What are the three major structures within a traditional company

The internalization of market transactions objectively requires enterprises to establish an effective and more developed hierarchical organization to prevent the irrational allocation of resources due to the ineffectiveness of the administrative coordination mechanism. There is no universally applicable enterprise management, the best management theory and method, and should be based on the internal conditions and the external environment of the enterprise in the appropriate contingency, flexibility. Contingency theory of the enterprise as an open system, what kind of organizational structure should be used, depending on the specific circumstances of the enterprise, there can not be a universally applicable structural model. Herrigel and Slocum according to the external environment and internal choice of two factors, the traditional enterprise organizational structure is divided into a highly centralized system, linear functional system, matrix organization system, multi-division system (also known as business unit system) four types. However, with the continuous development of the economy and the trend of economic globalization, the traditional organizational structure has encountered more and more challenges, which not only come from the field of management theory research, but also from the practice of management.

1 Analysis of Traditional Organization Theory

1.1 Analysis of Classical Organization Theory

Classical organization theory includes the scientific management theory founded by Thierry and others at the beginning of the 20th century, Fayol's administrative management theory and the bureaucratic model developed by Max? Weber developed the theory of bureaucratic model. The main contribution of classical organization theory is that it is the first time to use the scientific method to systematize, theorize and scientize the organizational problems.

Taylor's scientific management theory includes the early germ of organization theory, the main ideas of its organization theory are: setting up the planning department, the implementation of the functional system, and the implementation of the principle of exception. Fayol's administrative theory of the main organizational theory are: ① from the perspective of the organizational management process put forward the five basic functions of management, ② from the perspective of the organizational functions put forward the 14 basic principles of management, ③ put forward the establishment of a hierarchical organization of the concept of the range of management, ④ study of the establishment of the functional institutions of the enterprise, the construction of a linear system of the form of the organization, and ⑤ put forward to solve the problem of the efficiency of the organization's internal management, "Fayol's bridge". (v) proposed the idea of "Fayol's Bridge" to solve the problem of management efficiency within the organization. "Max Weber, the father of organization theory, was a famous German sociologist. Max Weber, the father of organization theory, is a famous German sociologist and organizational scientist, and his main contribution to organization theory is to put forward the "ideal administrative organization system" with the "bureaucratic model" as the main body. Max Weber believed that the organizational structure should be a "bureaucratic model". Weber believed that the organizational structure should be a "hierarchical structure" and that the bureaucratic organization is the ideal organizational model. Max Weber believed that statutory authority was the ideal organizational model. Weber believed that the legal authority is the cornerstone of the organization; any kind of human organization should be based on a particular authority as the foundation, the lack of authority of the organization is impossible to unify the action and achieve the **** the same goal; legal authority basis has three pure forms: rational basis, traditional basis and divine basis, but only the legal authority is the basis for the construction of bureaucratic organizations.

Classical organization theory mainly focuses on the organization's internal division of labor and activity arrangements for research, this theoretical system for the rationalization of the organization's internal division of labor and activity arrangements as well as the organization's internal system construction provides a good theoretical guidance. All classical organization theory **** the same starting point is to improve the management efficiency of the enterprise organization. Classical organization theory is built around four pillars, which are the division of labor, hierarchical and intelligent methods, structure, and the theory of span of control.

1.2 Analysis of Neoclassical Organization Theory

Neoclassical organization theory is based on a hierarchical structure, but also draws on psychological and sociological perspectives on "groups". Neoclassical organization theory is characterized by the relationship between centralization and decentralization, relatively advocate decentralization, so that members of the organization can be more involved in decision-making to improve motivation; from the organizational form, tends to flat organizational structure, advocating departmentalization. Neoclassical organization theory is sometimes called behavioral science organization theory, because its organization theory mainly from psychology, social psychology and sociology, and its advocates and founders are also from these areas of research scholars.

