralization, we discuss a few more questions here and finally define centralization.
    A couple of blogs earlier, we had discussed and defined the concept of procedures/policies etc? It would be interesting to relate these with centralization and ask the question – “Can policies override decentralization?” Generally, the decision making at the first level of workers is directed by a policy which provides a guideline towards making decisions. So given that these policies is it real decentralization?
    As we defined centralization we said it would stand for “concentration at a single point” – does this single point mean – a single person, or a unit, or a level? For the operational employees it wouldn’t matter at what level the decision is being made – is it one level above them of some 5 levels above them! 
    Will having an information processing system closely monitor the decentralization amount to centralization of control?
    If the operational level workers are able to control information does this result in decentralization if the process is actually centralized decision making?
    Taking all these into considerations, we can now define centralization as – “the degree to which the formal authority to make discretionary choices is concentrated in an individual, unit or level (usually high in the organization), thus permitting employees lower in the organization minimum input into the work.”
    Read in Kannada:

  • Organization Theory 23

    In the last blog, we looked at the video of assembly line production of the T-model of ford and attempted understanding the relation between formalization and complexity. In today’s blog we begin our discussion about centralization – another dimension of the organizational structure, but we shall approach this discussion on centralization slightly differently given the issues we have to discuss.
    It is common knowledge that in a centralixed decision making process, the decisions are concentrated at a single point in an organization – Right? and this could easily be followed by an undersanding that high concentration implies high centralization and vice-versa. Given this simplicity in understanding the concept as a whole, it would be more comprehensive if we talk about the issues that arise in such a simple understanding of centralization!
    Lets take for example (an assumption in this case if not real):
    Your role say is at a Television channel and you are incharge of identifying the successful and unsuccessful prime time programs. Your boss generally take along you into many meeting that only he would otherwise attend alone. The boss rarely takes any major decision with out your inputs. 
    If you look at the scenario above, clearly your role doesnt give you any formal authority to takse such decisions, but informally you are affecting the decisions being made. This arises an interesting question in understanding centralization – “Should we observer the formal authroity or the informal one?”
    To get an answer to the question, lets continue understanding other challenges that the way we defined centralization has and then attempt a more comprehensive one.
    Read in Kannada:

  • ಸಾಂಸ್ಥಿಕ ಸಿದ್ಧಾಂತ – ೭

    ಈ ಹಿಂದಿನ ಅಂಕಣದಲ್ಲಿ ನಾವು ವ್ಯವಹಾರ ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಯ ವಿವಿಧ ಆಯಾಮಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಚರ್ಚಿಸುವೆವು ಎಂದು ಹೇಳಿದ್ದೆವು. ಇಂದಿನ ಅಂಕಣದಲ್ಲಿ ನಾವು ಕೆಲವೊಂದು ವಿಚಾರಗಳ (variables) ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಅರಿಯುವ ಮೂಲಕ ಆಯಾಮಗಳನ್ನು ಅರಿಯಲು ಮುಂದುವರಿಯೋಣ.
     
