Difference Between Minzberg 5 Structure Theory And Functionalist And Interpretivist Theories

Organisation

Explain the difference between competing models and theories should be discussed of Minzberg 5 structure or Functionalist and Interpretivist.

The various corporate houses in the present times in order to sustain themselves in the competitive business and also to achieve better results take the help of various kinds of organizational structures (Fisher, Campbell & Svendsen, 2012). Therefore, the concept of organizational structure has gained a considerable amount of significance in the recent times. Thus, it is seen that in the present times various kinds of organizational structures as well as theories related to them has gained significance in the present times (Fisher, Campbell & Svendsen, 2012). These different types of organizational structures are being used being used by the various organizations to enhance the effectiveness of the overall organization. In addition to this, the concept of organizational behavior is concept which the various organizations need to take into consideration for the process of their business as it is generally seen that the organizations that have developed effective organizational behaviors are more likely to attain better results than the ones which do not take into effective consideration the concept of organizational behavior (Sorensen & Stanton, 2013). This report will focus on the concept of organizational behavior and organizational structures in the light of the various theories and models related to them.

An organization can be defined as an entity that is composed of different individuals who are trying to achieve the same kind of objectives (Foss, Woll & Moilanen, 2013). Furthermore, these organizations can be governmental organizations or business organizations or organizations of other natures (Foss, Woll & Moilanen, 2013). In the recent times the working style of the various organizations have undergone drastic transformation and it is the end result of this particular fact that the various organizations take the help of the concepts of effective organizational behavior and structures to not only achieve effectiveness but at the same time to further enhance the prospects of their organization (Iyamu & Mphahlele, 2014). Thus, in the present times these two areas have emerged as the prime areas of focus of the various corporate houses and it is generally seen that no two corporate houses have the same kind of organizational behavior (Iyamu & Mphahlele, 2014). As a matter of factor of organizational behavior is the one which distinguishes one organization from another and many experts are of the viewpoint that the concept of organizational behavior often helps the management associated with a particular corporate house to further enhance the performance level of the employees who are associated with the concerned corporate house (Plugge & Bouwman, 2013). Since the traditional times the primary motif of the various business corporate houses is to earn a large amount of profit. However, in the present times it is generally seen that this focus of the corporate houses to make a positive contribution towards the cause of the environment (Plugge & Bouwman, 2013). It is because of this reason that the various kinds of “corporate social responsible” activities have gained a considerable of significance in the recent times and the various corporate houses try to follow them to further enhance the brand image of their corporate houses (Carlström & Ekman, 2012). This has become an important necessity for the various corporate houses and is not longer just a mere choice for the corporate houses since the customers or the end users of the products or services offered by the various corporate houses have become more conscious about the kind of products or services which they are consuming (Carlström & Ekman, 2012). It is precisely because of this particular reason that the concept of ethical consumerism has gained a considerable amount of prominence in the recent times.    

Organisation Management

The emergence of the various kinds of business corporate houses has made it imperative for the corporate houses to take the help of the concept of organisational management. The effectiveness and the overall performance as well as the productivity of a particular corporate house depend on the effectiveness of the organisational management system which it is following (Mohr, Young & Burgess Jr, 2012). Furthermore, it is generally seen individual performance of the employees who are associated with a particular corporate house depends on the kind of organisational management style which that particular corporate house is following for the management of the concerned corporate house (Mohr, Young & Burgess Jr, 2012). Therefore, it would be apt to say that the concept of organisational management has emerged as one of the most important ones within the framework of the contemporary business world. In the broader sense of the term, the concept of organisational management is generally referred to the process which concerns itself with the processes of organising, planning, implementing and the effective utilisation of the resources which are at the disposal of a particular corporate house (Cadden, Marshall & Cao, 2013). The above mentioned processes are the core functions within the framework of any corporate house and it is a reflection of this particular fact that the focus of the various corporate houses in the present times is on the effective utilisation of the concept of organisation management. An important concept within the framework of the organisational management which has gained a considerable amount of significance in the recent times is the concept of the “organisational behaviour management” (Cadden, Marshall & Cao, 2013). In this particular context the opinion of Chester Barnard is significant to note when he says that the behaviour of the individuals within the framework of the various organisations is different from their normal behaviour (Schermerhorn et al., 2014). He is further of the opinion that the behaviour of the individuals within the framework of the corporate houses depends on the kind of organisational culture as well as the kind of organisational behaviour which is prevalent there (Schermerhorn et al., 2014). Moreover, experts are of the viewpoint that the concept of organisational management is very important for a particular corporate house and it helps the concerned organisation in a significant manner to achieve the objectives as well as the goals which has been set by the concerned corporate house (Schermerhorn et al., 2014). Therefore, it would be apt to say that the concept of organisational management has become an indispensible part of the various modern day corporate houses.

Competing models and theories

The emergence of the various kinds of organisational structure theories as well as models in the recent times can be explained on the basis of the popularity which the concept of organisational structure has gained prominence in the recent times (Kogg & Mont, 2012). The most commonly used theories or models of organisational structure are the Mintzberg’s organisational structure, Interpretivist organisational structure and others (Kogg & Mont, 2012). The Mintzberg’s organisational structure is one of the most commonly used organisational structures and this particular model of organisational structure consists of five different types (Omotayo, 2015). The following figure gives an overview of the five different organisational structures as per this particular model-

The five different kinds of organisational structures as per Mintzberg which are commonly used in the contemporary business world are simple structure, machine bureaucracy, professional bureaucracy, divisionalized form and adhocracy (Omotayo, 2015). Furthermore, Mintzberg is of the opinion that the effectiveness of these organisational structures depends on the context as well as the scenarios in which they are being used (Omotayo, 2015). He is thus of the opinion that a particular organisational structure which has proved useful as well as effective for one particular organisation cannot yield the same kind of results for another organisation although they belong to the same kind of industry (Omotayo, 2015). Therefore, it would be apt to say that the corporate houses need to take into consideration various factors like the kind of industry in which they are operating, the organisational culture, organisational behaviour, the nature of power division in the organisation and others.

The Functional model of organisational structure, on the other hand, has gained a considerable amount of importance in the recent times and is being widely used by the various corporate houses for the structuring of their organisation (Lunenburg, 2012). This particular model of organisational structure divides the entire corporate house into various smaller units depending on the functions which they perform (Lunenburg, 2012). Thus, the various divisions are made on the basis of the roles or the functions which the individuals perform and many experts are of the viewpoint that the creation of smaller functional units further enhances not only the performance as well as the productivity of these smaller functional units but in turn enhances the overall productivity and the performance level of the corporate house as well. Therefore, it would be apt to say that this particular model of organisational structure is widely different from the Mintzberg’s model of organisational structure which divides the organisations on the basis of the centralisation or the decentralisation of power which they have within the framework of their organisation and also on the basis of the key components of the organisation whereas the functional model of organisation believes in the creation of smaller functional units to further enhances not only the effectiveness of the concerned organisation but also the productiveness of the organisation.

The “Central Bank of Sri Lanka” is one of the central monetary authority of the nation of Sri Lanka and regulates all kinds of financial dealings of the nations be it in the private sector or the governmental sector (Central Bank of Sri Lanka, 2018). The bank founded in 1950, regulates all the national as well as the international transactions of the nation and at the same time is one of the oldest banking institutions of the nation (Central Bank of Sri Lanka, 2018). The banking institute follows a functional structure for the process of its operations and taking the help of this particular model of organisational structure in the recent times has created various kinds of smaller within its framework depending on the kind of jobs that they perform or the kind of functions that they render to the banking institution (Central Bank of Sri Lanka, 2018). It is a reflection of this particular fact that the banking institution under discussion here takes the help of various kind of functional units like revenue department, currency exchange department, loan department and others depending on the functions which they render to the concerned institution. Furthermore, many experts are of the viewpoint that the creation of these smaller functional units have not only further enhanced the individual performance level of each of smaller functional units but at the same time have contributed in a significant manner to enhance the overall performance as well as the productivity of the individuals associated with the concerned banking institution (Schermerhorn et al., 2014). Therefore, it would be apt to say that the use of the functional organisational structure has contributed in a significant manner towards the success gained by the banking institution under discussion here and also the quality the services which they have been offering to the nation for the past 68 years.

The process of organisational learning can be defined as the one which concerns itself with the creation, retention as well as the transfer of knowledge within the framework of the concerned organisation (Shafritz, Ott & Jang, 2015). The growth of a particular corporate house is directly associated with the kind of organisation learning process which it follows and thus the focus of the various corporate houses of the present times is on the creation of continuous learning culture at their workplace wherein they try to instil the kind of culture where the individuals are encouraged to indulge in continuous learning styles rather than depending on the various training programs which are being provided to them (Shafritz, Ott & Jang, 2015). The various training programs no doubt provide significant amount of knowledge and help in the inculcation of skill sets which are required for the effective performance of the however by focusing on the process of continuous learning the corporate houses can ensure that learning is not just limited to the various training problems on the other hand it is a part of their organisational culture itself (Csaszar, 2012). Therefore, it would be apt to say in the recent times the concept of organisational learning has attained a significant amount of prominence within the framework of the contemporary business world. The process of organisational learning helps the concerned organisation to impart the kind of information or skill sets which are likely to help the individuals who are associated with the organisation to perform their job roles in a much better manner (Csaszar, 2012).

