Українська   Русский

A modern approach to organizational development

Content

Introduction

With the rapid growth of environmental uncertainty, organizational development associated with the modernization of business processes and the formation of competitive advantages in order to successfully position themselves in the market is a prerequisite for the survival of business entities. The key condition for the adaptability of the enterprise is the analysis of the stage of its development, taking into account the accumulated potential and market position. However, both in the foreign and domestic scientific literature there are no studies related to the systemic transformation of the components of the organization in accordance with the concept of its life cycles. The article proposes an approach to the interpretation of the concept of adaptive organization, its components and their balanced change while overcoming critical points in development. An adaptive organization is considered as a complex structure, including, in addition to the control object, a strategy, structure, organizational culture and personnel interacting with the external environment. The methodological support proposed by the authors makes it possible to bring the named basic components of the enterprise into line with the stage of its life cycle and create an organizational infrastructure to support managerial changes. The developed methodology and technology for choosing the direction of development is being introduced at one of the Nizhny Novgorod industrial enterprises at the stage of organizational transformation.

The functioning of industrial enterprises is currently carried out under conditions of globalization, global crises, increasing dynamism and uncertainty of the market environment. There is no universally recognized concept in management theory that allows organizations to effectively adapt to a complex and moving external environment. In our opinion, this is due to the lack of a clear interpretation of the concept of adaptive organization itself, its structure and approaches to conducting organizational transformations. We have to admit that many industrial enterprises have not yet formed a mechanism of organizational transformation that allows them to enter the trajectory of sustainable development.

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the author's approach to the interpretation of the concept of adaptive organization, its components and their balanced change at different stages of the life cycle of a modern innovative enterprise.

In theory, there is a variety of views on the structure of the organization. The most widely used are such models by foreign authors as the diamond model by G. Levitt [1], six cells by M. Weisbord [2], 7C (S) T.J. Peters, R.H. Waterman and J.R. Philips [3], as well as models by D. Boddy-R. Payton [4] and Burke-Lytvyn [5].

1. Structural model of adaptive organization

The first of these models – diamond – includes four components of the organization: technology, tasks or mission, structures, individuals. In the second model, six interconnected elements interacting with the external environment are identified. This is the goal, structures, leadership, reward, relationships and supporting mechanisms. Among the components of the organization, the developers of the 7C (S) model name the structure, strategy, amount of skills, staff composition, management style, systems and procedures, shared values. The model of D. Boddy and R. Payton contains goals, technologies, business processes, people, culture, structure and power. The last of these models (Burke-Litvin) is the most complex and includes twelve components, including the external environment.

Organizations with an adaptive type of behavior are characterized by adaptability, activity, openness, and developed connections with the external environment. It is the consideration of the external environment that reflects the nature of the organization as a model. The fundamental components of the subject of management are strategy, structure, organizational culture, and such an element combining these subsystems as managerial personnel. The inclusion of a larger number of components in the model and, accordingly, their interconnections, in our opinion, will significantly complicate the practical application of the model.

Such model elements as the control object and personnel have a generally accepted interpretation that does not require clarification in modern conditions. Other components (organizational structure, strategy, organizational culture) need, according to the authors, to be clarified.

The control object is a body that receives control actions from the control subject, receives impulses, control commands and acts in accordance with them. The control object is, in particular, employees, the labor collective, resources and information [6].

Personnel as a key element of the organization, predetermining the effectiveness of its activities, allowing to link together all the components of an economic entity, includes the personnel of the organization, employed.

For managers, the authors are invited to introduce the following classification: enthusiasts, achievers, defenders and bureaucrats. From a team of enthusiasts, members of the team expect to be involved in joint work, the opportunity to discuss decisions, put forward creative ideas. Achievements must create conditions for the implementation of the goals, ensuring freedom of action for employees in carrying out the tasks assigned to them, guaranteeing a worthy reward in accordance with the efforts expended. The defender team is characterized by taking care of the team members, maintaining their constant interest in the work and providing the necessary assistance. Bureaucrats are called upon to evoke a sense of justice and mutual responsibility among the organization’s employees, reduce the tension in the situation, and ensure security through competent orders and clear instructions. A more detailed description of managerial personnel corresponding to the proposed classification is presented by the authors of this article in [7].

