Mintzberg’s design parameters

1. Mintzberg’s design parameters Pål Sørgaard, Telenor R&D and IfI INF 5250 September 5, 2005

2. Remember: a book about designing organisations • One way to describe possible designs is to use a set of design parameters (3.2 GHz, 512 MB, 120 GB, 4 USB 2.0) • Mintzberg defines a set of 9 design parameters • These are covered in chapters 2-5 • Overview table 2.1 page 27 • Corresponding design questions p 25 Pål Sørgaard, R&D

3. Use the design questions! • Try to establish the design parameters for your organisation • Example: • Design parameter: training and indoctrination • Related concept (table 2.1): standardisation of skills • Design question (p 25): What skills and knowledge should be required for each position? • Translate into analysis question: How are positions defined in terms of skills and knowledge? • Collect data: look at job descriptions, vacancies in the paper/on the web, ask questions about this in an interview • Establish answer: e.g. main training at universities, but knowledge of the company must be acquired Pål Sørgaard, R&D

4. Job specialisation (ch 2, p 26) • How many tasks should a given position in the organisation contain, and how specialised should each task be? • Coordination mechanism: standardisation of work content • Horizontal specialisation • basic division of labour • the typical split between different specialities and talents • Vertical specialisation • split between performance of the work from its administration • relation to discussion of Taylorism, scientific management, and job enlargement • Variation between the different parts of the organisation • Think of examples from summer jobs, etc Pål Sørgaard, R&D

5. Behaviour formalisation (ch 2, p 33) • To what extent should should the work content of each position be standardised? • Coordination mechanism: standardisation of work content • Can take place • by position (e.g., job description) • by work flow (e.g., put orders here!) • by rules (e.g., dress code, code of conduct, use this form) • Useful for manageability, efficiency and equal treatment of clients • Relevance to core values of bureaucracy (Max Weber) • Variation by part of organisation, most common in the operating core Pål Sørgaard, R&D

6. Training and indoctrination (ch 2, p 39) • What skills and knowledge should be required for each position? • Coordination mechanism: standardisation of skills • Training: the teaching of job-related skills and knowledge • Training through apprentice system or schools? • Professionals in the operating core? • Indoctrination: the process by which organisational norms are acquired • Values can be taught at school • In house programs? • Some agencies train their own people, but fewer than before • Variation by part of the organisation, e.g. common in the technostructure, variation in the operating core Pål Sørgaard, R&D

7. Unit grouping (ch 3, p 46) • On what basis should should positions be grouped into units and units into larger units? • This is what we typically see in an organisation chart • Coordination mechanism: direct supervision and also mutual adjustment • Related concepts • Administrative division of labour • Formal authority • Informal communication Pål Sørgaard, R&D

8. Bases for grouping • Possible bases for unit grouping: • knowledge and skill • work process and function • time • output • client • place • Summarised in • market grouping (output, client, place) • functional grouping (knowledge, skill, process, function) Pål Sørgaard, R&D

9. Criteria for grouping • Work flow interdependencies • pooled (shared resource) • sequential • reciprocal • Process interdependencies • related to shared specialisation, consulting each other • Scale interdependencies • e.g. to exploit economies of scale • Social interdependencies • also a reality! Pål Sørgaard, R&D

10. Market grouping vs functional grouping • This is one of the classical dilemmas • Telenor Mobil (Norway) part of Telenor Mobile (international) or Telenor Nordic • Functional grouping • Main concern with process and scale interdependencies • Encourages specialisation • Weak on customer focus and coordination of work flow (relies on direct supervision) • Market grouping • Main concern with whole product, meeting the customer, handling of complex work flows • Reduced quality of specialised work • Cannot take the same advantage of economies of scale Pål Sørgaard, R&D

11. Unit size (ch 3, p 65) • How large should each unit be; how many people should report to a given manager? • Coordination mechanism: direct supervision and also mutual adjustment • Related to informal communication and “span of control” • If using direct supervision: how many can you control? • If working tightly together: what size works best? • Unit size driven up by standardisation, employees’ need for autonomy, and need for short communication chains • Unit size driven down by need for close direct supervision, mutual adjustment, other tasks of the manager, and employees’ need for consultation, advice and feedback Pål Sørgaard, R&D

12. Planning and control systems (ch 4, p 73) • To what extent should the output of each position or unit be standardised? • Coordination mechanism: standardisation of output • Heard of “mål- og resultatstyring”? • This was modern when the limitations of scientific management were realised • fad of the 40ies and 50ies Pål Sørgaard, R&D

13. Performance control • Often after the fact • Typically a financial focus • Normally supported by IT (MIS: management information system) • Most applicable when units are relatively independent • interdependencies mainly pooled, e.g. financial resources • units typically grouped on the basis of market Pål Sørgaard, R&D

14. Action planning • Goes into the units • Nonroutine decisions and actions planned in advance • Plans for • building a ship • fighting a battle • starting a gsm-operation in Pakistan Pål Sørgaard, R&D

15. Liaison devices (ch 4, p 81) • What mechanisms should be established to facilitate mutual adjustment among positions and units? • Coordination mechanism: mutual adjustment • When standardisation and direct supervision are insufficient • Used to overcome the limitation present in any hierarchical structure • Various mechanisms available to support mutual adjustment • Fad of the 60ies (and later!) • Excellently treated by Jay Galbraith • core concept: task uncertainty Pål Sørgaard, R&D

16. Some liaison devices • Liaison positions (no funds) • Task forces and standing committees • Integrating managers (with funds) • Matrix structures • regional and functional responsibilities in Oslo • The devices can be used to handle market issues in functionally grouped organisation or to handle functional issues in a market based organisation Pål Sørgaard, R&D

17. Vertical decentralisation (ch 5, p 101) • How much decision-making power should be delegated to the managers down the line of authority? • We focus on decentralisation of authority (not issues of location) • Often referred to as delegation • Coordination mechanism: mutual adjustment (between managers that have the power needed) Pål Sørgaard, R&D

18. Horizontal decentralisation (ch 5, p 105) • How much decision-making power should pass from the line manager to the staff specialists and operators? • Coordination mechanisms: standardisation • Power to the analysts (decentralisation to people in the technostructure that set the standards) • Power to the experts (in R&D , in the operating core, etc) Pål Sørgaard, R&D

19. Five models for decentralisation, see figure 5-4 • Vertical and horizontal centralisation • Limited horizontal decentralisation (selective) • typically to the technostructure • Limited vertical decentralisation (parallel) • strong divisional leaders • Selective vertical and horizontal decentralisation • ad hoc, as needed, highly organic • Vertical and horizontal decentralisation • professionals in the operating core run the game • Each of these fit with one of the main configurations • See table p 153 and table 12-2 Pål Sørgaard, R&D