flowchart TB
O[Organisation Structure] --> F[Formal]
O --> I[Informal]
F --> L[Line]
F --> FU[Functional]
F --> LS[Line-and-Staff]
F --> DI[Divisional]
F --> MA[Matrix]
F --> NW[Network / Virtual]
classDef default fill:#003366,color:#ffffff,stroke:#ffcc00,stroke-width:3px,rx:10px,ry:10px;
50 Organization structure: Formal and informal organizations; Span of control
50.1 Concept of Organisation
Organisation has two meanings — as a process, it is “the arrangement of people and resources so as to accomplish defined objectives” (Koontz). As an entity, it is a social unit deliberately constructed to seek specific goals (Etzioni). Organisation structure is the framework that shows how tasks are divided, grouped and coordinated, and how authority and information flow. A well-designed structure links strategy and execution — wrong structure quietly defeats good strategy. Two layers always exist: the formal organisation (sanctioned by management; reflected in org charts) and the informal organisation (emerges spontaneously; reflects friendship, communication, influence).
50.2 Formal vs Informal Organisation
| Aspect | Formal | Informal |
|---|---|---|
| Creation | Deliberately by management | Spontaneously through interaction |
| Purpose | Achieve organisational objectives | Satisfy social and psychological needs |
| Authority | Position-based | Personal influence |
| Communication | Through formal channels | Grapevine; rumours, gossip |
| Rules | Explicit, written | Implicit, unwritten norms |
| Boundaries | Clear; fixed | Fluid; cuts across departments |
| Identified by | Charts, job descriptions, manuals | Friendship cliques, group dynamics |
Both coexist and are complementary. Wise managers do not try to suppress informal structures but understand and channel them.
50.3 Principles of Organising
- Objective — every position contributes to the objective.
- Specialisation / Division of labour.
- Unity of command.
- Scalar chain — clear vertical authority.
- Span of control — limit on number of subordinates per manager.
- Authority-responsibility parity.
- Delegation of routine work.
- Coordination of activities.
- Flexibility — adaptable to change.
- Continuity — long-term in design.
50.4 Span of Control / Span of Management
The span of control (also called span of management) is the number of subordinates a manager can effectively supervise. Influences the shape of the organisation — narrow span → tall pyramid; wide span → flat structure.
50.4.1 Factors Affecting Span
- Nature of work — routine work permits wider span.
- Capability of manager and subordinates — competent staff need less supervision.
- Geographical dispersion — wider geography → narrower span.
- Technology / Information systems — modern IT enables wider span.
- Standardisation — clear procedures widen span.
- Need for interaction — close interaction needs narrow span.
50.4.2 Graicunas’s Formula
V.A. Graicunas (1933) quantified the number of relationships a manager handles:
\[R = n \left[\frac{2^n}{2} + (n - 1)\right]\]
For 4 subordinates, R = 44; for 5, R = 100; for 6, R = 222 — relationships grow exponentially. Hence the case for narrow span at top.
50.4.3 Tall vs Flat Structures
| Aspect | Tall (narrow span) | Flat (wide span) |
|---|---|---|
| Levels | Many | Few |
| Span per manager | Small | Large |
| Communication | Slow; many filters | Fast; direct |
| Supervision | Close | Loose |
| Coordination | Difficult across many layers | Easier |
| Empowerment | Lower | Higher |
| Cost of management | Higher | Lower |
50.5 Types of Organisation Structures
| Structure | Working content |
|---|---|
| Line / Military | Simple direct chain; one boss per employee |
| Functional | Specialists head functions (production, marketing, finance, HR) — F.W. Taylor’s functional foremanship |
| Line-and-staff | Line authority + specialist staff advisers |
| Divisional | Organised by product, geography, customer, project |
| Matrix | Dual reporting — functional + project |
| Project / Team-based | Temporary cross-functional teams |
| Network / Virtual | Outsourced functions; small core |
| Holacracy / Flat self-managed | Self-managed roles; minimal hierarchy (Zappos) |
50.5.1 Matrix Organisation
A matrix structure combines functional and project lines — each employee has two bosses. Pros: efficient use of specialists; cross-functional collaboration. Cons: dual-authority conflict, slow decision-making.
50.6 Organisational Design — Mechanistic vs Organic
Burns and Stalker (1961) identified two contrasting design types:
| Aspect | Mechanistic | Organic |
|---|---|---|
| Environment | Stable, predictable | Dynamic, uncertain |
| Tasks | Specialised, rigid | Broad, flexible |
| Hierarchy | Tall, clear | Flat, networked |
| Rules | Many | Few |
| Communication | Vertical | Horizontal + vertical |
| Examples | Mass-production factories | Tech start-ups, R&D labs |
50.7 Centralisation vs Decentralisation
| Aspect | Centralisation | Decentralisation |
|---|---|---|
| Decision-making | Concentrated at top | Pushed down |
| Pros | Uniform decisions; tight control | Faster decisions; employee development; flexibility |
| Cons | Slow; demotivates middle managers | Coordination difficulty; possible inconsistency |
| Suited to | Small firms; crisis; uniform tasks | Large firms; diverse markets; volatile environments |
50.8 Departmentation
Departmentation is the grouping of related activities into units. Common bases:
- Function — production, marketing, finance, HR.
- Product — separate divisions for each product line.
- Geography / Territory — by region.
- Customer — by customer segment.
- Process — by stage of production.
- Matrix — combination.
PYQ trap: Span of control = number of subordinates per manager. Narrow span → tall structure; wide span → flat structure.
50.9 Practice Questions
A **formal** organisation is one:
View solution
A **narrow** span of control results in:
View solution
Graicunas's formula calculates the **number of relationships** a manager handles based on:
View solution
In a **matrix** structure:
View solution
Mechanistic vs organic organisations were distinguished by:
View solution
Match each structure with its description:
| Structure | Description | ||
| (i) | Line | (a) | Specialists head functions |
| (ii) | Functional | (b) | Dual reporting |
| (iii) | Divisional | (c) | Organised by product/region/customer |
| (iv) | Matrix | (d) | Simple chain; one boss |
View solution
The "grapevine" is associated with:
View solution
**Decentralisation** typically results in:
View solution
A bank with separate divisions for retail, corporate, and investment banking is departmentalised by:
View solution
A *network / virtual* organisation typically:
View solution
Which is **not** a factor widening span of control?
View solution
In a *functional* structure, employees are grouped by:
View solution
A radically flat, self-managed structure with minimal hierarchy is called:
View solution
A flat organisation typically has:
View solution
In a *line-and-staff* organisation:
View solution
An *organic* organisation is best suited for:
View solution
By Graicunas, total relationships with 4 subordinates is:
View solution
A key disadvantage of matrix structure is:
View solution
"Scalar chain" refers to:
View solution
Which is **not** true of an informal organisation?
View solution
50.10 Quick Recall
- Organisation — process (arranging) + entity (social unit, Etzioni).
- Formal (deliberate, charted) vs Informal (spontaneous, grapevine).
- Principles of organising: objective, specialisation, unity of command, scalar chain, span, authority-responsibility parity, delegation, coordination.
- Span of control — narrow → tall; wide → flat. Graicunas (1933) formula: R = n[2ⁿ/2 + (n−1)].
- Structures: Line, Functional (Taylor), Line-and-Staff, Divisional, Matrix (dual reporting), Project, Network/Virtual, Holacracy.
- Mechanistic (stable, bureaucratic) vs Organic (dynamic, flexible) — Burns & Stalker 1961.
- Centralised vs Decentralised — trade-off between control and speed.
- Departmentation by: Function, Product, Geography, Customer, Process, Matrix.