Currently, in our opinion, a strategy can be understood as a set of long-term measures aimed at strengthening the viability of an organization in relation to its competitors. As a function of time, the strategy establishes the direction of the organization: growth, stabilization, reduction or a combination of these options.

In the classic textbook of American authors, the organizational structure was understood as the totality of levels and links of management that ensure the achievement of goals [8]. In connection with the need to adapt the organization to a dynamically developing external environment, organizational structures undergo radical changes [9].

2. Organizational structure

Organizational structure is an ordered set of elements consisting in optimally stable relations, characterized by common goals to achieve the required level of organizational effectiveness based on internal and external integration. The internal type of integration, which has strong levers for coordinating and controlling the actions of individual officials and entire structural units, outlines the links between the functional units of the organization. External integration while weakening the leverage of management separates the internal and external environment of the organization, allows you to acquire greater flexibility and innovation, due to the manifestation of market forces of influence. The varieties of internal and external borders systematized by the authors and proposed for various business entities are described in detail in the works of the authors of this article [10, 11] and are shown in Fig. 1.

Figure 1 – Organizational structure
(animation: 9 frames, 5 cycles of repeating, 160 kilobytes)

In our opinion, it is reasonable to understand organizational culture as the fundamental values and beliefs developed in the organization by staff and transmitted to new employees as they resolve the problems of their adaptation to the external environment and internal integration.

In accordance with such criteria as values, attitudes, personal qualities and behavioral features distinguish between market, bureaucratic, clan and adhocratic types of cultures. Market culture is characterized by the priority of value relations in conjunction with the orientation of management and staff on profitability, the external environment, and consumers. Bureaucratic culture gravitates to a system of power with a clear delineation of powers that regulates all activities of the enterprise in the form of rules, instructions and procedures. Clan culture makes maximum use of the organization’s internal resources when uniting personnel around a system of values ​​accepted by all. Adhocratic culture is based on innovation and risk. A detailed description of these types of crops is presented in [12].

Учитывая тезисы, сформулированные выше, применительно к каждой из составляющих субъекта управления возможна реализация одного из её типов:

The obtained conceptual model of organization, including the considered structural components, is characterized by adaptability, which, in turn, determines the need to diagnose and solve organizational problems at different stages of the organization's life cycle (LCO). Moreover, the effective functioning of the organization implies the need to coordinate all its most important components at the stages of the life cycle, corresponding to the internal potential and the state of the external environment in accordance with the principles presented by us in [13, 14, 15].

Findings

When introducing changes in an enterprise with highly qualified personnel, it is advisable and reliable to use a combination of rational persuasion and compromise techniques. The first method involves convincing the staff of the need and timeliness of the transformations by appealing to figures and facts. The second method provides for partial control over the introduction of changes and offers employees effective compensation.

In order to detect problems and make timely adjustments to ongoing activities, it is recommended to monitor the process of implementing organizational changes. It is necessary to regularly hold meetings of team members so that the staff is aware of the upcoming transformations in advance and can put forward during the meeting all the problems they have identified, rather than divert the leadership individually for each issue that arose. Monitoring of the implementation of transformations, regularly carried out by managers, will allow to refine the program of organizational development.