Neoclassical organization theory broadly accepts the ideas of classical organization theory, but emphasizes the importance of social groups to organizational efficiency and makes important modifications to some of the major flaws of classical organization theory. An important feature of neoclassical organization theory is that it focuses more on the important role of human beings in the organization and begins an in-depth study of the behavior of organizational members, the most noteworthy research activity of which is the Hawthorne Experiment conducted under the leadership of Mayo. The conclusions drawn from this experiment are: workers are "social beings" rather than "economic beings", there is an "informal organization" in the enterprise, the new type of leadership lies in improving the satisfaction of workers, and there is the Hawthorne effect. There is the Hawthorne effect. The representative theoretical achievements of neoclassical organization theory include: ① Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory, ② Herzberg's two-factor theory, ③ McClelland's incentive needs theory, ④ McGregor's "Theory X - Theory Y", and ⑤ Porter-Laurel model proposed by Porter and Laurel. Porter's and Lawler's Porter-Lawler model.

1.3 Analysis of other traditional organization theories

In addition to classical and neoclassical organization theories, some other theories that have played an important role in the field of organization research include: systems theory, ecological theory of the whole, resource dependence theory, neo-institutional organization theory, and transaction cost theory.

In the 1960s, with the development of systems theory, organization theory also began to move towards the path of systems analysis. Systems organization theory is not strictly speaking a single theory, but a general term for three theoretical schools, they are the social systems school developed in the 1930s with the 1960s produced by the socio-technical school and the theory of contingent systems. They have a *** point of convergence in that they all view the business organization as a system, and thus refer to them collectively as systems theory. Social systems school from the sociological point of view to study the organization, the enterprise organization of people's interrelationships as a collaborative social system, its founder is Chester? Barnard; Chester? Barnard believes that the organization is two or more people consciously coordinated activities of the system, is a collaborative system, the organization is in a specific environment, the organization is not only formal organizations and informal organizations. The socio-technical systems school is further developed on the basis of the social systems school, the main representative of this school is Trieste; the socio-technical systems school believes that the organization is both a social system and a technical system, and puts great emphasis on the importance of the technical system, which is considered to be the mediator of the organization's contact with the environment. The strongest and most far-reaching of the systems theories is the theory of contingent variable systems, which is represented by Woodward, Stock, Custer and Rosenzweig, among others. Contingency systems school of thought that an organization's relationship with other organizations and with the environment depends on the specific situation, rejecting the classical organizational theory of "omnipotent" principle and structure, that the organization is agreed upon and has a certain degree of adaptability.

The new institutional organization theory has a very close relationship with the new institutional economics. New institutional organization theory in the 1970s, but is the 1990s "the darling of organization theory". The main representative figures of the new institutional organization theory are Moyo, Louvain, Scott and so on. The new institutional organization theory school believes that organizations not only operate in a certain technical environment, but also survive in a certain institutional environment. The institutional environment emphasized by the New Institutional Organization Theory school is such an environment which is characterized by an elaborate arrangement of rules and regulations through which an individual organization has to obey in order for it to gain the technology and recognition of the environment. The new institutional organization theory starts from the institutional environment of the organization, takes the organizational domain as the basic unit of analysis, analyzes the process of homogeneity of the organization through the concept of institutional homosociality, and emphasizes that the organization's functioning in the environment must not only satisfy the requirements of the technical environment in order to achieve the efficiency of the organization.

2 Comparative Analysis of Traditional Organizational Structure Models

2.1 Linear Organizational Structure

Linear organizational structure has gained prominence because it meets many of the needs of the industrial age. The four main characteristics of the linear organizational structure are broadly as follows: a hierarchical chain of command; a specialized division of functions; a consistent policy of rights and responsibilities; and standardization of work.

The linear organizational structure creates a system that is capable of effectively managing large investments, division of labor, and capitalist mass mechanized production. Specialized division of labor allows for an efficient method of work for every task of the organization. Organizations with a linear organizational structure are managed through consistent written rules and policies that are set by the company's board of directors and management. In a linear organizational structure, supervisors are responsible for the actions of all employees under their jurisdiction and have the authority to give orders that employees unconditionally obey. An employee's first duty is to immediately follow the orders of his or her top supervisor and should not have to think about what is right or what needs to be done. By organizing the division of labor, institutionalizing managerial decision-making, and developing a process and set of rules, various types of specialists can work together towards a ****same goal. The linear organizational structure greatly broadens the breadth and depth of knowledge available to the organization.