     ಈ variables ಗಳನ್ನು ಅನೇಕ ವಿಧಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ವಿವಿಧ ವ್ಯಾಖ್ಯಾನಕಾರರು ವ್ಯಾಖ್ಯಾನ ಮಾಡಿರುವರು.ನಾವು ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯವಾಗಿ ಬಳಕೆಯಲ್ಲಿರುವ ವ್ಯಾಖ್ಯಾನವನ್ನುಬಳಸೋಣ.
    Administrative Component: ಒಟ್ಟು ಉದ್ಯೋಗಿಗಳ ಸಂಖ್ಯೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಲೈನ್ ಸೂಪರ್ ವೈಸರ್, ಮ್ಯಾನೇಜರ್, ಸ್ಟಾಫ್ ವ್ಯಕ್ತಿಗಳು ಇರುವ ಸಂಖ್ಯೆ.
    Autonomy: ಕೆಲವೊಂದು ಬಹಳ ಪ್ರಾಮುಖ್ಯವಾದ ನಿರ್ಧಾರಗಳನ್ನು ತೆಗೆದುಕೊಳ್ಳಲು ಕಂಪನಿಯ ಉನ್ನತ ಮ್ಯಾನೇಜ್ಮೆಂಟ್ ತಲುಪಬೇಕಾದ ಅಧಿಕಾರಿ/ಗಳು.
    Centralization: ನಿರ್ಧಾರ ತೆಗೆದುಕೊಳ್ಳುವ ಪಾಲ್ಗೊಳ್ಳುವ ವ್ಯಕ್ತಿಗಳ ಕೆಲಸಗಳ ಒಂದು ಭಾಗ ಮತ್ತು ಪಾಲ್ಗೊಳ್ಳುವ ಕ್ಷೇತ್ರಗಳ ಸಂಖ್ಯೆ, ಅಥವಾ ಅಧಿಕಾರ ವ್ಯವಸ್ಥೆಯ ಏಕತ್ರತೆ, ಅಥವಾ ಪ್ರಮುಖ ಮತ್ತು ವಿಶೇಷವಾದ ರೀತಿ ನಿಯಮಾವಳಿಗಳನ್ನು ರೂಪಿಸಲು ನಿರ್ಧಾರ ತೆಗೆದು ಕೊಳ್ಳುವ ಕೇಂದ್ರ ಬಿಂದು, ಅಧಿಕಾರದ ವಿವಿಧ ಸ್ತರಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಮಾಹಿತಿ ವಿನಿಮಯ ಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳುವ ಮಟ್ಟ, ಮತ್ತು ದೀರ್ಘ ಕಾಲಿನ ಯೋಜನೆಗಳನ್ನು ರೂಪಿಸುವಲ್ಲಿ ಪಾಲ್ಗೊಳ್ಳುವ ಮಟ್ಟ.
    Complexity: ಉದ್ಯೋಗಿಗಳ ವಿಶೇಷತೆಗಳ, ಔದ್ಯೋಗಿಕ ಚಟುವಟಿಕೆಗಳ ಮತ್ತು ಔದ್ಯೋಗಿಕ ತರಬೇತಿಗಳ ಸಂಖ್ಯೆ.
    Delegation of authority: ನಿರ್ಧಿಷ್ಟವಾದ ಮ್ಯಾನೇಜ್ಮೆಂಟ್ ನಿರ್ಧಾರಗಳನ್ನು ಚೀಫ್ ಎಕ್ಸಿಕುಟಿವ್ ಅಧಿಕಾರಿ ನೀಡಿದ್ದು ಮತ್ತು ಅವರಿಗೆ ಇರುವ ಒಟ್ಟು ನಿರ್ಧಾರ ಮಾಡಲು ಅಧಿಕಾರವಿರುವ ನಿರ್ಧಾರಗಳ ಸಂಖ್ಯೆ.
    Differentiation: ಕಂಪನಿಯಲ್ಲಿರುವ ವಿವಿಧ ವಿಶೇಷತೆಗಳನ್ನು ಹೊಂದಿದ ವಿಭಾಗಗಳು ಅಥವಾ ವಿವಿಧ ಡಿಪಾರ್ಟ್ಮೆಂಟ್ ಗಳ ಮ್ಯಾನೇಜರ್ ಗಳ ನಡುವೆ ಇರುವ ಯೋಚನಾ ಲಹರಿಯ ಮತ್ತು ಭಾವನೆಗಳ ಭೇದ.
    Formalization: ಒಬ್ಬ ಉದ್ಯೋಗಿಯ ಕಾರ್ಯದ ಹೊಣೆಗಾರಿಕೆಯನ್ನು ಔಪಚಾರಿಕ ದಾಖಲೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಬರೆಯುವ ಗರಿಷ್ಟ ಮಟ್ಟ.
    Integration: ಒಂದೆಡೆಗೆ ಕೇಂದ್ರವಾದ ಶ್ರಮವನ್ನು ಹೊಂದಲು ಅಥವಾ ಯೋಜನೆ ಅಥವಾ ಒಮ್ಮತದ ಅಭಿಪ್ರಾಯ ಹೇಳಲು  ಡಿಪಾರ್ಟ್ಮೆಂಟ್ ಗಳ ನಡುವೆ ಇರುವ ಒಟ್ಟುಗೂಡಿ ಸಾಮರಸ್ಯದಿಂದ ಕೆಲಸ ಮಾಡುವ ಗುಣಮಟ್ಟ. 
    Professionalism: ಉದ್ಯೋಗಿಗಳು ಒಂದು ವೃತ್ತಿಪರ ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಯನ್ನು ಮಾನದಂಡವಾಗಿ ಎಷ್ಟು ಉಪಯೋಗಿಸಿಕೊಂಡು, ಸಾರ್ವಜನಿಕರಿಗೆ ಸೇವೆಯನ್ನು ನೀಡಬೇಕೆಂದು, ಸ್ವ ಶಿಷ್ಟಾಚಾರ ಪಾಲಿಸಬೇಕೆಂದು, ತತ್ಪರತೆ ಯನ್ನು ಒಂದು ಕಾರ್ಯದಲ್ಲಿ ಹೊಂದಿರಬೇಕೆಂದು ನಂಬಿರುವರೋ ಅದು.
    Span of Control: ಪ್ರತ್ಯೇಕವಾಗಿ ಒಬ್ಬೊಬ್ಬ ಮ್ಯಾನೇಜರ್ ಹೊಂದಬಹುದಾದ ಮತ್ತು ಅಧಿಕಾರ ಚಲಾಯಿಸಬಹುದಾದ ಅವನ/ಳ ಕೆಳಗಿನ ಉದ್ಯೋಗಿಗಳು.
    Specialization:  ಔದ್ಯೋಗಿಕ ವಿಶೇಷತೆಗಳ ಸಂಖ್ಯೆ ಮತ್ತು ಅವುಗಳನ್ನು ತರಬೇತಿ ನೀಡಲು ಬೇಕಾಗುವ ಸಮಯ ಮತ್ತು ಗಹನತೆ ಅಥವಾ ಒಂದು ಉದ್ಯೋಗದ ವಿಶ್ಲೇಷಣೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಒಂದು ಔದ್ಯೋಗಿಕ ವಿಶೇಷತೆಯ ಅಗತ್ಯತೆಯನ್ನು ಹೇಳಿರುವ ಆಳ.
    Standardization: ಒಂದು ಕೆಲಸದಲ್ಲಿ ಸಹಿಸಬಹುದಾದ variables ಗಳ ಮಿತಿಗಳು.
    Vertical Span: ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಯ ಕೆಳಗಿನ ಹಂತದಿಂದ ಮೇಲಿನ ಹಂತದ ವರೆಗೆ ವಿವಿಧ ಸ್ಥರಗಳಲ್ಲಿರುವ ಅಧಿಕಾರದ ಹಂತಗಳು.
    ಇವುಗಳನ್ನು ನೋಡಿದಾಗ ಸಹಜವಾಗಿ ಇದೊಂದು ಬ್ರಹ್ಮ ವಿದ್ಯೆಯೆಂದು ಅನ್ನಿಸಿರಬಹುದು. ಆದರೆ ಉದ್ಯಮಗಳಲ್ಲಿನ   ಅನುಭವ ಮತ್ತು ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ವಿವರಣೆಯ ಮೂಲಕ ಇದನ್ನು ಸರಿಯಾಗಿ ಅರ್ಥ ಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳಬಹುದು. ಇದೆ ಪ್ರಯತ್ನವನ್ನು ನಾವು ಮುಂದಿನ ಅಂಕಣಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಆಯಾಮಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ವಿವರಿಸುವ ಮೊದಲು ಮುಂದುವರಿಸುವೆವು.ಆದರೆ ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ಕಡೆಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಎರಡು ಅಂಶಗಳನ್ನು ನಾವು ಒಟ್ಟು ಸೇರಿಸಿ ಮುಖ್ಯಾಂಶವನ್ನು ಗಮನಿಸಬೇಕು. 
    ಆಂಗ್ಲ ಅಂಕಣ:
    http://somanagement.blogspot.com/2011/09/organization-theory-7.html

  • Organization Theory – 22

    In the last blog, we discussed about Rituals and Training as a means for Formalization in organization. Over the last few blogs we have looked at 2 major concepts – Formalization and Complexity. Time is apt for us to understand the relation between these 2 dimensions of organization structure.
    For clarity sake, let’s begin with the scenario of an assembly line used to produce cars. 
    Lets us look at this video from the YouTube which mentions about ford’s T model car being produced through assembly line. 
    In an assembly line, workers have highly specialized tasks with standardized routine and lots of formal rules and procedures to follow. Let us focus on the section in the video around 1.20 seconds where the worker is really building pieces of the tyre rim. It becomes very clear that he has different units, and a set of procedures for inserting the forks into the rim and then punching them. These discrete pieces are then put up together to create a complete wheel rim by the next employee.
    For ease of understanding and coordination, it is pretty clear that there would have been a strict procedure to achieve the target of building a car. Each employee would be asked to do a specific piece of the task and not the whole of the car. Everyone was given a particular task to perform and also along with it was a particular set of rules to follow. 
    The above is a scenario of functional specialization! Where there is a very strong association between formalization and specialization (dimension of complexity). It would be also interesting to ask if, the scenario would be same in case of social specialization.
    A professional like an engineer or a charted accountant doesn’t require a great number of rules and regulations to perform ones task. Imposing rules and regulations would only mean redundant control.
    As a simple underlying rule one could use to understand the complexity-formalization relation is to focus on the degree of horizontal differentiation and the way it is achieved.
    Read in Kannada:

  • Organization Theory – 21

    Continuing our discussion from the last blog, we today look at the training and rituals as a means to achieve formalization. 
    Training: Almost every organization offers trainings to its employees. These could be on-the-job like coaching, apprenticeship etc or off-the-job like class room lectures, films etc. In addition to this are the orientation programs. All these aim to instill in employees work behaviors and attitudes that are required by the organization in addition to the job related technology skills.
    Let’s understand this with the help of the very famous training program of Infosys. One could read more about it here.
    The training that Infosys provided doesn’t just look at the technology challenge but here is a specific program – Infosys Leadership System (ILS) which addresses the issue of sustained growth in general and creates a formal and committed system for developing leadership capabilities in Infoscions. The emphasis in the program is on developing a “partnership approach” in its top management!
    Rituals: These are generally repetitive acts which are followed by a larger section of the organization. A well known example is that of Wal-Mart!
    Wal-Mart was founded by Sam Walton. He initiated a very famous ritual for the Wal-Mart employees – “the company chant”. It served as a means to motivate and unite the workforce. – the Wal-mart chant is: “Gimme a W, gimme and A gimme and L, gimme a squiggle, give me an M, A, R, T!” Similarly other companies like IBM, Ericsson, Novell, Deutsche Bank, and Pricewaterhouse coopers. all have their own company chants. 
    Rituals like the ones above attempt to highlight the key values of the organization like – what goals are most important which people are important, and which people are expendable.
    Read In Kannada:

  • ಸಾಂಸ್ಥಿಕ ಸಿದ್ಧಾಂತ – ೬

    ಹಿಂದಿನ ಅಂಕಣದಲ್ಲಿ ನಾವು ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಯು ೫ ಪ್ರಮುಖ ವಿಭಾಗಗಳನ್ನು ಹೊಂದಿರುತ್ತದೆ ಎಂದು ಸ್ಥೂಲವಾಗಿ ನೋಡಿದೆವು. ಇಂದಿನ ಅಂಕಣದಲ್ಲಿ ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಗಳ ಪ್ರಾಥಮಿಕವಾಗಿ ವಿವಿಧತೆಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಸ್ಥೂಲವಾಗಿ ಅರಿಯುವ ಯತ್ನ ಮಾಡೋಣ.
     
    ನೇರವಾಗಿ ಗ್ರಹಿಸಲು ಸಾಧ್ಯವಾಗುವ ವಿಚಾರವೆಂದರೆ ಪ್ರತಿಯೊಂದು ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಯು ಎಲ್ಲ ವಿಭಾಗಗಳನ್ನು  ಉಪಯೋಗಿಸಬೇಕೆಂದಿಲ್ಲ. ಆದರೆ ಕೆಲವು ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಬಹಳ ಸಂಕೀರ್ಣವಾದ ಪರಸ್ಪರ ಸಂಬಂಧಗಳು ಇವುಗಳ ನಡುವೆ ಇರುತ್ತದೆ. 
    ನಾವು ಅರಿಯಬೇಕಾದ ಮುಖ್ಯ ವಿಚಾರವೇನೆಂದರೆ ಪ್ರತಿ ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಯ ಮುಖ್ಯ ಉದ್ದೇಶ ಅಥವಾ ಕೇಂದ್ರ ಗುರಿ ಕೆಲಸ ಸಾಧಿಸಲು ಬೇಕಾಗುವ ಸಮನ್ವಯತೆಯನ್ನು ಸಾಧಿಸುವುದು. ನಾವು ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಗಳನ್ನು ಅವುಗಳ ಸಮನ್ವಯತೆಯ ಗುರಿಗಳ ಮೇಲೆ ೫ ಗುಂಪುಗಳನ್ನಾಗಿ ವಿಂಗಡಿಸಬಹುದು. ಅವು:
    • Simple Structure
    • Machine Bureaucracy
    • Professional Bureaucracy
    • Divisionalized
    • Adhocracy  

    ನಾವು ಈ ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಗಳ ರೀತಿಯ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಅರಿಯಲು ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಗಳ ರಚನೆಯ ಕೆಲವು ಮೂಲಭೂತ ಪ್ರಮುಖ padagala ಅರಿವನ್ನು ಹೊಂದುವುದು  ಅಗತ್ಯ. ಇವುಗಳನ್ನು ಸಂಸ್ಥೆಯ ರಚನೆಯ ಆಯಾಮಗಳೆಂದು ಕೂಡ ಕರೆಯುವರು.

    • Complexity
    • Formalization
    • Centralization

    ಇವುಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಮುಂದಿನ ಅಂಕಣದಲ್ಲಿ ತಿಳಿಯೋಣ.

    ಆಂಗ್ಲ ಅಂಕಣ:
    http://somanagement.blogspot.com/2011/09/organization-theory-6.html 

  • Organization Theory – 20

    In the earlier blog, we began looking at the various general ways which could be used to formalize in an organization. In today’s blog we continue the discussion and deal about the following means of formalization:
    1. Role Requirements
    2. Rule, Procedures and Policies

    Role Requirements: 
    Any individual in an organization performs a role. Each role has a certain set of expectations from the individual, his behavior and tasks he is to perform etc.Since the job comes with a role expectation, it plays a major role in regulating the employee’s behavior.
    These could be explicit or implicit. By loosing or tightening the role expectations, one could essentially loosen or tighten the degree of formalization in an organization.
    Rule, Procedures and Policies
    Since the roles would get obvious as we define them, let’s just understand these and the role played would be clearer with that.
    Rules are explicitly stated statements that tell an employee what he or she ought or ought not to do. – These do not leave any room for employee discretion or judgement. They state a particular behavior pattern in a particular situation.
    Procedures are a series of interrelated sequential steps that employees follow in the accomplishment of their job tasks. These steps follow a specific sequence (standardization) that results in a uniform output.
    Policies are guidelines that set constraints on decision that employees make. – These allow employees use discretion but within boundaries.
    Read in Kannada: