Linear organizational structure of enterprise management example. Hierarchical organizational structures for managing operational enterprises

1. PURPOSE OF THE WORKS

2. DATA COLLECTION METHODS AND ANALYSIS SCHEME

3. DIAGNOSIS RESULTS

3.1. FEATURES OF THE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF JSC "XXX"
3.2. RESPONSIBILITY ANALYSIS
3.3. ANALYSIS OF ORGANIZATION OF PERFORMANCE OF WORK
3.4. ORGANIZATION OF INFORMATION INTERACTION

4.1. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGING THE MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE
4.2. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGE MANAGEMENT STYLE
4.3. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGING THE PROCEDURES OF WORK ON PROJECTS
4.4. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE REGULATION OF FUNCTIONAL PROCEDURES

5. CONCLUSION

APPENDIX 1 Analysis of the effectiveness of control actions

Satisfaction with the current state of affairs
Stability and security of the position
Evaluation of employees' performance by process, not by result
Information closure
Analysis of the level of coordination of actions of company employees
Conclusion

1. Purpose of work

This report has been prepared on the basis of the results of work carried out in accordance with the Program approved by the Order of the President of JSC "XXX" No. __ dated "__" ___. The purpose of the work was to develop proposals and recommendations for optimizing the management system based on a comprehensive analysis of organizational, structural and personnel problems in the activities of the Central Office of JSC "XXX".

This report provides a description of the results of the first stage - diagnosing the state of the organization.

The process of developing private solutions to individual problems, using the results of diagnostics, actually began even before the completion of the first stage. The consultants, at the request of management, prepared a number of policy briefs on various topical management issues.

It is advisable to draw up a work plan for designing changes after discussing the data presented in this report on the state and development trends of the organization, as well as proposals and recommendations for their optimization.

2. Data collection methods and analysis scheme

Methods for collecting data on the state of the company were chosen taking into account the specifics of XXX JSC. The main feature of the company's activity is that it is actually the central management apparatus of a large holding. The management apparatus itself is not directly involved in the production of services or goods for the foreign market, but, first of all, coordinates and manages the activities of subsidiaries and banks. One of the main tools of management activity is the work with documents. Therefore, the specifics of the activity of the administrative apparatus determines the analysis of documents as the main method of research. However, these methods were only partially successful for two reasons.

• Firstly, the analysis of the objective results of the company's employees was difficult due to the high level of confidentiality of this information, which is quite natural, given the scale of the holding's activities.
• Secondly, out of almost a hundred submitted documents describing the functions and tasks of departments, job responsibilities of employees, etc. less than half are approved. The rest are in the process of being reviewed, some for quite a considerable amount of time.

As additional methods, indirect data collection methods were used, namely: interviews, questionnaires, observation of work and projective methods.

When determining the scheme for analyzing the results, the consultants of Euromanagement proceeded from the fact that changes in JSC XXX are ongoing, but with varying efficiency. The results of the company's activities vary greatly depending on the area of ​​application of forces. Moreover, the smaller the results in any of the areas of activity, the more control actions are performed in relation to it.

A detailed analysis was carried out of the reasons why the control actions to change the state of the holding are not effective enough. When analyzing the effectiveness of control actions, the level of resistance to changes on the part of employees and managers of the organization was assessed (Appendix 1).

3. Diagnostic results

3.1. Features of the organizational structure of JSC "XXX"

In general, the organizational structure of the company's management can be characterized as a mixed type structure. Taking into account the trends of changes in the composition of departments and their functions, we can say that the company is in the initial phase of the transition from linear functional to divisional structure. Both types refer to hierarchical management structures and differ in the principles of separation of management activities.

Using linear functional structures Deputy heads of the organization are responsible for the implementation of individual functions throughout the organization (for example, finance, production, personnel, etc.). In "XXX" this role has recently been assigned to managers Offices(planning and economic, legal, personnel, affairs, economic, financial, as well as Central Accounting).

Initially, the Directorates also controlled the activities of subsidiaries (for example, the AgroXXX Directorate). Recently, however, the Departments have been implementing only the basic management functions: control over finances, personnel, and legal issues.

At the same time, operational control over subsidiaries is gradually reduced. For example, at the beginning of 1997, employees of the production and dispatching department of the AgroXXX Directorate were transferred to one of the subsidiaries (JSC Plemzavod "XXX"). The tendency to increase the independence of subsidiaries in solving operational issues, while strengthening the centralization of financial, legal and personnel issues, indicates a transition to a divisional management structure. What strategically corresponds to the nature of the development of a holding type organization.

Using divisional structures, the central office of the company carries out general and centralized coordination of activities, and the heads of the company's production departments ("divisions") have a high level of independence. In "XXX", the role of such divisions is performed by subsidiaries controlled by departments of the central office (construction and reconstruction, trade, advanced developments, "AgroXXX" Department). General coordination of the activities of subsidiaries, as well as their management, is carried out by the vice presidents of the company. Each of the vice presidents oversees or directly heads one of the departments. The degree of management of subsidiaries by vice presidents is not the same, which is associated with different conditions for companies to join the holding.

In addition, the management of the solution of a part of the company's tasks is carried out by creating temporary working groups, with the involvement of a wide variety of specialists. Moreover, specialists are involved both from the holding apparatus and from other organizations (as a rule, subsidiaries of the company). This way of organizing management is especially often used when developing new areas of activity or deepening old ones. An example is the working groups on oil and the Middle East. The use of temporary working groups indicates the application of the third principle of company structuring - the matrix structure. At the present stage, this is, in fact, the most progressive direction towards the creation of an integrated system for monitoring the profitability and commercial efficiency of projects.

The process of establishing such a structure has been going on since about the middle of 1994 (ie, since the beginning of the active formation of a holding type company) and includes a number of consistent and gradual steps to form the most adequate management structure. Moreover, the process of the holding's formation is still far from complete.

In the design of the divisional structure, the next step was taken in November 1996, with the approval of the Regulations on the apparatus of JSC "XXX". The Regulation separates two types of divisions of the holding apparatus: management, responsible for the implementation of functions, and departments responsible for the areas of work, i.e. activities of subsidiaries. It should be noted that the provisions on specific departments and departments have not yet been revised in accordance with the new Regulations on the apparatus of JSC "XXX".

A schematic representation of the organizational structure of the company is given in the Scheme:

Scheme 1. Organizational structure of the company

Unfortunately, the formalization of the management structure is not a priority goal of the company's leaders, and insufficient attention to the regulation of the activities of employees leads to a number of systemic failures, which in a significant way reduce employee co-ordination.

3.2. Responsibility Analysis

The distribution of responsibility was determined on the basis of the scope of authority and the area of ​​decisions taken by various officials independently, since these two parameters directly determine the responsibility of an official. Based on the results of the analysis, it can be said that JSC "XXX" is characterized by a very high concentration of responsibility among a limited circle of managers.

The maximum responsibility is concentrated with the President of the company. In fact, a practice has been introduced when the President approves not only fundamental decisions, for example, on changing strategic goals or company management rules, which is traditionally the prerogative of the top management, but also all projects and tasks for company divisions. The need to approve decisions on almost all issues has two serious drawbacks.

First, it takes too much time from the President to consider secondary issues.

Secondly, it removes a significant part of the responsibility from the coordinating units. This conclusion was made on the basis of the existing facts of the approval of orders without all the necessary approvals, and this practice makes it possible to "push through" insufficiently developed projects.

Partial unloading of the time of the President of the company is provided by the preliminary approval of orders by the Vice Presidents and departments, and for large projects by the Financial Committee. However, coordination, rather than direct approval of orders at their level, removes a significant part of the responsibility from the Vice-Presidents. It should be noted that the level of responsibility of the Vice-Presidents, i.e. the boundaries of the decisions they make on their own are not clearly defined and are defined in the documents only in general terms.

To increase the consistency and clarity of actions, it is necessary to fix the "pyramid of distribution of responsibility" more rigidly. When each employee of the company will know who he should apply to for permission, who is empowered, etc. At the same time, the President of the company will be able to interact only with his deputies for areas of activity (vice-presidents), as well as deputies for functional areas (heads of departments), and really spend time mainly on solving fundamental issues of strategic management of the company.