The form of the linear organizational structure is like a pyramid, with a boss with absolute authority at the extreme end, who divides the total tasks of the organization into many pieces and later assigns them to the next level of responsibility, which in turn further subdivides its own tasks and assigns them to the next level down the chain, which extends along an unbroken chain to each employee. 1980s In giant organizations such as General Motors, IBM and the U.S. government, there were as many as 12 levels of management between the top leadership and the workers. That proved to be too many layers of management.

2.2 Functional Organizational Structures

In a functional organizational structure, activities are organized from top to bottom according to the same functions. Functional organizational structure is sometimes called functional departmentalized organizational structure, because the basic basis of its organizational structure design is the similarity of business activities within the organization. This model of organizational structure is most effective for business organizations when the external environment of the organization is relatively stable and there is not much need for coordination across functional departments within the organization. For small and medium-sized enterprise organizations that produce only one or a few products, functional organizational structure is not the best choice.

2.3 Linear - functional organizational structure

Linear - functional organizational form, is based on the linear system, under the leadership of the executive at all levels, set up the corresponding functional departments. That is, under the principle of unity of command in the linear system of organization, increased staff agencies. At present, the linear - functional system is still used by the vast majority of enterprises in China. Linear - functional organizational structure model is suitable for complex but relatively stable business organizations, especially large-scale business organizations. Complexity requires that managers have the ability to identify key variables, evaluate their impact on business performance, and fully consider their interrelationships; if these factors are relatively stable and their impact on business is predictable, the linear-functional organizational structure model is relatively effective. The biggest difference between the linear-functional organizational structure model and the linear organizational structure model is that it pays more attention to the role of the staff in the management of the enterprise. Linear - functional organizational structure model retains the centralized characteristics of the linear organizational structure model, while absorbing the functional organizational structure model of the advantages of functional departments.

2.4 Division system organizational structure

Division system is a typical organizational form used by large enterprises in Europe, America and Japan, because it is a decentralized organizational form. In the specific operation of the enterprise organization, the division system can be differentiated into regional division system, product division system and other types according to the different bases on which the enterprise organization is constructed in the division, through which the division can be organized for a single product, service, product mix, major projects or programs, geographic distribution, business or profit centers. Regional division system according to the enterprise organization's market area as the basis for the construction of the enterprise organization within the relatively large autonomy of the business sector; and product divisions based on the similarity of the products operated by the enterprise organization of the product classification and management, and product categories as the basis for the construction of the enterprise organization of the business sector.

2.5 Decentralized Organizational Structure

Decentralized organization includes two similar forms of organizational structure: federal decentralized structure and simulated decentralized structure. A federal decentralized organization is one in which there is a group of independent operating units under the corporation, each of which is responsible for its own performance, results, and contributions to the corporation; each of which has its own management; and although the operations of the federal decentralized organization are independent, the administration of the corporation is centralized. A simulated decentralized organization is one in which the constituent units of the organizational structure are not really business units, but are treated administratively as independent divisions; these "divisions" have a high degree of autonomy and are linked to each other by supply and sales relationships, among other things. The advantages of decentralized organization are that it can reduce the degree of centralization, weaken the adverse effects of the linear organizational structure; improve the responsibility of subordinate department managers, promote the combination of power and responsibility, improve organizational performance; reduce the management decision-making work of senior managers, improve the management efficiency of senior managers. A federal decentralized organization requires a strong "core management" that will be responsible only for making decisions on major issues. If used properly, this form of decentralization reduces the decision-making burden on top management and allows them to focus on direction, planning, and goals. While the simulated decentralized organization has some advantages, it does not meet all organizational design specifications. Generally speaking, simulated decentralized organizations are suitable for the chemical industry and the materials industry; in addition, the electronic information industry can also adopt the form of simulated decentralization, and IBM can be regarded as a typical case of simulated decentralized organization in this field. For simulated decentralized organizations, a high degree of employee self-discipline is necessary.