Peter Senge is his 1980 book “The Fifth Discipline” propounded the five disciplines of the process of organisational learning and since then the concept has been widely in use in the various corporate houses for the process of imparting of knowledge as well as learning to the entities who are associated with these corporate houses (Van der Voet, 2014). The below given figure provides an overview of this particular model of Senge-

The five essential components of the process of organisational learning as per this particular model of organisational learning are shared vision, systems thinking, personal mastery, team learning and mental models (Van der Voet, 2014). Thus, it can be said that Senge saw the process of organisational learning as the cumulative effect of the combination of these five factors. Therefore, it becomes important for the individuals associated with a particular corporate house as well as the entire corporate house itself to take into effective consideration all these five factors into effective consideration for the process of providing the kind of learning that would be of maximum utility to the various entities who are associated with the concerned corporate house.

“The Central Bank of Sri Lanka” also takes the help of this particular model of Senge for the process of providing effective organisational learning to the various individuals who are associated with the concerned banking institution. Thus, it is generally seen that for the process of providing effective organisational learning the banking institution takes the help of all these five components so that the necessary as well as the adequate information and the skill sets are being conveyed to the individuals who are a part of the banking institution (Van der Voet, 2014). This helps the employees of the banking institution in a significant manner to perform their job roles as well as the duties which are required as per the expectation level of the institution (Van der Voet, 2014). Furthermore, in addition to this, the banking institution also takes the help of the concept of continuous learning process which helps the individuals who are associated with the banking institution to learn new things that are likely to help them to perform their job roles in a much better manner without having to depend on the various periodical training sessions that the institution provides.

The psychologists “John R. P. French and Bertram Raven” in 1959 identified the five major sources of power within the framework of the various corporate houses (Duffield & Whitty, 2015). These five sources of power as per the above mentioned psychologists are referent, legitimate, coercive, expert and reward power (Duffield & Whitty, 2015). The psychologists are of the viewpoint that these are the major sources of power within the framework of the various corporate houses and they thus need to be used in an effective manner by the concerned corporate house to wield a significant amount of influence over the individuals who are associated with them (Duffield & Whitty, 2015). The banking institution under discussion here also takes the help of these five kinds of power for the effective management of their institution. The below given table indicates the way these five kinds of power are being used in this particular banking institution-

The leaders of the present times thus take the help of these five kinds of powers for the purpose for providing better quality results to the concerned corporate house (Gutiérrez, Bustinza & Molina, 2012). The effective use of the above mentioned powers in correct contexts is likely to not only enhance the prospects of the concerned organisation but at the same time is likely to further enhance the productivity as well as the performance level of the concerned organisation (Gutiérrez, Bustinza & Molina, 2012). Thus, it is generally seen that the leaders associated with “The Central Bank of Sri Lanka” also take the help of these five kinds of power for the effective management of the different entities who are associated with them.

“Equality of Opportunity” is one of the basic Fundamental Rights of the individuals and it is generally seen that the various nations of the world have embedded this particular concept in their constitution itself (Alegre et al., 2012). It is a reflection of this particular fact that the various corporate houses of the world have also included this particular within the framework of their organisation as part of their corporate governance plan. The various corporate houses of the present times try to take the help of this particular policy with the objective to provide equal kinds of economic, growth and other kinds of opportunities to all the employees are associated with them (Alegre et al., 2012). Furthermore, this particular policy also helps the concerned corporate houses to avoid various kinds of conflicts by means of providing equal kind of opportunities to all the members of the corporate house (Alegre et al., 2012). Therefore, it would be apt to say that this particular policy forms an important part of the entire corporate governance plan of the various corporate houses of the present times and helps them in the process of effective governance of their organisations.

The process of co-creation is being used by the various corporate houses of the present times to create a particular product or service by entering into collaboration with any other business enterprise or group of people (Malik, Sinha & Blumenfeld, 2012). There are four important aspects of this process which is represented by the below given figure-

This particular process is used by the various corporate houses for the process of not only creating the kind of products as well as services which are much in demand among the customers but at the same time for creating superior kind of products that are likely to find a better market (Malik, Sinha & Blumenfeld, 2012). Furthermore, by means of the use of this particular concerned corporate house is able to use the resources of the organisation with which it is undergoing the process of co-creation and this particular fact is likely to affect the business of their organisation in a positive manner.

“The Central Bank of Sri Lanka” is the largest banking institution and holds a monopoly over all the financial transactions of the country. However, there is much scope for improvement for the concerned banking institution. For example, the leaders associated with the institution can take the help of various kinds of effective organisational behaviour as well as culture to further enhance the prospects of the concerned banking institution. In addition to these, the utilisation of effective organisational structure is also likely to help the concerned banking institution in a significant manner. The implementation of the equality of opportunity policy is also likely to not only provides equal kind of growth opportunities to all the members of the institution but at the same time is likely to help the institution to achieve a better success rate. Furthermore, the effective utilisation of Raven and French’s power structure is likely to further enhance the performance level of the individual employees as well as the overall productivity and the performance level of the banking institution. Moreover, for the process of providing effective learning to the employees the institution can take the help of Senge’s five disciples of power. The use of these policies as well as strategies is likely to help the concerned institution in a significant manner.

Conclusion

To conclude, for the improvement of the prospects of their organisation the corporate houses need to take into effective consideration various factors like organisational culture, behaviour, structure, power, organisational learning and other factors. The success or the failure of a particular corporate house depends on the way these diverse aspects are managed within the framework of the concerned corporate house not only in the context of the performance of the individual but for the overall organisation in particular. Therefore, it would be apt to say that the various corporate houses need to take into effective consideration these diverse factors for the overall growth of their organisation.

References

Alegre, J., Pla-Barber, J., Chiva, R., & Villar, C. (2012). Organisational learning capability, product innovation performance and export intensity. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 24(5), 511-526.

Cadden, T., Marshall, D., & Cao, G. (2013). Opposites attract: organisational culture and supply chain performance. Supply Chain Management: an international journal, 18(1), 86-103.

Carlström, E. D., & Ekman, I. (2012). Organisational culture and change: implementing person-centred care. Journal of health organization and management, 26(2), 175-191.

Central Bank of Sri Lanka. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.cbsl.gov.lk/

Csaszar, F. A. (2012). Organizational structure as a determinant of performance: Evidence from mutual funds. Strategic Management Journal, 33(6), 611-632.

Duffield, S., & Whitty, S. J. (2015). Developing a systemic lessons learned knowledge model for organisational learning through projects. International journal of project management, 33(2), 311-324.

Fisher, D. R., Campbell, L. K., & Svendsen, E. S. (2012). The organisational structure of urban environmental stewardship. Environmental Politics, 21(1), 26-48.

Foss, L., Woll, K., & Moilanen, M. (2013). Creativity and implementations of new ideas: do organisational structure, work environment and gender matter?. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 5(3), 298-322.

Gutiérrez, L. G., Bustinza, O. F., & Molina, V. B. (2012). Six sigma, absorptive capacity and organisational learning orientation. International Journal of Production Research, 50(3), 661-675.

Iyamu, T., & Mphahlele, L. (2014). The impact of organisational structure on enterprise architecture deployment. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 16(1), 2-19.

Johnson, G. (2016). Exploring strategy: text and cases. Pearson Education.

Kogg, B., & Mont, O. (2012). Environmental and social responsibility in supply chains: The practise of choice and inter-organisational management. Ecological Economics, 83, 154-163.

Lunenburg, F. C. (2012). Organizational structure: Mintzberg’s framework. International journal of scholarly, academic, intellectual diversity, 14(1), 1-8.

Malik, A., Sinha, A., & Blumenfeld, S. (2012). Role of quality management capabilities in developing market-based organisational learning capabilities: Case study evidence from four Indian business process outsourcing firms. Industrial Marketing Management, 41(4), 639-648.

Mohr, D. C., Young, G. J., & Burgess Jr, J. F. (2012). Employee turnover and operational performance: The moderating effect of group?oriented organisational culture. Human Resource Management Journal, 22(2), 216-233.

Omotayo, F. O. (2015). Knowledge Management as an important tool in Organisational Management: A Review of Literature. Library Philosophy and Practice, 1.

Plugge, A., & Bouwman, H. (2013). Fit between sourcing capabilities and organisational structure on IT outsourcing performance. Production Planning & Control, 24(4-5), 375-387.

Schermerhorn, J., Davidson, P., Poole, D., Woods, P., Simon, A., & McBarron, E. (2014). Management: Foundations and Applications (2nd Asia-Pacific Edition). John Wiley & Sons.

Shafritz, J. M., Ott, J. S., & Jang, Y. S. (2015). Classics of organization theory. Cengage Learning.

Sorensen, L. J., & Stanton, N. A. (2013). Y is best: How Distributed Situational Awareness is mediated by organisational structure and correlated with task success. Safety science, 56, 72-79.

Van der Voet, J. (2014). The effectiveness and specificity of change management in a public organization: Transformational leadership and a bureaucratic organizational structure. European Management Journal, 32(3), 373-382.

Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:

Turnitin Report

Formatting

Title Page

Citation

Outline

Place an Order