3.3. Analysis of work organization

The coordination of the actions of employees at the level of specific actions very much depends on the technical side of the organization of work, that is, on how the following procedures are implemented:

• setting tasks for performers;
• managing the process of completing tasks;
• control over the timing and quality of implementation;
• coordination of work between departments.

Task setting procedure in the company is carried out strictly vertically. In accordance with paragraph 3 of the "Regulations on assessing the performance of the divisions of JSC "XXX", the scheme is as follows:

In accordance with the tasks and production needs, the President of JSC "XXX" by his order entrusts the subdivision with the implementation of specific tasks (projects).

The division draws up a plan for the implementation of the task (project) and makes an economic calculation of the intermediate and final financial and economic results of the project, taking into account the current and forecast state of foreign and domestic markets.

The version of the plan prepared by the subdivision is coordinated with the vice-president in charge of the subdivision, planning, economic and financial services of the Central Office of JSC "XXX".

The plan endorsed by the relevant services is submitted to the President of JSC "XXX" for approval.

After the President approves the plan, the intermediate and final results of the plan become the main guidelines:

• for a subdivision - the progress of the task (project)
• for JSC "XXX" - control and evaluation of the work of the unit.

Such a procedure includes the following disadvantages in terms of its impact on the coherence of actions:

1. At the level of the entire unit implementing the project, control is exercised mainly over financial and economic indicators. Quality Criteria intermediate results project implementation are not defined in sufficient detail. For intermediate results, financial indicators cannot be the main ones, since in the course of their achievement, as a rule, funds are disbursed, and not profit is made. Full and timely use of the allocated funds is far from always a guarantee of obtaining the final result.
2. At the level of direct executors, tasks are set orally, since they are most often not mentioned in an officially approved document (project), and the practice of documented task setting is not used in all departments. The oral statement of the task to the executor by the immediate supervisor, as a rule, is not specific enough. To be as specific as possible, the task statement should be given in writing.

This type of task setting is effective in cases where the performers are directly interested in the result of the implementation, for example, they receive a percentage of the implementation of the order or the work of each employee is evaluated according to specific parameters. In the situation of receiving a guaranteed salary and the absence of formalized criteria for assessing the effectiveness of each employee, a more detailed level of task setting and control is needed.

Task execution process management is carried out by the "responsible executor" - one of the leaders of the company, for example, the Vice President or the head of department. The management procedure is not regulated and is not generally accepted, but depends on the characteristics of each leader. The level of detail of management depends on the qualifications of the performer and the attitude of the manager towards him. Only one regularity can be noted - in departments it is not customary to exercise control over the critical points of work plans. For example, there were practically no cases of documented revision of work plans due to changes in the conditions for their implementation.

Coordination of interaction between departments regulated only partially (only recently a decision has been made on the procedure for considering projects). Therefore, the main part of interactions is carried out at the level of personal connections. When transferring materials to another department for review and revision, it is necessary to constantly maintain the relevance of this work at the level of personal contacts with the manager and employees. The informal order of interaction between employees of departments is not negative in itself and even contributes to the formation of a team spirit, but significantly reduces the effectiveness of activities if there is no official order in parallel.

The organization of information interaction, which will be discussed in the next section, is directly related to the coordination of the activities of departments.

To improve the organization of work, the following preliminary recommendations can be made:

• Attach to the order of the President more detailed work plans indicating specific executors and expected results.
• Formalize the assignment of tasks to direct executors by order of the responsible executor (Vice President or Head of Department) with the obligatory transfer of the plan to the case management for more detailed control.
• Include contractors in the development of detailed work plans.
• To carry out more detailed control over the implementation of individual stages of the work plan by the responsible Vice President, as well as the Department of Affairs and functional departments, in order to timely correct actions or promptly inform the President about the discrepancy between the plan and the real state of affairs.

3.4. Organization of information exchange

This parameter was used to assess how interconnected and aimed at achieving common goals the work of divisions and employees of the holding can be.

The influence of this parameter on the effectiveness of organization management is undeniable. When managing a holding, it is information that is one of the main objects of activity, and the efficiency of decisions made and the quality of their implementation depend on how quickly it is collected and transmitted, how meaningful and adequate the activity is.

The company is currently in the process of developing information flows. So far, only a number of financial parameters have been defined within the framework of a unified system of accounting, financial and planning and economic control, the provision and processing of which is carried out without fail. Data on the state of the market, production resources, manufactured products (goods or services), sales opportunities are not collected and analyzed systematically.

In particular, there is not a single computer database in which information would be systematized. There is no unified computer network (only local ones in separate subdivisions), which, in the absence of databases, is not fundamental, but significant.

The collection of information in the form of official documents and working materials is carried out in each division independently. The file of documents in the Office of Affairs is maintained according to a limited number of signs - the time of creation, the source of receipt.

Employees turn to the archive for information quite rarely and prefer direct contacts with colleagues to obtain the necessary data at the level of personal contacts.

At the same time, it should be noted that the work on collecting and transmitting information has been actively developing recently. Thus, the Financial Department conducts a systematic collection of data on the state of the oil sales market, a single archive of documents and materials, etc. has been created.

In general, it can be concluded that information interaction corresponds to the style of company management, but more and more conflicts with the needs for information. To eliminate contradictions, it is necessary to carry out the following activities:

• expanding the parameters of the collected and analyzed information;
• definition of systematization criteria and units responsible for collection and analysis;
• creation of computer databases (if necessary with limited access) and a single computer network;
• development and implementation of standards for the content and design of information materials.

In conclusion of this subsection, it should be emphasized that the implementation of these activities will increase the level of coordination of actions of the company's employees, only if the company's management structure is put in order and the responsibility of all managers and at least most of the performers is specified.

This section of the report provides recommendations for making changes that will significantly improve the efficiency of both the holding's management apparatus and its subsidiaries. When reviewing the recommendations, it should be borne in mind that so far they only define general directions of changes and are the basis for the work at the second stage of consulting- designing changes. A specific change action plan should be drawn up at the beginning of the design phase.

The second component of the success of the changes is the "clearness of actions." The success or failure of the implementation of the strategy primarily depends on how clearly the employees of the company perform their work.

The level of consistency and clarity of actions depends on the specificity of such components of the company as:

• managment structure;
• management style;
• operational management.

"Managment structure"are the principles of management organization that determine its constituent parts (elements), their powers and resources, the rules of interaction with each other, as well as the rules of general coordination. The elements and rules of their interaction depend on how adequately the strategy and the conditions for its implementation determine manageability of the company, that is, the ability to achieve the goals set without constant direct intervention of the first persons.

Under the term " management style"is understood to be the consistency of positions in the top management of the entire holding, including all persons making fundamental decisions both in the central office and in subsidiaries. At the same time, consistency should be achieved in two directions: firstly, the interests of top managers, and secondly, their areas of responsibility and authority.

The direction of application of joint efforts depends on the degree of coordination of the positions of leaders: whether they lead to common goals or to fundamentally different ones.

Under " operational management"means the management of procedures for solving problems and implementing functions. In this case, the tasks of the company are understood as separate projects to achieve tactical goals. Under the functions - work regularly performed in each project, for example, planning and evaluating financial flows, legal justification, determining payback, etc. .d.

At the central office problem solving carried out by employees of the Departments (for existing areas of work) or working groups (for newly created areas). It is these employees who ensure the achievement of a specific result. The composition of the activities of the performers who solve problems is constantly changing, therefore, making their work more accurate is possible only through more detailed planning and control over the implementation of plans.

Function implementation or constantly recurring duties that do not depend on the specifics of the task, in the central office are carried out by employees of the Departments. Ultimately, they provide control over the quality of project implementation: their elaboration, validity, availability of resources, etc. The content of the activities of the performers who implement the functions is stable, and the more systematically they perform their duties, the greater the guarantee of the quality of the tasks. Therefore, the introduction of clarity in their work is possible due to the specific definition of their functional responsibilities in job descriptions and instructions for the implementation of procedures.

As noted above, the structure of the company is somewhat contradictory and needs to be changed. The specific changes to the structure will depend on the decisions made in the course of defining the strategy. The structure must be designed in an appropriate way for the success of the implementation of the strategy. For example, if in the course of concretizing the strategy, five areas of development are adopted as the main ones, then for each of them it is advisable to have a department, and the remaining departments can be reduced and other profitable projects can be implemented by the composition of working groups. The same rule applies to functional units - departments.