2.6 Matrix Organizations

The matrix form of organization is a horizontal system of leadership added to the linear-functional vertical form of organizational system. A matrix organization can also be called a non-permanent fixed organization. The uniqueness of the matrix organizational structure model lies in the simultaneous realization of divisional and functional organizational features. The advanced form of the matrix organization is the global matrix organization structure, which is currently in operation in large global corporations such as ABB, DuPont, Nestle, Philip, Morris, etc. ABB's predecessor, ASEA, was a Swedish company; in 1979, when Barnavik became the managing director of ASEA, he set out to reform the company's organizational structure. First, he flattened the company and reorganized it into a global matrix organization when it became an international business; ABB's success lies in the strategy and execution of its global matrix structure, which is based on the strategic management principles of Charles Hill and Gries, Johns Hopkins, and others. According to the strategic management scholars Charles Hill and Gollis and John, this type of organizational structure allows the company to reduce costs due to increased efficiency, and at the same time, differentiate its operations due to better innovation and customer response. In addition to a high degree of flexibility, this type of organizational structure allows global executives in each region to have access to a large amount of information about each location. It provides global executives with many opportunities for face-to-face communication, which facilitates the transfer of company norms and values, and thus promotes the building of a global corporate culture.

The advantages of the matrix system are: ① strengthened horizontal ties, professional equipment and personnel have been fully utilized, ② has a greater mobility, ③ to promote a variety of professionals to help each other, stimulate each other, and complement each other. The disadvantages of the matrix system are: ① members of the position is not fixed, there is a temporary concept, sometimes not strong enough sense of responsibility. ② personnel subject to dual leadership, sometimes it is not easy to distinguish responsibilities.

2.7 Comparison of Traditional Organizational Structures

There are six common forms of corporate organizational structures in the traditional economy, which are: linear, functional, linear-functional, divisional, decentralized, and matrix structures. These organizational structure modes are roughly formed in the era of capitalist industrialized mass production, in which the linear organizational structure mode is the most typical, and its influence is also the most extensive. The rise of capitalist production relations has directly led to the concentration of social capital and the expansion of the scale of enterprise production, the management method and enterprise organization formed in the small handmade stage can no longer meet the needs of socialized mass production, in order to strengthen the management of large-scale industrial enterprises, the theory of straight-line organizational structure has been put forward by management scholars, and has been widely adopted by the practice of enterprise management. The great advantages of the linear system did greatly promote the development of the early capitalist economy, but with the continuous development of the economy, the linear system organizational model is increasingly exposed its inherent defects. In the late stage of capitalist economic development, in order to make up for the shortcomings of the linear organizational model, the management community has accordingly put forward other organizational structure model. Whether it is a linear organizational structure mode, or after this other organizational structure mode, are based on the premise of the industrial economy, they are in accordance with the requirements of industrial production in the industrial economy and society to organize and improve the microstructure of enterprises.

In the industrial economy, the theory of the above organizational structure mode has its special economic reasons and basis; Similarly, these organizational structure mode is adopted by enterprise managers, but also explains the existence of each organizational structure mode and the development of the perfect economic rationality. A variety of traditional enterprise organizational structure theory, although all **** the same embodiment of the unique attributes of the industrial economy, but in practice, each organizational structure model is in accordance with its own uniqueness to build the internal management framework of the enterprise. In different organizational structure models, the distribution of management power, the level and range of management, and the relationship between different departments within the organization are all different. Considering the characteristics of various organizational structures, their effectiveness in various types of enterprises is also different, that is to say, different organizational structure models are suitable for different enterprises. In any case, it is necessary and useful to make a comparative analysis of the enterprise organizational structure models formed in the traditional industrial economy and society. Accurately grasping and understanding the traditional organizational structure theory is essential for building the theory of enterprise organizational structure under the condition of knowledge economy.

Though the linear organizational structure is proposed because of the needs of industrialized mass production, it is not suitable to be applied in the design of management structure of large-scale organizations, and the linear organizational structure will bring obvious obstacles to the development of the organization. And other organizational structure theory is proposed to a large extent to make up for the shortcomings of the linear organizational structure theory, as well as in order to better adapt to the needs of industrialized mass production, the establishment and improvement of the organizational structure theory adapted to the needs of large and very large organizations to build the management structure. Various organizational structure theory **** have a defect is: they are more or less with centralist tendency, in the organization of the degree of decentralization is low. It is because of this low degree of decentralization, so that members of the organization lack a sense of responsibility, self-discipline, decision-making authority, thus resulting in the organization of low learning motivation, lack of innovation and incentives for innovation. Therefore, in the formation of knowledge-based economic and social learning organizations, the traditional industrial economic and social organizational structure theory is sometimes not applicable.