References

  1. Leavitt. H. Applied Organizational Change in Industry. In March, J. Handbook of Organization, Chicago: Rand McNally, 1965.
  2. Weisbord M. R. Organizational Diagnosis: A Workbook of Theory and Practice. – Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1978.
  3. Peters T., Waterman R. In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America's Best-Run Companies. New York: Harper and Row, 1982, P. 203.
  4. Бодди Д., Пэйтон З. Основы менеджмента / Пер. с англ. СПб.: Питер, 1999, C. 816.
  5. Burke W. W. Organization Development: A Process of Learning and Changing. 2nd ed. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1994.
  6. Райзберг Б. А., Лозовский Л. Ш., Стародубцева Е. Б. Современный экономический словарь. М.: Инфра-М, 2013, C. 512.
  7. Горшкова Л. А., Поплавская В. А. О методике проведения организационных изменений в бизнесе // Менеджмент и бизнес-администрирование. 2013/№ 4, С. 180-183.
  8. Mescon M., Michael Albert M., Khedouri F. Management. New York: Harper & Row, 1988, P. 777.
  9. Magretta J., Stone N. What Management Is: How It Works and Why It's Everyone's Business. Harper Collins Bussiness, 2002, P. 244.
  10. Горшкова Л. А. Диагностика и выбор организационной структуры хозяйствующего субъекта // Экономический анализ: теория и практика. 2007/№ 10, С. 17-23.
  11. Мельник М., Горшкова Л., Поплавская В. Современные производственнохозяйственные системы: виды и особенности // Проблемы теории и практики управления. 2010/№ 4, С. 8-17.
  12. Горшкова Л. А., Поплавская В. А. Методика управления организационной культурой крупного промышленного предприятия // Экономический анализ: теория и практика. 2012/№ 20, С. 37-42.
  13. Горшкова Л. А., Поплавская В. А. Методика развития системы управления организацией на разных стадиях ее жизненного цикла // Экономический анализ: теория и практика. 2010/№ 34, С. 2-7.
  14. Поплавская В. А. Комплексный подход к организационному развитию // Вестник Университета (Государственный университет управления). 2008/№ 11, С. 160-167.
  15. Горшкова Л. А., Поплавская В. А. Управление развитием организации в соответствии с концепцией жизненных циклов // Менеджмент и бизнесадминистрирование. 2011/№ 4, С. 167-173.
  16. Горшкова Л. А., Поплавская В. А. Методика реализации изменений в системе управления промышленным предприятием // Экономический анализ: теория и практика. 2011/№ 11, С. 7-11.
  17. Горшкова Л. А. Теория бизнес-анализа: учебное пособие. Н.Новгород: Изд-во ННГУ, 2007, C. 293.
  18. Gorshkova L. A., Poplavskaja V. A., Sovik L. E. Methodology of organizational changes during the implementation of business-activity monitoring // International Journal and Social Science. V.4, N 2, 2013, P. 104-110.
  19. Горшкова Л. А., Поплавский Б. Н. Анализ внешней и внутренней среды организации с использованием методов эвристики // Экономический анализ: теория и практика. 2007/№ 24, С. 11-14.
  20. Поплавская В. А. Подход к реализации изменений в системе управления организацией // Вестник Нижегородского университета им. Н. И. Лобачевского. 2011/№ 3, С. 230-235.
  21. Горшкова Л. А., Поплавская В. А. Выбор направления развития промышленных предприятий в соответствии с реализуемой ими стадией жизненного цикла // Вестник Нижегородского университета им. Н. И. Лобачевского. 2010/№ 4, С. 214-219.
  22. Горшкова Л. А., Поплавский Б. Н. Процесс разработки стратегии промышленного предприятия // Вестник Нижегородского университета им. Н.И. Лобачевского. Серия: Экономика и финансы. 2004/№ 2, С. 119-124.
  23. Горшкова Л. А., Поплавский Б. Н. Реализация и контроль выполнения стратегии с использованием эвристического инструментария // Экономический анализ: теория и практика. 2008/№ 11, С. 29-34.
  24. Трифонов Ю. В., Горбунова М. Л. Выбор стратегии развития предприятия в территориально-отраслевом контексте // Вестник Нижегородского университета им. Н. И. Лобачевского. Серия: Экономика и финансы. 2004/№ 2, С. 160-165.
  25. Горшкова Л. А., Поплавская В. А., Поплавский Б.Н. Управление организационной культурой: опыт крупного промышленного предприятия // Экономический анализ: теория и практика. 2012/№ 21, С. 19-26.