Such changes will require a lot of work and time, so they should be done gradually. A possible implementation sequence could be as follows.

First, it is necessary to determine for each of the areas of development of the holding of participants (subsidiaries, departments and departments) and the schemes of interaction between them. The definition can be carried out in the form of a scheme indicating the participants, the distribution of functions and the sequence of tasks. In carrying out this work, it is expedient to involve Vice-Presidents, heads of departments and subsidiaries.

The next step should be to inform all contractors about the adopted interaction schemes and perform work in accordance with the schemes, taking into account and timely making the necessary clarifications and additions.

After we get the first experience in performing work, it will be necessary to consolidate the established interaction schemes in the Regulations on the apparatus of JSC XXX, as well as the Regulations on divisions and relevant documents of enterprises.

Technical work on making changes and timely correction of documents can be entrusted to employees of the Personnel Department and the Office of Affairs. For example, employees of the Office of Affairs will be responsible for storing documents and agreeing on the changes made with the management, and the Office of Personnel will make changes and monitor their mutual consistency.

When changing the "Regulations on the apparatus of JSC XXX" it is necessary to perform the following work:

• describe the fundamental differences between departments and offices (performance of functions and control over the implementation of tasks);
• specify the rules of interaction with subsidiaries (depending on the conditions of control over them);
• list specifically all currently available divisions and subsidiaries, indicating their tasks (for departments), functions (for departments) and areas of activity (for subsidiaries);
• list the interactions of each department, department and enterprise in the implementation of basic procedures, with links to instructions in which these interactions are regulated in more detail.

Characterizing the company's management style, we noted the lack of coordination between the interests of various managers, as well as their areas of responsibility. As a result, it is advisable to change the management style in two ways.

Increase the alignment of interests leaders is a difficult task that can only be solved company owners. There are two approaches that will allow you to reconcile interests:

• change in property relations;
• change in the principles of remuneration of managers.

Change of property relations involves the transfer of a part of the holding's shares into the possession of managers, primarily of the highest level. Moreover, the transfer should be carried out by equal shares of all firms included in the holding, so that there is no shift of interests to the firm whose shares the head has more. This path is fraught with a certain risk of losing absolute control over the management of the company and subsidiaries, so at this stage it can hardly be used.

Changing the payment plan The labor of managers (Vice-Presidents, heads of departments, heads of subsidiaries) can be carried out by transferring a significant part of the payment in the form of profit sharing. And not so much in profit in its own direction, but in the total profit of the entire holding. In this way, the main reason for the disagreement between the interests of managers can be significantly "mitigated" and control over management can be maintained.

Increased consistency across areas of responsibility managers will be started already when changes are made to the management structure. However, one cannot dwell on the level of detail of responsibility that will be laid down in the structure, since the structure will determine the responsibility of departments and enterprises, and this is clearly not enough to achieve clarity of action.

The next possible step should be personification of responsibility for specific leaders. The specification of the responsibility of top-level managers should be carried out by them themselves in the form of formalized agreements on the distribution of powers. Naturally, the final "fixing" of authority and responsibility should remain with the President. For the success of the changes, it is advisable to inform all employees of the company about the adjustments made in the areas of responsibility of managers.

The personification of the responsibility of middle-level managers can be enshrined in documents of the following types: work orders, work plans, job descriptions of managers and contracts for their employment. The definition of responsibility is likely to be carried out by top-level managers together with middle-level managers, based on previously adopted management strategies and structures.

After specifying the areas of responsibility, top management, with the participation of the relevant functional units, should take control over its strict observance.

The practice of directly addressing the President with a request to point out to another leader his duties cannot be continued. Top management should be concerned with strategic management, as rightly noted in the President's report.

As noted at the beginning of Section 2, the success of project implementation is largely determined by the detail and validity of work plans.

To improve the organization of project implementation, the following recommendations can be made:

• It is obligatory to attach detailed plans to the order of the President on the commencement of work on the project, indicating specific executors and expected results.
• Formalize the assignment of tasks to direct executors by order of the responsible executor (Vice President or Head of Department).
• At the beginning of work on the project, each performer must draw up an individual plan, which clearly defines the results and the timing of their receipt.
• To carry out more detailed control over the implementation of individual stages of the detailed work plan by the supervising Vice President and the relevant departments.

It is advisable to assign control over the consistent implementation of the proposed scheme of work to one of the functional units, for example, the Office of Affairs or PES, as well as direct project managers.

The specification of the work performed by the functional units should be started already at the stage of changing the management structure. As noted in section 2.1, the results of the change in the management structure will be interaction schemes between divisions and revised Regulations on the management apparatus, as well as on departments and offices.

The schemes of interaction, as well as the Regulations on the departments, will specify the functional duties that each of the departments must perform. The next step should be the distribution of functional responsibilities among the performers within the department. The purpose of such work is to further strengthen the clarity of actions to implement the company's strategy, due to the fact that one of the drawbacks of management is the "freezing" of management orders due to insufficient specificity of the personal duties of the performers.

The functional responsibilities of performers are regulated in job descriptions, as well as in instructions for the implementation of procedures. Given the specifics of XXX JSC - a small number of employees in functional divisions, as well as the low priority of these changes, the revision of job descriptions can be carried out far from the first place. At the first stages (5-6 months), the distribution of functions between the performers can be carried out by the heads of departments on an operational basis, gradually regulating them in job descriptions.

More relevant is the task of regulating the main functional procedures. At present, its solution has already begun. For example, the rules for considering projects and the rules for document flow have been adopted. However, given the shortcomings in the organization of work, both of these documents need to be significantly improved. In particular, the rules for considering projects should be changed into a procedure for working with projects, expanding it by more detailed regulation of activities for analyzing the situation, drawing up a business plan, monitoring the implementation of work progress, and evaluating results. In addition, it is necessary in the near future to develop and approve the entire documentary procedure for such procedures as the provision and analysis of financial statements, as well as the collection and analysis of data on the state of the market.

5. CONCLUSION

Summing up, we can conclude that the company is in the stage of active development and formation as a financial and industrial group. JSC "XXX" within the framework of this FIG acts as a parent company, and employees working directly in the office of JSC "XXX" - the central office of the entire FIG.

In their work, the consultants did not touch upon the substantive aspects of the strategic goals of the company's development, but the results of diagnostics of the organization of management in the company and personnel policy show that in order to maintain the pace of its development, it is advisable to solve a number of problems in the near future, the essence of which is the need to modify the management system.

The old management methods that were effective during the period of "primitive capital accumulation", i.e. formation of the financial basis of the groups, show their low efficiency due to the increase in the number of managed objects. The essence of the former methods of management was the direct participation of top managers in solving most issues. The result of the practice of its application was the highest possible concentration of responsibility in a limited circle of top officials. The increase in the number of management objects associated with the development of the group requires the delegation of a significant part of the responsibility and authority to middle-level managers, due to the fact that all the attention of the first persons should be focused on determining the company's policy and solving strategic management issues.

Unfortunately, the old culture of managing state enterprises is not suitable for the new conditions; Western European and American cultures do not have a sufficient basis, both in cultural traditions and in trained personnel. The most optimal way out is the gradual formation of our own management culture, taking into account Russian specifics and world achievements in this area.

The results of the diagnostics, first of all, showed the organization's low susceptibility to management influences.

The main factors causing a decrease in the effectiveness of control actions are:

• The lack of a unified vision of the "image of the future", i.e. understanding by employees of the direction of the company's development, as well as strategic and tactical goals.
• Underestimated coherence and clarity of actions of employees, compared to what should be for the successful implementation of strategic development plans.
• Too high level of satisfaction of the company's employees with the current state, which is reflected in the tendency to stagnation, i.e. hinder the development of the company.
• A relatively high level of resistance to constructive changes in the organization, which is associated with a large number of existing privileges and the fear of losing them during the reorganization of work.

As a result of a detailed analysis, the main reasons for the negative severity of factors that reduce the effectiveness of control actions were identified, and measures were outlined that should lead to the optimization of corporate activities.

