Organizations

 

Organizations need to be understood and intelligently managed because they are an ever-present feature of modern life. When people gather together and formally agree to combine their efforts for a common purpose, an organization is the result. All organizations, whatever their purpose, have four characteristics: (1) coordination of effort, (2) common goal or purpose, (3) division of labor, and (4) hierarchy of authority. If one of these characteristics is absent, an organization does not exist. Coordination of efforts multiplies individual contributions. A common goal or purpose gives organization members a rallying point. By systematically dividing complex tasks into specialized jobs, an organization can efficiently use its human resources. Division of labor permits organization member to become more proficient by repeatedly doing the same specialized task. Organization theorists have defined authority as the right to direct the action of others. Without a recognized hierarchy of authority, coordination of effort is difficult, if not impossible, to achieve.

      Organizational classifications aid systematic analysis and study of organizations. There is no universally accepted classification scheme among organization theorists. Two useful ways of classifying organizations are by purpose and technology. In regard to purpose, organizations can be classified as business, not-for-profit service, mutual benefit, or common�weal. In regard to technology, there are long-linked, mediating, and inten�sive technologies. Each of these technologies has characteristic strengths and weaknesses.

There are both traditional and modern views of organizations. Tradi�tionalists such as Fayol, Taylor, and Weber subscribed to closed-system thinking by ignoring the impact of environmental forces. Modern organiza�tion theorists tend to prefer open-system thinking because it realistically incorporates organizations' environmental dependency. Early manage�ment writers proposed tightly controlled authoritarian organizations. Max Weber, a German sociologist, applied the label bureaucracy to his formula for the most rationally efficient type of organization. Bureaucracies are characterized by their division of labor, hierarchy of authority, framework of rules, and impersonality. Unfortunately, in actual practice, bureaucracy has become a synonym for a red tape and inefficiency. The answer to this bureaucratic paradox is to understand that bureaucracy is a matter of degree. When bureaucratic characteristics, which are present in all organizations, are carried to an extreme, efficiency gives way to inefficiency.

Barnard�s acceptance theory of authority and growing environmental complexity and uncertainty questioned traditional organization theory. Open-system thinking became a promising alternative because it was useful in explaining the necessity of creating flexible and adaptable rather than rigid organizations.