As the main reasons for the negative severity of factors that reduce the effectiveness of control actions, the following should be noted:

• Excessive diversification of the company's activities in the market, which leads to a partial "dispersal" of funds and the loss of operational control over each direction and project.
• Insufficiently flexible system of stimulating the work of employees, which leads to a shift in the goals of a significant part of the employees from the result of work to the process.
• Disorganization of the organizational structure and a high level of concentration of responsibility.
• A number of deficiencies in managing the progress of projects and performing the most important functions (such as analysis, planning and overall coordination)

The proposed measures to optimize the company's activities consist in purposeful and systematic work, both to eliminate the causes and to change the attitude of employees to the performance of their duties. The following steps should be taken as a matter of priority:

• Concretize the company's strategy, bring it to the attention of employees and fundamentally change the attitude towards it.
• Specify the structure and style of company management, as well as change the attitude of employees to responsibility for the results of their work.
• Make more detailed and thorough control over the performance of their duties by employees, as well as change the attitude of employees to work with documents.

The specific composition of priority measures should be determined at the beginning of the next stage of consultation - the design of changes. Due to the fact that rather fundamental issues for the company's activities should be resolved here, for example, the development strategy is specified, a significant part of the company's managers should be involved in this work.

APPENDIX 1

Analysis of the effectiveness of control actions

When analyzing the effectiveness of control actions, we used the formula of the consulting firm Informles Consulting, which has long proved its practical suitability. In accordance with this formula, changes in the organization are effective if the level of resistance to change on the part of employees and managers of the organization is less than the product of such components as the level of employees' understanding of the future of the organization, the level of clarity in actions to achieve the future and the level of dissatisfaction with the existing the state of affairs.

And = H x R x BH
Wed x Sp

I - the final assessment of the direction of changes (can be in the range from 0 to + , but almost rarely exceeds 2).

H - the level of employees' dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs in the organization (measured by assessing the proportion of employees who have a desire to change something in the organization - a range from 0 to 1);

OB - the level of unity of ideas among employees of the organization about its future state (measured by assessing the share of concurring opinions of employees about the future of the organization - a range from 0 to 1);

BH - the level of unity in the ideas of employees about the actions that will lead to the future state (measured by assessing the share of concurring opinions about planned actions, relationships, expected results - range from 0 to 1);

Ср - the level of resistance to changes on the part of the leaders of the organization (measured by an assessment of the proportion of the leaders of the organization for whom changes can lead to an undesirable increase in workload and a decrease in status - range from 0 to 1);

Cn - the level of resistance to change on the part of subordinates (measured by an assessment of the proportion of employees in the organization for whom changes can lead to an undesirable increase in workload - range from 0 to 1);

When using this formula, we can say that the changes are successful and purposeful, if I> 1 and lead to destabilization of the state of the organization and reduce its effectiveness, if I

Accordingly, direct control actions on the organization by top management lead to positive changes, subject to the following conditions:

• A significant part (at least 60%) of employees are not satisfied with their position in the organization and they want official, professional and material growth.
• The management of the organization clearly defines the strategic and tactical guidelines for its development, communicates them to employees without distortion, and employees accept these goals as not contradicting personal ones. That is, at least 70% of the personnel have a common idea of ​​​​strategic and tactical goals.
• Employees of the organization understand which sequence of actions will lead to the achievement of the goals of the organization and do not have fundamental disagreements about their participation in the implementation of these actions. At least 70% of employees clearly understand their tasks and the content of work to achieve them.
• Leaders' resistance to change does not block the essence of management actions. The number of managers who do not see their personal interest in the results of changes does not exceed 50%.
• The resistance of employees to change does not lead to a formal degeneration of control actions. The number of employees formally related to their duties and satisfied with the current state of affairs does not exceed 50%.

The data collected during the first consultation session was evaluated according to the above formula. Due to the fact that the results of the assessment showed the prerequisites for insufficient effectiveness of control actions, a detailed analysis of the causes of such a state was carried out. The analysis of the causes was carried out on the basis of the problems that were noted by the company's employees during the survey and interviews.

Satisfaction with the current state of affairs

According to the results of the survey, 78% of the interviewed employees and 56% of senior managers answered that they are quite satisfied with the way the company is managed. The most commonly cited arguments were: the ability of senior management to choose promising business areas, their intuition and ability to find a way out of difficult situations, a friendly, "spiritual" atmosphere in the company, general stability and stability of the position, which gives confidence in maintaining a job with a sufficient level of pay .

Such a high percentage of satisfaction with the current state of affairs in the company (on average 67% of respondents) indicates that the majority of employees are generally satisfied with the current situation. They are satisfied with the content of the work, its intensity, pay, supervisors, relationship patterns, and so on. With such an attitude to the successes achieved, a person has a desire not to change anything, but to preserve it.

Thus, the parameter "dissatisfaction" from the "formula for the success of changes" can be estimated at approximately 0.33. This value is slightly more than the minimum allowable for successful implementation of changes. As a rule, if the level of dissatisfaction is below 0.2 (less than 20% of employees are not satisfied with the current state of affairs), then any changes are generally doomed to failure.

The diagnosed indicator of the level of dissatisfaction (0.33) requires very high indicators in terms of the level of unity of the image of the future and the level of coherence and clarity of actions in order for the change process to lead to the expected end result - an increase in the efficiency of the organization.

To offer options for a positive increase in the level of dissatisfaction, an additional analysis of its causes was carried out. The following were identified as the most significant:

• general stability and security of the position of the company's employees;
• evaluation of employees' performance by the process, not by the result;
• information isolation of the company's employees within it.

The characterization of each of the above causes is discussed in more detail in the subsections below.

Stability and security of the position

The main reason for the high level of satisfaction is the stability and security of the position of most of the employees of the central office. The relatively low level of staff turnover in the central office in recent years confirms this assessment.

Consideration of the particular facts of dismissal and displacement of employees shows that they are mainly dismissed by lower-level performers who do not have significant work experience in the company and have not managed to establish themselves as professionally competent and loyal employees. If there is a dismissal of managers or employees with significant experience, then the main reason is insufficient loyalty to the company.

In relation to employees who show an adequate level of loyalty, layoffs are not actually practiced, but, as a rule, the method of transfer to another position or to a subsidiary is used.

The satisfaction of the company's employees is mainly based on "confidence in the future." Their experience shows that no matter how they work, they are guaranteed a job and a high salary by modern Russian standards. If there are any difficulties, then the talent and connections of the President help to get away from them, so there is nothing to worry about, you just need to believe and work.

Evaluation of employees' performance by process, not by result

An analysis of the remuneration system, in particular the distribution system for additional material support (SME), shows that it is also the cause of an overestimated level of satisfaction.

Prior to April 1997, the amount of payment was not linked to individual performance. If, following the results of the company's work, there was a decrease in the value of DMO, then it was proportionally distributed to all employees in all divisions. Bonuses were carried out individually, but quite rarely and for very serious merits.

Such a system of remuneration implies the orientation of employees on the process of performing work, and not on the result obtained.

In conditions of large volumes of work, the individual role of a particular employee is noticeable only if he makes serious mistakes or gets outstanding results. Such results cannot be obtained permanently. For example, new accounting specialists were rewarded for the first case of prompt and timely preparation of the annual report for 1995, but the following year, such quality of work already became the norm and there was no special bonus. As a result, employees tend to reduce the number of errors, and this almost always leads to a general decrease in activity, initiative and, most importantly, a shift in work goals from its result to the process. The logic of an employee in such a situation (usually unconscious) is approximately the following: “The main thing is not to make mistakes, but the fact that the result will eventually be received at the wrong time, with insufficient quality or not received at all, no one will personally blame me, since I did everything right."

The orientation of the payment system to process characteristics almost always causes a high level of satisfaction of the employees of the organization due to the fact that it allows you to work with a relatively low level of intensity. There is always an excuse that the employee did everything that was needed if he did not make obvious mistakes.

At present, a new regulation on the distribution of DMOs has been adopted, according to which wages are more differentiated. So, for each top-level manager, the amount of 80% is guaranteed, and another 20% can be issued in the form of a bonus based on the President's assessment of the results of his work. Rank-and-file employees and mid-level and lower-level managers can be charged up to 30% of the payment of DMO, but only for specific violations. Moreover, each case of a decrease in DMO must be considered by a special "Commission for Consideration of Issues of Additional Material Remuneration."

The new DMO distribution scheme is a definite step towards improving the efficiency of the company, as it implies an increase in the interest of the company's employees in the quality of their work. However, it cannot significantly affect the fundamental change in the attitude of employees to work, i.e. reorienting them from the process to the result, since the new scheme does not include a mechanism for evaluating group or individual results according to objective criteria.

Information closure

The third reason for the high level of employee satisfaction is their information isolation. Moreover, isolation is characteristic not only within the company, but also within departments. Systematization of their own and other people's mistakes, information on the use of best practices, data on the state of the market and competitors are collected by each employee almost independently, maximum within one unit.

So, for example, so far only a number of financial parameters have been defined, the provision, processing and storage of which is carried out without fail. Data on the state of the market, available resources, products manufactured by subsidiaries (goods or services), sales opportunities are not collected and analyzed systematically.

Orders of analytical reviews on the state of the market in specialized firms are not practiced. As a rule, they learn about them from magazine and newspaper publications, that is, a little later than it was possible and most often in a clearly abbreviated form. In addition, there is no practice of continuous professional development of employees at various courses and seminars, where they can freely get information about new experience, expected problems, etc.

The practice of information isolation comes from the specifics of the company's activities at the first stages of its development - a priority focus on government agencies. However, taking into account the change in the direction of the holding's development towards minimizing dependence on the political situation in the country, as was said by the President at an expanded meeting of the holding's leaders following the results of 1997, this ideology should be corrected.

Information isolation, that is, the lack of practice of comparing one's work results with the results of colleagues and competitors, also leads to high satisfaction and reduces the ability of employees to accept innovations.

Drawing a conclusion about the assessment of the level of employee satisfaction, it can be noted that the holding has been developing according to the paternalistic principle for a long time.

In accordance with this principle, any person who has fallen into the sphere of influence of the leader and confirmed his personal loyalty is firmly fixed in the organization. His line of work may be closed, he may show insufficient ability to fulfill his duties, but he will still not be fired, but will be rearranged from place to place until he finds his niche in which his abilities will be maximized.

The paternalistic approach fundamentally does not contain anything wrong. It is evidence of the presence of a cohesive team, focused on the leader, and ready to implement any of his strategic and tactical plans. Its main advantage is the high level of loyalty of the employees of the organization. However, this approach implies the maximum concentration of power in one hand, and, therefore, requires increased attention to the detail of managing subordinates and can lead to a loss of control over the situation, with an increase in the scale of the organization. Obviously, it was the realization of this danger that led to a change in personnel policy and the involvement of high-level professionals in leading positions, both in the central office and in subsidiaries over the past two years.

The company's practice of evaluating the activities of employees by the process, and not by the result, information isolation, general stability and security of the situation, combined with the paternalistic principle of building a management system, largely determine the insufficiently high level of staff dissatisfaction to ensure the success of changes. The fact that 67% of employees are generally satisfied with the current situation indicates that XXX JSC is not ready for innovations. Therefore, we can make a preliminary conclusion that it is impossible to implement a program for the transition to strategic management in a company without a targeted and differentiated impact on the staff's susceptibility to innovation.

For example, the highest percentage of employee satisfaction is observed in the following divisions: Economic Department, Business Administration and Central Accounting, that is, in predominantly functional divisions. These divisions do not have a decisive influence on the success of the changes, especially in the Economic Department. However, the possibilities for the employees of the Department of Affairs to reduce the effectiveness of managerial influence are quite large.

To increase the effectiveness of changes, it is advisable to take a number of measures to change the level of employee dissatisfaction by increasing the interest of staff in identifying and solving urgent problems in various areas of the company's life.

The change in the level of dissatisfaction should be carried out in accordance with the analysis of existing problems and the forecast of the effectiveness of managerial influences on individual problem areas and the organization as a whole.

The conducted content analysis of the reasons causing dissatisfaction of the personnel today showed that the most significant problem area is the personnel policy of the company - 26% of those who noted the presence of problems in JSC "XXX". Next in order of decreasing employee dissatisfaction is a set of problems related to operational management (23%), then - to the administrative and functional structure of the company (19%), top-level management (14%), and the definition of strategic goals (12%).

The lowest percentage of problems was identified on issues of interaction with subsidiaries (6%). In addition, this problem area turned out to be separate and weakly connected with others. Probably, this fact is due to the lack of information among the main part of the personnel about the state, development prospects, status and place of many subsidiaries in the overall management structure of the Holding.

The distribution of problem areas shows that with an overall high satisfaction of the staff, the most significant are those problems that people face most often in their daily work. Measures to change the personnel policy and operational management will increase the interest of the staff in identifying problems in the structure and procedures of the company's management. The involvement of employees in solving the company's pressing problems is possible through a systematic impact on the most significant problem areas, for example, the transition in the system of material incentives from payment for the labor process to payment for the result.

Analysis of the level of coordination of actions of company employees

The coherence of the actions of the company's employees means the absence of contradictions between the way the employee himself understands his duties and the way his colleagues and managers understand them.

The presence of contradictions in the understanding of one's own and other people's duties leads to a variety of shortcomings in the work of the organization, for example:

• in the emergence of areas of irresponsibility;
• in unjustified duplication of duties;
• in the loss of time to obtain the necessary information, too long time for consideration of documents;
• delay in decision-making due to untimely receipt of the necessary information, etc.

Area of ​​irresponsibility arises when, during joint work by several specialists, each employee considers the performance of actions at the intersection of duties to be the work of another and it is not performed by anyone.

Unjustified duplication of duties arises when different employees or departments perform the same work without knowing it. Unjustified duplication leads to a decrease in efficiency due to the commission of a large number of technical actions, for example, to collect information. Duplication may be justified if it is necessary to reduce operational risks or increase objectivity in assessing the scope of projects.

Consistency assessment was carried out by the method of expert assessment of coincidences between how the employee describes his duties and how his colleagues and managers understand his duties.

During the survey and interview, each employee was asked the following questions:

• what are the functions and tasks of his unit, as well as his duties, functions and tasks;
• with which departments and employees he interacts;
• what are the functions and tasks of the departments and employees with whom it interacts.

The results of the questionnaire and interviews were then processed by consultants to determine the percentage of agreement in the assessments of responsibilities, functions and tasks.

With this assessment methodology, the maximum level of consistency can be diagnosed in cases where the detailed description of duties, functions or tasks that an employee gives during a conversation with a consultant fully matches the description of his duties that are given by colleagues and a manager. The presence of the maximum level of coordination of actions implies that each employee does his job, understanding its role and place in the final result of the company's activities. In combination with the unity of the "image of the future", this way of doing work implies the well-coordinated work of one team to achieve common goals, which is always the best option for the development of the organization. In the absence of unity of the "image of the future" - at least a reduction in the labor costs of personnel.

As a result of data processing questionnaires and interviews, the following data were obtained:

• coincidence in the description of the content of the activities of other units is approximately 67%, i.e. with such a probability, the description of the functions and tasks of the unit by its employees did not differ from the description made by employees from the adjacent one;
• coincidence in the description of the content of the activities of colleagues from their department is also 67% on average, i.e. with such a probability, the description of their functions and tasks by the employee himself did not differ from the description of his colleagues in the unit;
• coincidence in the description of the content of the activities of colleagues from an adjacent unit is on average 50%, i.e. in half of the cases, the description of their functions and tasks by the employee himself did not differ from the description of his functions and tasks by colleagues from related departments.

The level of consistency was calculated as the average share of concurring opinions of employees on responsibilities, functions and tasks and amounted to 0.61.

In accordance with the formula for the effectiveness of changes, this value of the "consistency level" parameter is almost normal for an effective control action. However, taking into account the low values ​​already noted in sections 2.1 and 2.2 for the parameters "level of dissatisfaction" and "unity of vision of the image of the future", it is not high enough for a positive direction of changes.

In order to offer options for improving the coordination of actions, an analysis of the causes of disagreements was carried out. The following were identified as the most significant:

• insufficient specificity of the organizational structure of company management;
• a high level of concentration of responsibility for the results of work, i.e. the concentration of all responsibility in the hands of a very limited circle of leaders;
• lack of regulation of the content and sequence of work on projects;
• insufficiently clear organization of information interaction.

Conclusion

The value of the indicator of coherence or clarity of actions of employees is not high enough to carry out successful changes. It is 0.61 in general for the administrative apparatus of JSC "XXX".

The main reason for the mismatch of actions is the lack of understanding by the company's management that it has already outgrown the level at which effective management can be carried out by the direct intervention of top management in every problem and every issue.

Strengthening the coherence of actions can go in the following way:

• First, it is necessary to delegate responsibility from top to bottom, i.e. its transfer from top managers to middle managers, and then to specialists of departments.
• Secondly, during the implementation of this, it is necessary to specify the structure of the company's management (organizational structure), as well as the procedures for performing work and information interaction.

Consider the main types of organizational structures.

Linear organizational structure. The simplest organizational structure is linear. Its main principles are: all management functions are concentrated with the head of the enterprise, direct subordination of personnel to the head with a control range of 5-10 people (depending on the situation), hierarchy and unity of command, universalism of the line manager.

Fig.1. Line structure diagram

Such a structure is simple and economical, provides ultimate responsibility, makes it possible to maintain a balance of power and responsibility. All responsibilities and powers are clearly distributed here, and therefore conditions are created for an operational decision-making process and maintaining the necessary discipline.

However, the linear structure has a major drawback: no manager can be a universal specialist and cover all aspects of the enterprise.

Such a structure is focused only on the implementation of current tasks, it is characterized by a lack of flexibility, a tendency to bureaucracy, the possibility of distorting information when transferring from one level of management to another.

Functional structure. With a functional structure, the heads of functional departments specialize in a particular area.

activities and are responsible for the implementation of the relevant functions, directly give orders to production units on issues within their competence. The main advantages of the functional structure are the direct impact of specialists on production, a high level of management specialization, in-depth development and justification of decisions made. The main disadvantage is the complexity and inefficiency (many divisions, and consequently, control channels).

Rice. 2. Scheme of the functional structure.

Experience shows that it is expedient to use the functional structure in those enterprises that produce a relatively limited range of products, operate in stable external conditions and require the solution of standard management tasks to ensure their functioning. Examples of this kind are enterprises operating in the metallurgical, rubber industry, in industries that produce raw materials.

Linear-staff organizational structure. The growth of the complexity and scale of production, the differentiation of management functions led to the emergence of a linear-staff organizational structure.

Under the leaders, "headquarters" are created, that is, management units made up of specialists who perform certain functions (accounting, control, etc.) and are not directly responsible for decision-making and production results.

The line-staff structure makes it possible to solve management problems more skillfully, but creates the danger of substitution of line managers in the decision-making process.

The diversification of production and the specialization of management led to the emergence of combined structures, the most common of which was the linear-functional one. It combines the main advantages of both a linear and a functional system, ensures the development

specialization of management activities, while maintaining the authority of line managers responsible for production results.

Due to its advantages, the linear-functional management structure has become widespread, being practically the only option for organizing enterprises in our country. It fully corresponded to the command-administrative principles and management methods. Its advantages are realized in conditions of stable technology, mass and large-scale production.

In conditions of macroeconomic instability, rapidly changing preferences and values ​​of consumers, competition, with the predominance of economic methods of management, the advantages of a linear functional structure are not so obvious, and the disadvantages become more tangible. These include: the slow movement of information and, accordingly, decision-making; conflict of interests of line and functional managers, which affects not only the speed, but also the quality of decisions made; narrow specialization of middle managers, limiting their horizons and rejecting innovations; the desire of managers to reduce risk and not take on more responsibility when making managerial decisions.

The functional structure is not suitable for enterprises with a wide or frequently changing product range, as well as for enterprises operating on a large international scale, simultaneously in several markets in countries with different socio-economic systems and legislation.

divisional structure. Currently, in industrialized countries, there is a departure from a linear-functional structure (the classic type of this organization has been preserved only in small and medium-sized enterprises operating in traditional business areas).

Among large companies, the divisional type of organizational structure prevails. The factors that led to the transition to this type of organizational structure include: the growth of business diversification, the specialization of management, the international division of labor, the growth of awareness, self-esteem and expectations of middle managers, etc.

Rice. 3. Scheme of the divisional structure

The divisional organizational structure is characterized by decentralization of management functions: production units have autonomous structures that perform the main management functions (accounting, planning, financial management, marketing, etc.). This allows production units to solve independent tasks related to the development, production and marketing of their own products.

At the same time, the top management of the enterprise can focus on setting and solving strategic problems.

The divisional structure differs from the linear-functional one by greater flexibility, which ensures the speed of decision-making and is the main advantage in a rapidly changing market environment and technological innovations.

1. Stability (most effective in a stable environment) 2. Savings on management costs 3. Specialization and competence 4. Quick resolution of simple problems that are within the competence of one functional service 5. Focus on stable technology and an established market 6. Focus on price competition1. Flexibility (most effective in a dynamic environment) 2. Efficiency in decision-making 3. Interdisciplinary approach 4. Quick resolution of complex cross-functional problems 5. Orientation to new markets and technologies 6. Orientation to non-price competition

The structuring of the organization by departments is usually carried out according to one of three criteria: by products or services provided (product specialization); by consumer orientation (consumer specialization); by serviced territories (regional specialization).

Organization of divisions by product principle (Fig. 4) is one of the main forms of divisional structure, and at present most of the largest manufacturers of consumer goods with diversified products use the product structure of the organization.

Rice. 4. Scheme of the product management structure

When using a divisional-product management structure, departments are created for the main products. The functions of managing the production and marketing of a product (service) are transferred to one person responsible for this type of product. Heads of auxiliary services report to him.

Some businesses produce a wide range of products or services that meet the needs of several large consumer groups or markets. Each group or market has well-defined specific needs. If two or more of these elements become particularly important to an enterprise, it may use a customer-oriented organizational structure in which all departments are grouped around certain customer groups.

Rice. 5. Diagram of the organizational structure focused on the consumer

This type of organizational structure is used in rather specific areas, for example, in the field of education, where recently, along with traditional general education programs, special departments have emerged for adult education, advanced training, etc. An example of the active use of a consumer-oriented organizational structure is commercial banks.

The main groups of consumers using their services are individual clients (individuals), pension funds, trust companies, international financial organizations. Customer-oriented organizational structures are equally characteristic of wholesalers and retailers.

If the activity of the enterprise covers large geographical areas, especially on an international scale, then it may be appropriate to build an organizational structure according to the territorial principle, i.e., at the location of its divisions (Fig. 6). The regional structure facilitates the solution of problems related to local legislation, customs and consumer needs. This approach simplifies both the communication of the enterprise with customers and the communication between the company's divisions.

Rice. 6. Diagram of the regional organizational structure

A well-known example of regional organizational structures is the sales divisions of large enterprises. Among them, one can often find divisions whose activities cover very large geographical areas. In turn, they are divided into smaller units, and those into even smaller blocks.

The divisional structure also has very significant drawbacks. Among them are the contradictions of interests of individual departments and the entire enterprise, duplication of management functions and, consequently, the growth of the administrative apparatus and the uneconomical structure. With the growth of the enterprise, these shortcomings can lead to loss of control.

Matrix organizational structure. matrix organizational

the structure arises in conditions of diversified production, when an enterprise develops and produces several heterogeneous types of products, implements several investment or innovative projects, etc. It is a synthesis of linear functional and divisional structures.

Rice. 7. Matrix diagram of the organizational structure of the enterprise

General instructions to performers are given by line managers, and specific instructions are given by project managers. The latter are decision makers, endowed with special powers, accumulate and interpret information received from functional units, exercise control over the progress of the project. Orders of line managers concerning the work on this project are coordinated with them in writing. The advantages of such a structure are flexibility, dynamism, guarantees for the preservation and expansion of technological capital and innovative activity.

The personal interest of the project manager in his success, due to such motives as the desire for professional growth and the identification of goals, stimulates interactivity, i.e. team cohesion.

Principles of intrapreneurship (internal venture). A kind of flexible organizational structure arises on the principles of intrapreneurship. The essence of intrapreneurship is that a group of people who are confident in the future success of a promising project receives relative autonomy in working on it. Inside the enterprise, conditions are created that imitate entrepreneurial activity in small business: independence in organizing work, in selecting a group of project participants and entering the market. It also means the transfer of ownership (or disposal) of certain resources, the creation of prerequisites for a high level of remuneration in case of project success, the possibility of using employees' own funds in the labor process, complete exemption from formal organizational and bureaucratic procedures for a predetermined period of time.

Depending on the risk intrapreneurs take on, the following reward schemes can be used.

The intrapreneur continues to receive a salary plus bonus bonuses for developing the idea.

The salary of the intrapreneur is frozen at the level that existed before the organization of the internal venture, until the project begins to make a profit. Then, in addition to wages, the intrapreneur begins to receive bonus bonuses (in practice, up to 150% of wages).

The intrapreneur participates in the investment in his enterprise through deductions from his own wages or other sources, and subsequently receives a large share of the profits from the project if it is successful.

In addition to the funds of the enterprise, internal ventures can also attract external sources of financing, issue "securities" that are circulated within the enterprise (the so-called "imaginary" shares).

Intrapreneurship as a form of organization of the enterprise is attractive because it allows you to apply the principles of risky financing to increase the innovative activity of the company.

The obvious disadvantage of such a structure is its uneconomical nature: internal ventures require significant resources and significant risk. In addition, the number of semi-autonomous operations allowed within the enterprise is limited - otherwise there is a threat of loss of control - as well as the number of employees capable of becoming venture leaders is limited.

Depending on the nature of the links between the departments of the organization, the following types of organizational structures are distinguished: linear, functional, linear-functional (headquarters) and matrix.

(Figure 2.3) is one of the simplest organizational management structures. The scheme is built on the principle of "the result is a triangle." It is characterized by the fact that at the head of each structural unit there is a single leader, endowed with all powers and exercising sole leadership of subordinate employees and concentrating all management functions in his hands.

With linear management, each link and each subordinate has one leader, through whom all control commands pass through one single channel. Evaluation of performance results in a linear management structure has the form of a triangle. In this case, management links are responsible for the results of all activities of managed objects. We are talking about the allocation of managers per object, each of which performs all types of work, develops and makes decisions related to the management of this object.

Rice. 2.3.

Since in the linear management structure decisions are passed along the chain “from top to bottom”, and the head of the lower level of management is subordinate to the head of a higher level above him, a kind of hierarchy of the heads of the organization is formed (for example, site foreman, engineer, shop manager, director of the enterprise). Schematically, the linear control structure can be represented in the form of fig. 2.4.

Rice. 2.4.

In this case, the principle of unity of command applies, the essence of which is that subordinates carry out the orders of only one leader. A higher management body does not have the right to give orders to any performers, bypassing their immediate superior. As can be seen from fig. 2.4, in a linear management structure, each subordinate has a boss, and each boss has several subordinates. Such a structure functions in small organizations at the lowest level of management (section, brigade, etc.).

In a linear structure, the organization's management system is assembled according to production characteristics, taking into account the degree of concentration of production, technological features, the range of products, etc.

Examples of enterprises with a linear organizational structure can be, for example, for large enterprises operating in a fairly stable external environment, "Komi Energy Retail Company" (Fig. 2.5), for state organizations "Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS)" of Russia (Fig. 2.6 ).

As can be seen from fig. 2.5, at the head of the organization is a single leader, each unit has a chief through whom all management teams pass. As a result, the management structure of the Komi Energy Retail Company fully complies with the main criteria of linear management.

The linear organizational structure of management has its advantages and disadvantages.

Advantages:

• unity and clarity of command;
• coordination of actions of performers;
• ease of management (one communication channel);

Rice. 2.5.

The management structure of the organization "Komi Energy Retail Company"

Rice. 2.B. The management structure of the organization "Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS)" of Russia

• clear responsibility;
• efficiency in decision-making;
• personal responsibility of the head for the final results of the activities of his unit.

Disadvantages:

• high demands on the leader, who must be comprehensively prepared to provide effective leadership in all management functions;
• lack of links for planning and preparing decisions;
• information overload, many contacts with subordinates, superiors and shift structures;
• difficult connections between authorities;
• concentration of power at the top.

Serious shortcomings of the linear structure to a certain extent can be eliminated by the functional structure. Functional management is carried out by a certain set of units specialized in the performance of specific types of work necessary for decision-making in the linear management system.

The idea is that the performance of individual functions on specific issues is entrusted to specialists, i.e. each governing body (or executor) is specialized in the performance of certain types of activities. In an organization, as a rule, specialists of the same profile are combined into specialized structural units (departments), for example, a marketing department, a planning department, accounting, etc. Thus, the overall task of managing an organization, starting from the middle level, is divided according to the functional criterion into several elements. Hence the name - functional management structure.

Rice. 2.7.

Functional management exists along with linear management, which creates a double subordination of performers. As can be seen from fig. 2.7, instead of universal managers who must understand and perform all management functions, a staff of specialists appears who are highly competent in their field and are responsible for a certain area (for example, planning and forecasting). Such functional specialization of the management apparatus significantly increases the effectiveness of the organization.

An example of an enterprise with a functional organizational structure can be, for example, StroyHolding LLC, whose general director has his own analytical department (Fig. 2.8). As can be seen from the figure, in the LLC StroyHolding organization, specialists of the same profile are combined into separate divisions. This division can significantly improve the efficiency of company management.

Like a linear structure, a functional structure has its advantages and disadvantages. Advantages:

• high competence of specialists responsible for the implementation of specific functions;
• release of line managers from solving some special issues;
• standardization, formalization and programming of phenomena and processes;
• exclusion of duplication and parallelism in the performance of managerial functions;
• reducing the need for generalists. Disadvantages:
• excessive interest in the implementation of the goals and objectives of "their" units;
• difficulties in maintaining constant relationships between various functional services;
• emergence of tendencies of excessive centralization;
• lengthy decision-making process;
• relatively frozen organizational form, with difficulty responding to changes.

The disadvantages of linear and functional management structures are largely eliminated linear functional structures(Fig. 2.9).

With such a management structure, the full power is assumed by the line manager, who heads a certain team. In developing specific issues and preparing appropriate decisions, programs, plans, he is assisted by a special apparatus consisting of functional units (departments, departments, bureaus, etc.).

Rice. 2.8.

Rice. 2.9.

Thus, the linear-functional structure includes special units under line managers that help them carry out the tasks of the organization.

The main scope of the linear-functional organizational structure is large state structures, for example, the Federal Migration Service (FMS) (Fig. 2.10), in which a number of units carry out organizational and methodological management of the activities of the territorial bodies of the FMS of Russia.

Advantages of a linear functional structure:

• deeper preparation of decisions and plans related to the specialization of employees;
• release of the chief line manager from in-depth problem analysis;
• opportunity to attract consultants and experts. Disadvantages of a linear-functional structure:
• lack of close relationships and interaction at a horizontal level between production departments;
• insufficiently clear responsibility, since the one who prepares the decision, as a rule, does not participate in its implementation;
• overly developed system of interaction along the vertical: subordination according to the management hierarchy, i.e. tendency towards over-centralization.

The matrix control structure is created by combining the structures of two

Rice. 2.10.

types: linear and program-target. During the functioning of the program-target structure, the control action is aimed at fulfilling a certain target task, in the solution of which all parts of the organization participate.

As can be seen from fig. 2.11, special headquarters bodies (persons or a group of persons) are introduced into the established linear-functional structure (temporarily or permanently), which coordinate the existing horizontal connections for the implementation of a specific program (project), while maintaining the vertical relations inherent in this structure. The main part of the workers involved in the implementation of the program is subordinate to at least two managers, but on different issues.

With a matrix management structure, the program (project) manager does not work with specialists, but with line managers to whom they are directly subordinate, and determines what and when should be done for a specific program. Linear

Rice. 2.11.

leaders decide who and how will perform this or that work.

An example of a matrix organizational structure of an enterprise can be, for example, the organizational structure of a university (Fig. 2.12).

The matrix structure also has its advantages and disadvantages. Advantages of the matrix structure:

• the ability to quickly respond and adapt to changing internal and external conditions of the organization;
• increasing the creative activity of administrative and managerial personnel through the formation of program units that actively interact with functional structures;
• rational use of personnel due to the specialization of various types of labor activity;
• increase in motivation of activity due to decentralization of management and strengthening of democratic principles of leadership;
• strengthening control over individual tasks of the project;
• reducing the burden on high-level managers by delegating a certain part of the authority;
• increasing personal responsibility for the implementation of the program as a whole and its constituent elements.

Disadvantages of the matrix structure:

Complex structure of subordination, as a result of which there are problems associated with setting the priorities of tasks and allocating time for their implementation;

Rice. 2.12.

• the presence of an unhealthy competitive spirit among program managers;
• the need for constant monitoring of the balance of power between the tasks of management by objectives;
• difficulty in acquiring the skills needed to work on the new program.

Matrix management structures, which supplemented the linear functional organizational structure, opened up a qualitatively new direction in the development of the most flexible and active program-targeted management structures. They are aimed at raising the creative initiative of managers and specialists and identifying opportunities for a significant increase in production efficiency.

test questions

• 1. What are the goals of the organization's management?
• 2. What are the tasks of the organization's management?
• 3. What are the functions of the organization's management?
• 4. What is the management activity in the organization?
• 5. What is the essence of the vertical division of labor?
• 6. What is the essence of the horizontal division of labor?
• 7. What is the essence of the functional division of labor?
• 8. What types of organizational structures do you know?
• 9. What are the advantages of a matrix organizational structure?
• 10. What are the advantages of a linear functional organizational structure?

We have successively examined the structures of the controlled (production) system and the control system, which, from the point of view of cybernetics, are parts of the enterprise as a control system. Now we have to combine both structures (organizational-production and organizational management structure) into a single whole (Fig. 7.6.1.):

Rice. 7.6.1.

Organizational structure of the enterprise - it is a synthesis of the structure of production and the structure of management.

The production system has several structures that are formed at the levels (stages) of production and have their own distinctive features. For example, the organizational and production structure of a workshop consists of production sites, and the organizational and production structure of sections consists of workplaces of labor process performers.

The control system, which reflects the structuring of production, is also characterized by a plurality of structures that provide management of objects at various levels of the hierarchical system. So the shop (and moreover, each shop separately) has its own organizational management structure, not at all similar to the management structure that the production site has.

Organizational structure diagram. The structure of the organization and its parts (elements) is described by a “scheme language”, which serves as a visual means of reflecting on paper all structural cells (links, divisions), levels of the production (and management) hierarchy and subordination links.

There are two types of such connections:

Linear connection;

functional connection.

The linear communication channel serves line managers (director, his deputies, heads of shops, production foremen, foremen). Through this channel (line) direct and feedback communication is carried out. The functional communication channel serves functional managers (heads of services, departments, sectors, etc.) and specialists (technologists, designers, economists, lawyers, etc.).

The construction of an organizational structure diagram is still not strictly regulated and therefore there are various diagram figures both in a vertical (more compact) and in a horizontal (stretched) image. However, the structure diagram should clearly reflect the stages (levels) of production and management with the links (cells) located on them. In most cases, the organizational structure of an enterprise has a three-level structure (Fig. 7.6.2.):

Rice. 7.6.2.

To provide a schematic representation of the organizational structure of the enterprise, you can offer a kind of layout consisting of lines on which there are links, divisions, cells:

The development of a diagram of the organizational structure of an enterprise is a creative process that has certain technical difficulties when it comes to a large enterprise with hundreds of divisions, links that must be placed on the diagram in compliance with the indicated rules. Most often, in this case, the diagram shows the management structure at the highest level (director, his deputies, services of chief specialists, departments, bureaus) and designates a line of workshops without deploying their structure, a diagram of which is drawn up in each workshop.

For a small enterprise, the development of an organizational chart is not a technical difficulty. Such a diagram usually shows all, without exception, divisions, links, cells that take place in the enterprise, in compliance with the rules for their presentation on the organizational structure diagram (break lines, steps, linear and functional connections). The scheme of the organizational structure of the enterprise not only represents a clear picture of its structure, but also serves as the most important object of study, analysis and rationalization of the current structure.

On fig. 7.6.3 and 7.6.4 are given as an example of a diagram of the organizational structures of an enterprise and a workshop. The vertical representation of the structures in this case is explained solely by the author's technical considerations (placement of the diagram on one sheet). With such an image, the levels of production and management are clearly visible.

Achieving high performance results is what all companies strive for without exception. However, without a well-established organizational structure, the enterprise runs the risk of failing.

In this article, we will analyze what the organizational structure of enterprise management is and how to choose it correctly.

Features of choosing the organizational structure of the enterprise

The organizational structure is the basis for performing the functions of enterprise management. So, it is understood as the composition, subordination, interaction and distribution of work between individual employees and entire departments.

In simple terms, the organizational structure of an enterprise is a set of departments, as well as managers, headed by a general director. Her choice depends on many factors:

• age of the organization (the younger the company, the simpler its organizational structure);
• organizational and legal form (JSC, LLC, IP, ...);
• field of activity;
• scale of the company (number of employees, departments, etc.);
• technologies involved in the work of the company;
• communications within and outside the firm.

Of course, when considering the organizational structure of management, it is necessary to take into account such features of the company as levels of interaction. For example, how departments of the company interact with each other, employees with employees, and even the organization itself with the external environment.

Types of organizational structures of enterprise management

Let's take a closer look at the types of organizational structures. There are several classifications, and we will consider the most popular and at the same time the most complete of them.

Linear

The linear structure is the simplest of all existing types of enterprise management structures. At the head is the director, then the heads of departments, then ordinary workers. Those. everyone in the organization is connected vertically. Typically, such organizational structures can be found in small organizations that do not distinguish the so-called functional units.

This type is characterized by simplicity, and tasks in the organization, as a rule, are completed quickly and professionally. If for some reason the task is not completed, then the manager always knows that he needs to ask the head of the department about the task, and the head of the department, in turn, knows who in the department to ask about the progress of the work.

The disadvantage is the increased requirements for management personnel, as well as the burden that falls on their shoulders. This type of management is applicable only to small businesses, otherwise managers will not be able to work effectively.

Linear staff

If a small firm that used a linear management structure develops, then its organizational structure changes and turns into a linear-staff one. Vertical connections remain in place, however, the leader has a so-called "headquarters" - a group of people who act as advisers.

The headquarters does not have the authority to give orders to the performers, however, it has a strong influence on the leader. Based on the decisions of the headquarters, managerial decisions are also formed.

functional

When the load on employees increases, and the organization continues to grow further, the organizational structure moves from a linear-headquarters to a functional one, which means the distribution of work not by departments, but by functions performed. If earlier everything was simple, now managers can safely call themselves directors of finance, marketing and production.

It is with the functional structure that one can see the division of the organization into separate parts, each of which has its own functions and tasks. A stable external environment is a mandatory element to support the development of a company that has chosen a functional structure for itself.

Such companies have one serious drawback: the functions of management personnel are very blurred. If in a linear organizational structure everything is clear (sometimes even too much), then with a functional organizational structure everything is a little blurry.

For example, if there are problems with sales, the director has no idea who exactly to blame. Thus, the functions of managers sometimes overlap, and when a problem occurs, it is difficult to establish whose fault it occurred.

The advantage is that the company can be diversified and do a great job of it. Moreover, due to the functional separation, the firm can have several goals.

Linear-functional

This organizational structure only applies to large organizations. So, it combines the advantages of both organizational structures, however, it has fewer disadvantages.

With this type of control, all the main connections are linear, and the additional ones are functional.

Divisional

Like the previous one, it is only suitable for large companies. Functions in the organization are distributed not according to the areas of responsibility of subordinates, but according to the types of product, or according to the regional affiliation of the division.

The division has its own divisions and the division itself resembles a linear or linear-functional organizational structure. For example, a division may have a procurement department, a marketing department, and a production department.

The disadvantage of such an organizational structure of the enterprise is the complexity of relations between departments, as well as the high cost of maintaining managers.

matrix

Applicable to those enterprises that operate in a market where products must be constantly improved and updated. To do this, the company creates working groups, which are also called matrix. It follows from this that a double subordination arises in the company, as well as a constant collaboration of employees from different departments.

The advantage of such an organizational structure of the enterprise is the ease of introducing new products into production, as well as the flexibility of the company to the external environment. The disadvantage is double subordination, which often causes conflicts in work groups.

findings

So, the organizational structure of an enterprise is a company management system and the ease of performing tasks, the flexibility of the company to the external environment, as well as the burden that falls on the shoulders of managers depends on its choice.

If the company is small, then at the stage of formation, as a rule, a linear organizational structure naturally arises in it, and as the enterprise develops, its structure becomes more and more complex, becoming matrix or divisional.

Video - an example of the organizational structure of the company: