FEDERAL AGENCY FOR EDUCATION

Branch of the State Educational Institution

higher professional education

"Altai State University" in Slavgorod

Faculty of Economics

Department of Economic Disciplines

Course work

in the subject: "Theory of organization"

On the topic: "Analysis of the organizational structure of management"

Is done by a student

2 courses, group No. 61

_____________________

(signature)

scientific adviser

Senior Lecturer

_____________________

(signature)

Job protected

«___»__________ 2008

Grade_______________

Slavgorod 2008

ABSTRACT 3

INTRODUCTION 4

1 Analysis and formation of organizational management structures based on a systematic approach 6

1.1 The concept of a systematic approach, its main features and principles. 6

1.2 The concept and formation of the organizational structure 11

2 Analysis of the organizational structure on the example of Brücke LLC 27

2.1 Characteristics of the enterprise 27

2.2 Organizational structure of management of Brücke LLC 28

2.3 The main directions for improving the organizational structure of the management of LLC "Brücke" 33

CONCLUSION 36

REFERENCES 38

ESSAY

To achieve this goal, the following tasks were set in the work.

When writing the work, the following methods were used: comparison, analysis, observation, graphic, method of expert assessments, etc.

INTRODUCTION

The performance of work to improve the organizational structure of management requires the involvement of specialists in the field of management, information technology of the industry to which the enterprise belongs.

Changes in the organizational structure of the enterprise are made through the formation, abolition, merger and separation of structural units (positions), their reassignment, changes in the functions of structural units (officials), the formation of regulations and procedures for management processes. No less important are the measures regulating the information exchange at the enterprise, in particular the management accounting system, internal document flow. Such regulations, as a rule, are also fixed in the internal standards of the enterprise.

Changing the organizational structure is often a complex and painless process. An indispensable condition for its implementation is the will and direct participation of the top management of the enterprise. In order to overcome the alertness of middle management personnel and maintain the stability of the enterprise, changes in the organizational structure are usually not declared as the goal of ongoing activities at the start of work. On the contrary, at the survey stage, the goal of the work is usually called the study of information exchange between departments, preparatory measures for the introduction of management automation, etc. technical problems. If the reorganization is seen as inevitable, then, as a rule, new employees who are not involved in stable relations within the enterprise are involved in its implementation.

This topic is more relevant than ever in our days, because. the problems of choosing and building an organizational structure in an enterprise are of concern to many. This topic is also relevant in that in Russia an economic situation is now brewing that forces the organization to change, but most organizations have not been able to adapt to changes in the external environment and this has caused such a crisis situation for many enterprises in our country.

The subject of the research is the consideration of the organizational structure of management at the enterprise.

The object of the study is Brücke LLC.

The purpose of this course work is to improve the organizational structure of management at the enterprise LLC "Brücke".

To achieve this goal, the following tasks were set in the work.

form an idea of ​​the systematic approach, its features and peculiarities;

give the concept of organizational structure and consider its classification;

to analyze the organizational structure of Brücke LLC;

suggest ways to improve the structure of Brücke LLC in accordance with a systematic approach.

When writing the work, the following methods were used: comparison, analysis, observation, graphic, method of expert assessments, etc.

The sources of information are the works of such authors as B.Z. Milner, O.S. Vikhansky, M.Kh. Meskon, and others, as well as the management documents of Brücke LLC.

1 Analysis and formation of organizational management structures based on a systematic approach

1.1 The concept of a systematic approach, its main features and principles.

There is no unambiguous concept of a system. In the most general form, a system is understood as a set of interrelated elements that form a certain integrity, a certain unity. The study of objects and phenomena as systems caused the formation of a new approach in science - a systematic approach.

The system approach as a general methodological principle is used in various industries science and human activity.

Let's define the features of a systematic approach:

A systematic approach is a form of methodological knowledge associated with the study and creation of objects as systems.

A systematic approach requires considering the problem not in isolation, but in the unity of relations with the environment, to comprehend the essence of each connection and individual element, to make associations between general and particular goals.

In view of the foregoing, we define the concept of a systematic approach:

A systematic approach is an approach to the study of an object (problem, phenomenon, process) as a system in which the elements, internal and external relations that most significantly affect the results of its functioning are identified, and the goals of each of the elements, based on the general purpose of the object .

It can also be said that a systematic approach is such a direction in the methodology of scientific knowledge and practical activity, which is based on the study of any object as a complex integral socio-economic system.

Integrity, which allows considering the system at the same time as a whole and at the same time as a subsystem for higher levels.

Hierarchy of the structure, i.e. the presence of a set (at least two) elements located on the basis of the subordination of elements of the lower level - elements top level. The implementation of this principle is clearly visible in the example of any particular organization. As you know, any organization is an interaction of two subsystems: managing and managed.

Structuring, which allows you to analyze the elements of the system and their relationships within a specific organizational structure. As a rule, the process of functioning of the system is determined not so much by the properties of its individual elements, but by the properties of the structure itself.

Multiplicity, which allows using a variety of cybernetic, economic and mathematical models to describe individual elements and the system as a whole.

Any organization is considered as an organizational and economic system that has inputs and outputs and a certain number of external links.

An organizational system is a certain set of internally interconnected parts of an organization that forms a certain integrity.

The main elements of the organizational system (and hence the objects of organizational management) are:

production;

marketing and sales;

• information;

  personnel, human resources - have a system-forming quality, the efficiency of the use of all other resources depends on them.

These elements are the main objects of organizational management. But the organizational system has another side:

People. The task of the manager is to promote the coordination and integration of human activities.

Targets and goals. The organizational goal is an ideal blueprint for the future state of the organization. This goal contributes to the unification of the efforts of people and their resources. Goals are formed on the basis of common interests, so the organization is a tool for achieving goals.

Organizational structure. A structure is a way of organizing the elements of a system. Organizational structure is a way of connecting various parts of an organization into a certain integrity.

Specialization and division of labor. It is also a control object. The fragmentation of complex production processes, operations and tasks into components that require the specialization of human labor.

Organizational power is the right, ability (knowledge + skills) and willingness of the leader to pursue his own line in the preparation, adoption and implementation of managerial decisions.

Organizational culture is a system of traditions, beliefs, values, symbols, rituals, myths, norms of communication between people inherent in the organization. Organizational culture gives an organization its own identity. Most importantly, it brings people together, creates organizational integrity.

Organizational boundaries are material and non-material constraints that fix the isolation of this organization from other objects located in the external environment of the organization. A manager must have the ability to expand the boundaries of his own organization.

Organizational systems can be divided into closed and open:

A closed organizational system is a system that has no connection with its external environment (i.e., does not exchange products, services, goods, etc. with the external environment). An example is subsistence farming.

An open organizational system has connections with the external environment, i.e. other organizations, institutions that have connections with the external environment.

Thus, the organization as a system is a set of interrelated elements that form integrity (ie, internal unity, continuity, interconnection). Any organization is an open system, because interacts with the external environment. She gets out environment resources in the form of capital, raw materials, energy, information, people, equipment, which become elements of its internal environment. Part of the resources with the help of certain technologies is processed, converted into products and services, which are then transferred to the external environment.

Any enterprise is a system that turns a set of resources invested in production - costs (raw materials, machines, people) - into goods and services. It functions within a larger system - a foreign policy, economic, social and technical environment in which it constantly enters into complex interactions. It includes a series of subsystems that are also interconnected and interact. Disruption of functioning in one part of the system causes difficulties in other parts of it.

The value of a systems approach is that managers can more easily align their specific work with that of the organization as a whole if they understand the system and their role in it. This is especially important for the CEO, because the systems approach encourages him to maintain the necessary balance between the needs of individual departments and the goals of the entire organization. It makes him think about the flow of information going through the whole system and also emphasizes the importance of communication. A systems approach helps to identify the reasons for making ineffective decisions, it also provides tools and techniques for improving planning and control.

A modern leader must have systems thinking, because:

the manager must perceive, process and systematize a huge amount of information and knowledge that are necessary for making managerial decisions;

the manager needs a systematic methodology with which he could correlate one direction of his organization's activity with another, to prevent inconsistencies in management decisions;

the manager must see beyond the private - the general, rise above everyday life and realize what place his organization occupies in the external environment, how it interacts with another, larger system, of which it is a part;

a systematic approach to management allows the manager to more productively implement his main functions: forecasting, planning, organization, leadership, control.

Systems thinking not only contributed to the development of new ideas about the organization (in particular, special attention was paid to the integrated nature of the enterprise, as well as the paramount importance and importance of information systems), but also provided the development of useful mathematical tools and techniques that greatly facilitate managerial decision-making, the use of more advanced planning and control systems. Thus, a systematic approach allows us to comprehensively evaluate any production and economic activity and the activity of the management system at the level of specific characteristics. This will help to analyze any situation within a single system, to identify the nature of the input, process and output problems. The application of a systematic approach allows the best way to organize the decision-making process at all levels in the management system.

Despite all the positive results, systems thinking has still not fulfilled its most important purpose. The claim that it will allow the application of the modern scientific method to management has not yet been realized. This is partly because large-scale systems are very complex. It is not easy to grasp the many ways in which the external environment influences the internal organization. The interaction of many subsystems within the enterprise is not fully understood. The boundaries of systems are very difficult to establish, too broad a definition will lead to the accumulation of costly and unusable data, and too narrow - to a partial solution of problems. It will not be easy to formulate the questions that will arise before the enterprise, to determine with accuracy the information needed in the future. Even if the best and most logical solution is found, it may not be feasible. Nevertheless, a systematic approach provides an opportunity to better understand how the enterprise works.

1.2 The concept and formation of the organizational structure

The organizational structure of enterprise management is traditionally understood as a complex characteristic, including: the composition and linear subordination of structural units within the enterprise; normative and actual distribution of functions between structural divisions; functional subordination and jurisdiction of structural divisions; regulations and procedures for the interaction of departments developed for special cases.

The optimal organizational structure is one that fulfills the following general principles

The fixed functions of structural divisions fully cover the needs of managing business processes carried out at the enterprise;

The fixed functions of the units coincide with the actual ones;

The functions assigned to each division do not come into conflict with each other when evaluating performance;

Duplication of functions of various departments is minimized;

The functions of each division are provided in terms of resources (including administrative resources);

The functions of each division are provided in terms of information;

Control procedures have been developed and are in place. Each organization is a rather complex technical, economic and social system, which reflects its individuality and specificity. In order to describe this system, it will first be necessary to determine the nature of interaction at each of its levels: the interaction of the organization with the external environment, between organizational units, between groups of people, and, perhaps, the interaction between an individual and the entire organization as a whole. The ways in which these parties interact allow us to view the system in a certain way, and also allow us to judge how effectively it copes with its main task. The structure of the organization is not unimportant.

Scientifically substantiated formation of organizational management structures is an urgent task of the modern stage of adaptation of economic entities to a market economy. Under the new conditions, it is necessary to widely use the principles and methods of designing a management organization based on a systematic approach.

Significance and tasks of organizational design

Without the development of methods for designing management structures, it is difficult to further improve management and increase production efficiency, since:

=> First; in the new conditions, in a number of cases, it is impossible to operate with old organizational forms that do not meet the requirements of market relations and create a danger of deformation of the management tasks themselves;

=> Secondly, in the sphere of economic management of technical systems. An integrated approach to improving the organizational mechanism was previously largely replaced by work on the introduction and use of automated control systems;

=> Thirdly, the creation of a structure should be based not only on experience, analogy, habitual schemes and intuition, but also on the scientific methods of organizational design;

=> Fourthly, the design of the most complex mechanism - the control mechanism - should be entrusted to specialists who own the methodology for the formation of organizational systems.

When developing the principles and methods of designing a structure as a frozen set of organs corresponding to each specialized management function, it first of all includes a system of goals and their distribution among various links. This includes the composition of units that are in certain connections and relationships with each other; distribution of responsibility. Important elements of the management structure are communications, information flows and document flow in the organization.

An organizational structure is a behavioral system, these are people and their groups constantly entering into various relationships to solve common problems.

Such versatility of the organizational mechanism is incompatible with the use of any unambiguous methods - either formal or informal. Therefore, it is necessary to combine scientific methods and principles of the formation of structures (system approach) with a large expert-analytical work, the study of domestic and foreign experience. The entire methodology for designing structures should be based first on the goals, and then on the mechanism for achieving them.

The systematic approach to the formation of the structure is manifested in the following:

Do not lose sight of any of the management tasks, without which the implementation of the goals will not be complete;

To identify and interconnect in relation to these tasks the entire system of functions, rights and responsibilities along the management vertical - from the general director of the enterprise to the site foreman;

Investigate and organize all connections and relationships along the horizontal management;

Provide an organic combination of vertical and horizontal management.

Study of the influence of the external environment on the design of the organization

Stage - identification and description of elements of the external environment (input, output, technology, knowledge)

Stage - identification of the main relationships between elements of the external environment, including elements of direct impact

Stage - determining the degree of diversity of elements of the external environment (changes, certainty, feedback)

Stage - the design of each element of the organizational structure, taking into account the external environment in which this element will function.

Stage - the formation of a management mechanism, taking into account the specifics of the elements of the organizational structure and its external environment.

Basic methodological principles

Until recently, the methods of building management were characterized by an excessively normative nature, insufficient diversity, which led to a mechanical transfer of the methods used in the past. organizational forms into new conditions. Often the administrative apparatus at various levels repeated the same schemes. From a scientific point of view, the initial factors in the formation of structures themselves were interpreted too narrowly: the number of personnel instead of the goals of organizations; a constant set of organs instead of changing their composition and combination under different conditions.

One of the main shortcomings of the methods used was their functional orientation, strict regulation of management processes, and not their results. Therefore, the goals and interrelations of various parts of the management system become more important than the strict establishment of their functional specialization. This is especially evident when solving problems related to the creation of corporations, joint-stock companies, financial and industrial groups, orders and contracts at the request of consumers, with a comprehensive solution to product quality problems.

A systematic approach, attaching great importance to the scientifically based definition of the management function and headcount standards as part of the overall process of forming an organizational and managerial structure, focuses researchers and developers on more general principles organization design. Those. it assumes the original definition of the system organization goals, which determine the structure of tasks and the content of the functions of the management apparatus.

The main purpose of most production organizations from the point of view of society is determined by the goals of satisfying the market demand for products and services. At the same time, the correspondence between the system of goals and the organizational structure of management cannot be unambiguous.

In a single system, various methods of forming organizational management structures should also be considered. These methods are of a different nature, each of them separately does not allow solving all practically important problems and must be used in organic combination with others.

The effectiveness of building an organizational structure cannot be assessed by any one indicator. On the one hand, it should be taken into account to what extent the structure ensures the achievement of results by the organization that correspond to the production and economic goals set for it, on the other hand, to what extent its internal structure and functioning processes are adequate to the objective requirements for their content, organization, properties.

The ultimate criterion of effectiveness when comparing different options for organizational structure is the most complete and sustainable achievement of goals. However, as a rule, it is extremely difficult to bring this criterion to practically applicable simple indicators. Therefore, it is advisable to use a set of normative characteristics of the control apparatus: its performance in processing information; efficiency in making managerial decisions; reliability of the control apparatus; adaptability and flexibility. When problems arise, it is necessary to formulate the number of personnel as a criterion of economic efficiency, in accordance with which the maximization of results in relation to management costs should be ensured. The size of the management apparatus must be objectively justified in order to fully ensure the solution of problems arising from the goals of the organizational system.

The process of forming an organizational structure.

The process of forming the organizational structure includes the formulation of goals and objectives, determining the composition and place of units, their resource support (including the number of employees), the development of regulatory procedures, documents, regulations that fix and regulate the forms, methods, processes that are carried out in the organizational management system .

This whole process can be organized into three major stages:

Formation of a common block diagram in all cases, it is of fundamental importance, since it determines the main characteristics of the organization, as well as the directions in which more in-depth design should be carried out, both the organizational structure and other most important aspects of the system (the ability to process information).

The development of the composition of the main divisions and the links between them consists in the fact that the implementation of organizational decisions is envisaged not only in general for large linear-functional and program-target blocks, but also up to independent (basic) divisions of the management apparatus, the distribution of specific tasks between them and building intra-organizational relationships. Basic subdivisions are understood as independent structural units (departments, bureaus, departments, sectors, laboratories), into which linear-functional and program-targeted subsystems are organizationally divided. Base units may have their own internal structure.

Regulation of the organizational structure - provides for the development of quantitative characteristics of the management apparatus and procedures for management activities. It includes: determination of the composition of the internal elements of the basic units (bureaus, groups and positions); determination of the design number of units; distribution of tasks and work between specific performers; establishing responsibility for their implementation; development of procedures for performing managerial work in departments; calculations of management costs and performance indicators of the management apparatus in the conditions of the designed organizational structure.

Structure design methods.

The organizational structure combines both technological, economic, informational, administrative and organizational interactions that lend themselves to direct analysis and rational design, as well as socio-psychological characteristics and connections.

The specificity of the problem of designing the organizational structure of management lies in the fact that it cannot be adequately represented as a problem of formally choosing the best variant of the organizational structure according to a clearly formulated, unambiguous, mathematically expressed criterion of optimality. This is a quantitative-qualitative, multi-criteria problem solved on the basis of a combination of scientific, including formalized, methods of analysis, evaluation, modeling of organizational systems with the subjective activity of responsible managers, specialists and experts in choosing and evaluating the best options for organizational decisions.

The process of organizational design consists in a sequence of approaching the model of a rational management structure, in which design methods play an auxiliary role in considering, evaluating and adopting the most effective options for organizational decisions for practical implementation.

There are complementary methods:

The method of analogies consists in the application of organizational forms and management mechanisms in relation to the projected organization. The analogy method includes the development of standard management structures for production and economic organizations and the definition of the boundaries and conditions for their application.

The use of the analogy method is based on two complementary approaches. The first of these is to identify for each type of production and economic organizations and for various industries the values ​​and trends of changes in the main organizational characteristics and their corresponding organizational forms and management mechanisms. The second approach represents the typification of the most general fundamental decisions about the nature and relationships of the links of the management apparatus, and individual positions in clearly defined working conditions of organizations of this type in specific industries, as well as the development of individual regulatory characteristics of the management apparatus for these organizations and industries.

Typification of solutions is a means of increasing the overall level of organization of production management. Typical organizational decisions should be: variant, not unambiguous; reviewed and adjusted at regular intervals; allowing for deviations in cases where the conditions of the organization's work differ from clearly defined conditions for which an appropriate standard form of the organizational management structure is recommended.

The expert-analytical method consists in the examination and analytical study of the organization by qualified specialists with the involvement of its managers and other employees in order to identify specific features, problems in the work of the management apparatus, and also to develop rational recommendations for its formation or restructuring based on quantitative assessments of the effectiveness of the organizational structure, rational management principles, expert opinions, as well as generalization and analysis of the most advanced trends in the field of management organization. This includes conducting expert surveys of managers and members of the organization to identify and analyze individual characteristics of the construction and functioning of the management apparatus, processing the obtained expert assessments by statistical and mathematical methods.

Expert methods should also include the development and application of scientific principles for the formation of organizational management structures. The principles of formation of organizational structures of management are the specification of more general principles of management (for example, unity of command or collective leadership, specialization). Examples of the formation of organizational management structures: building an organizational structure based on a system of goals, separation of strategic and coordinating functions from operational management, a combination of functional and program-targeted management, and a number of others.

A special place among expert methods is occupied by the development of graphical and tabular descriptions of organizational structures and management processes, reflecting recommendations for their best organization. This is preceded by the development of options for organizational solutions aimed at eliminating the identified organizational problems that meet the scientific principles and best practices of management organization, as well as the required level of quantitative and qualitative criteria for assessing the effectiveness of organizational structures.

The goal structuring method involves the development of a system of organization goals, including their quantitative and qualitative formulations. When using it, the following steps are most often performed:

1. Development of a system (tree) of goals, which is a structural basis for linking all types of organizational activities based on the final results;

   Expert analysis of the proposed options for the organizational structure in terms of organizational security for achieving each of the goals, observing the principle of homogeneity of goals set for each unit, determining the relationship of leadership, subordination, cooperation between units based on the relationship of their goals, etc.;

   Drawing up rights and responsibility maps for achieving goals for individual departments, as well as for complex cross-functional activities, where the area of ​​​​responsibility is regulated (products, resources, labor, information, production and management resources); concrete results, for the achievement of which responsibility is established; the rights that are given to achieve results (to agree, confirm, control).

The method of organizational modeling is the development of formalized mathematical, graphical, computer and other representations of the distribution of powers and responsibilities in an organization, which are the basis for building, analyzing and evaluating various options for organizational structures by the relationship of their variables. There are several main types of organizational models:

mathematical-cybernetic models of hierarchical management structures that describe organizational connections and relationships in the form of systems of mathematical equations and inequalities;

graphic-analytical models of organizational systems, which are network, matrix, and other tabular and graphic displays of the distribution of functions, powers, responsibilities, and organizational relationships. They make it possible to analyze their direction, nature, causes of occurrence, evaluate various options for grouping interrelated activities into homogeneous units, “lose” options for the distribution of rights and responsibilities between different levels of management, etc.

full-scale models of organizational structures and processes, which consist in assessing their functioning in real organizational conditions. These include organizational experiments - pre-planned and controlled restructuring of structures and processes in real organizations; laboratory experiments - artificially created situations of decision-making and organizational behavior; management games - actions of practical workers;

mathematical-statistical models of dependencies between the initial factors of organizational systems and the characteristics of organizational structures. They are based on the collection, analysis and processing of empirical data on organizations operating in comparable conditions.

The process of designing the organizational structure of management should be based on the joint use of the methods described above.

The choice of a method for solving a particular organizational problem depends on its nature, as well as the possibilities for conducting an appropriate study.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of organizational decisions

Efficiency evaluation is an important element in the development of design and planning decisions, which makes it possible to determine the level of progressiveness of the current structure, projects under development or planned activities, and is carried out in order to select the most rational variant of the structure or a way to improve it. The effectiveness of the organizational structure should be assessed at the design stage, when analyzing the management structures of existing organizations for planning and implementing measures to improve management.

A comprehensive set of criteria for the effectiveness of the management system is formed taking into account two areas for assessing its functioning:

according to the degree of compliance of the achieved results with the established goals of the production and economic organization;

according to the degree of compliance of the process of the system functioning with the objective requirements for its content of the organization and results.

The criterion of effectiveness in comparing different options for the organizational structure is the possibility of the most complete and sustainable achievement of the ultimate goals of the management system at relatively lower costs for its operation.

Of fundamental importance for evaluating the effectiveness of a management system is the choice of a basis for comparison or determining the level of efficiency, which is taken as normative. One of the differentiation approaches is reduced to comparison with indicators that characterize the effectiveness of the organizational structure of the reference version of control systems. The reference version can be developed and designed using all available control system design methods and tools. The characteristics of this option are accepted as normative. It can also be compared with performance indicators and characteristics of the management system chosen as a benchmark that determines the acceptable or sufficient level of efficiency of the organizational structure.

Often, instead of methods, an expert assessment of the organizational and technical level of the analyzed and designed system, as well as its individual subsystems and design and planning decisions is used, or a comprehensive assessment of the management system based on the use of a quantitative and qualitative approach that allows evaluating the effectiveness of management by a significant combination of factors.

The indicators used in assessing the effectiveness of the management apparatus and its organizational structure can be divided into the following three interrelated groups.

A group of indicators that characterize the effectiveness of the management system, expressed through the final results of the organization's activities, and management costs. When evaluating efficiency based on indicators characterizing the final results organization activities, as an effect due to the functioning or development of the management system, volume, profit, cost, volume of capital investments, product quality, timing of the introduction of new technology, etc. can be considered.

A group of indicators that characterize the content and organization of the management process, including the immediate results and costs of managerial work. As management costs, current expenses for the maintenance of the management apparatus, the operation of technical facilities, the maintenance of buildings and premises, the training and retraining of management personnel are taken into account.

When evaluating the effectiveness of the management process, indicators are used that can be evaluated both quantitatively and qualitatively. These indicators acquire a normative character and can be used as a criterion for the effectiveness of restrictions when the organizational structure changes in the direction of improving one or a group of performance indicators without changing (worsening) the rest. The following can be attributed to the regulatory characteristics of the control apparatus: productivity, efficiency, adaptability, flexibility, efficiency, reliability.

A group of indicators characterizing the rationality of the organizational structure and its technical and organizational level. The structures include the linkage of the management system, the level of centralization of management functions, the accepted standards of manageability, the balance in the distribution of rights and responsibilities.

To assess the effectiveness of management, it is important to determine the compliance of the management system and its organizational structure with the management object. This finds expression in the balance of the composition of functions and goals of management, the correspondence of the number of employees to the volume and complexity of work, the completeness of providing the required information, the provision of processes for managing technological means, taking into account their nomenclature.

Important requirements are the ability to adequately reflect the dynamism of controlled processes, balance and consistency of indicators. When evaluating the effectiveness of individual measures to improve the management system, it is allowed to use the basic requirements for their choice - the maximum compliance of each indicator with the target orientation of the event and the completeness of the reflection of the achieved effect.

Adjustment of organizational structures.

In most cases, decisions to adjust structures are made by the top management of the organization as part of their core responsibilities. Significant organizational undertakings are not carried out until there is a firm adjustment of the structure or the development of a new project.

Unsatisfactory functioning of the enterprise. The most common reason for the need to develop a new organization project is failure to reduce cost growth, increase productivity, expand ever-shrinking domestic and foreign markets, or attract new financial resources. Usually, first of all, changes are made in the composition and level of qualifications of workers, the development of special programs. But the reason for the unsatisfactory activity of the enterprise lies in certain shortcomings of the organizational structure of management.

Top management overload. If measures to change the methods and procedures of management do not reduce the burden, do not lead to lasting relief, then a very effective means of solving this problem is the redistribution of rights and functions, adjustments and clarifications in the forms of organization.

Lack of perspective orientation. The future development of the enterprise requires more and more attention from top managers to strategic tasks. At the same time, many managers still continue to devote most of their time to operational issues. Which will lead to a simple extrapolation of current trends in the future. The top manager must be aware that his most important responsibility is to enable the enterprise to develop and implement a strategic program.

Disagreements on organizational issues. Every experienced leader knows that stability in the organizational structure of an enterprise also depends on whether there is internal harmony. This structure makes it difficult to achieve goals, allows for an unfair distribution of power, and so on. When there are deep and enduring disagreements about organizational structure, the only way out is to study the structure carefully. A change in leadership often prompts a decision to reorganize. The replacement group may find this form completely inconsistent with its approach to the problems of the enterprise.

As experience shows, the process of making adjustments to the organizational structure of management should include:

Systematic analysis of the functioning of the organization and its environment in order to identify problem areas. The analysis may be based on a comparison of competing or related organizations representing other areas of economic activity;

Development of a master plan for improving the organizational structure;

Ensuring that the innovation program contains the most simple and specific proposals for change;

Consistent implementation of planned changes. The introduction of minor changes has a greater chance of success than major changes;

Encouraging employees to raise their level of awareness, which will allow them to better assess their ownership and, therefore, increase their accountability for the planned changes.

2 Analysis of the organizational structure on the example of Brücke LLC

2.1 Characteristics of the enterprise

LLC "Brücke" was founded in 1995 and is located on the territory of the village of Shumanovka, German National Region. The company is engaged in meat processing and production of meat products - this is the main activity. In addition, it is additionally engaged in the production of dairy products, and there is also a mill.

The enterprise has been operating on the market for the ninth year and during this period certain successes have been achieved. First, they occupy a certain position in the market. Secondly, the products are made only of high quality and excellent taste characteristics. These indicators make it possible to attract an increasing number of new customers and develop settlement systems for regular customers.

The production of sausages is carried out according to German technology, according to which raw materials are not salted and this ensures high quality products that do not contain soy and synthetic additives.

The company sells its products through retail stores in nearby areas, as well as in Barnaul and Novosibirsk. To meet such a large number of consumer requests, the company switched to two-shift work.

The financial condition is stable, which allows the company to expand, develop new types of products.

An important role in ensuring this state of affairs is played by the management structure at the enterprise, which we will get acquainted with in paragraph 2.2.

2.2 Organizational structure of management of Brücke LLC

The purpose of the organizational structure is to ensure the achievement of the objectives of the organization.

When creating the enterprise, an organizational management structure was developed (Fig. 2.1.), In which the organization was divided horizontally into broad blocks corresponding to the most important areas of activity: deputy director, chief technologist, engineer.

DIRECTOR

W deputy director

G master technologist

Downhole

Sausage

Expedition

Engineering service

Fig.2.1. Linear management structure of Brücke LLC

The ratio of powers of various positions is established. In doing so, management establishes the purpose of the teams and makes further divisions into smaller organizational units in order to use specialization more effectively and avoid overloading management.

Thus, the deputy director is subordinate to the downhole shop, as he is engaged in the supply of raw materials. The chief technologist has a slaughter shop, deboning, a sausage shop, an expedition, that is, production technology is controlled.

An engineer has an engineering service, that is, ensuring the uninterrupted operation of equipment. So, this control structure is linear. This management in its "pure" form assumes that the general decisions of the first manager are concretized by specialists: the chief technologist, engineer. They give the production links in their areas of mandatory tasks. In conditions when the company was just entering the market, and with a small number of employees, this approach ensured the high quality of decisions made.

Having occupied its niche in the market, the company began to produce more products, more customers appeared in the face of suppliers and buyers. As a result, it became clear that the current management system does not cope with the tasks assigned to it due to too much work. But there was another reason as well. Having applied this system at the enterprise, they did not think about the consequences, and in practice, functional management turned out to be not viable. Independent decisions of specialists, no matter how good they are in themselves, inevitably come into conflict with each other. As a result, specialists began to fight with each other to ensure that their decisions were carried out in the first place, all this brought disorganization into the management of society.

As an example, one can imagine a situation when the deputy director found profitable suppliers of raw materials, and the technologist rejected the supplies, considering the quality of the imported meat to be inappropriate, that is, there was clearly a mismatch of opinions of specialists.

Thus, we can conclude that this structure did not turn out to be an ideal model for management. Over time, it showed its advantages and disadvantages in a clear form.

The advantages of this management structure are as follows:

The head was personally responsible for the final results of the activities of his unit;

Obtaining by executors of interconnected orders and tasks provided with resources;

A clear system of mutual relations between the leader and the subordinate;

Responsiveness to direct instructions.

But all these positive aspects are suppressed by negative factors, which ultimately led to the need to revise the structure. These include the following:

Inconsistency in the actions of the heads of departments, a tendency to red tape when solving issues related to departments;

High requirements for the manager, who must have extensive, versatile knowledge and experience in all management functions and areas of activity carried out by subordinates, which limits the manager's ability to effectively manage;

Overload of top-level managers, a huge amount of information, a flow of paperwork, multiple contacts with subordinates and managers;

Lack of links for planning and preparation of management decisions.

Therefore, in 2000, the question arose about changing the structure, about the relationship of management links. A new governance structure has been developed and is currently in place (Figure 2.2.)

DIRECTOR

Deputy Director for Finance

Chief technologist

Management for supply and marketing

Head economist

Chief Accountant

Legal. Department

And engineering service

Procurement department

Marketing department

Downhole shop

Sausage shop

Figure 2.2 - Linear-functional management structure of Brücke LLC

The following arguments have been put forward in favor of this structure:

Now each governing body is specialized in performing individual functions at all levels of management;

Compliance with the instructions of each functional body within its competence is mandatory for production units;

Decisions on general issues are taken collectively;

The functional specialization of the management apparatus significantly increases its efficiency, since instead of universal managers who must understand the performance of all functions, highly qualified specialists appear;

The structure is aimed at performing constantly repetitive tasks.

An analysis of the current management system and a study of the enterprise's activities allows us to draw the following conclusions:

Firstly, in order to coordinate tasks between the main departments, a close relationship has been established. This is manifested in the following: in order to make a decision, all leading experts confer and develop common decision for further production activities;

secondly, in connection with the increased volume of production, it became necessary to create additional departments at the enterprise. Department functions include:

Deputy Director for Finance - provides production with working capital for the smooth operation of the enterprise;

Lawyer - provides the legal basis for the activities of the enterprise;

Chief technologist - controls the production process by workshops, ensuring that products comply with quality standards;

Engineer - his duties include monitoring the smooth operation of equipment;

The Purchasing and Sales Manager, who is in charge of the procurement department and the marketing department, is responsible for ensuring the uninterrupted supply of raw materials, as well as monitoring the process of marketing products, working with buyers.

This system has shown its effectiveness in the management process. The benefits of this governance structure include:

High competence of specialists responsible for the implementation of specific functions;

Releasing line managers from solving many special issues and expanding their capabilities for operational management of production;

The basis for the use of experienced specialists in the work of consultations is being created, the need for generalists is reduced.

But along with the advantages, there are also disadvantages of this management structure:

Difficulties in maintaining constant relationships between various functional services;

Lengthy decision making process;

Lack of mutual understanding and unity of action between functional services;

Reducing the responsibility of the performer for the work as a result of the fact that each performer receives instructions from several managers;

Duplication and inconsistency of instructions and orders received by employees, since each functional head and specialized unit puts its issues in the first place.

But it is impossible to successfully operate in the market without applying something new, the past results achieved are just a stepping stone to the next achievements. Our proposals, after studying the activities of LLC "Brücke", we offer in the next section.

2.3 The main directions for improving the organizational structure of the management of Brücke LLC

The systems approach involves considering the organization as an open system. This means that it is influenced external factors both positive and negative. The task of the management of Brücke LLC is to take advantage of its advantages by changing the organizational structure and minimize the negative impact of shortcomings.

In the previous chapter, we studied how changes occurred in the management system at the enterprise. And a lot in this system depends on the leader, because it is he who must organize the work, choose the structure of the organization.

In a broad sense, the task of managers in this case is to choose the management structure that best suits the goals and objectives of the organization, as well as external and internal factors interacting with it.

Having studied the state of affairs at Brücke LLC, we propose the following changes in the current management structure, based on the fact that the company intends to expand its activities by January 2005. New types of products will appear (bakery products, pasta, etc.), production areas will expand, and all this requires the introduction of a divisional management system (Figure 2.3.).

G

The structuring of subdivisions by departments is carried out, as a rule, according to one of the criteria, namely, by products (bread, sausages, pasta);

Heads of secondary functional services report to the manager of the production unit (technologist of the downhole shop to the chief technologist);

Assistants to the head of the production department control the activities of functional services in all departments of the company, coordinating their activities horizontally.

Generally this system will continue to grow the enterprise, as well as effectively manage different types activities in different markets. The heads of the established departments will be able to coordinate activities not only “along the line”, but also “by functions”, making their activities even more efficient and efficient. Thus, a good personnel reserve will be created for the strategic level of the enterprise, since the division of decisions by levels speeds up their adoption and improves their quality.

Along with the features of this management structure, I would like to dwell on the advantages of this management structure:

First, a closer connection between production and consumers will be established, as well as a faster response to changes that may occur in the external environment, that is, in the market. A change in demand, a decrease in one of the types of manufactured products, the enterprise will not put on the verge of bankruptcy, since it is possible to switch to another type of product and, moreover, very quickly with this structure.

The second point is the improvement of coordination of work in departments, due to subordination to one person.

Thirdly, the emergence of divisions of the competitive advantages of small firms. Each division will try to be the main one, and for this, it is possible that the quality of products will improve, a search will be made for possible reserves to reduce costs, and as a result, the possibility of increasing profits not only for the division, but for the entire company as a whole, which is not so few.

No economic phenomenon is possible only as positive. Management is no exception, and therefore this structure has as a disadvantage the growth of the vertical of management, but this is still due to the expansion of production, which plays a more significant role in activities.

The organizational structure that emerged as a result of the development is not a frozen form, similar to the frame of a building, but a process that clearly responds to changes in the market, plans and requires further reorganization if necessary, that is, this process, like all functions of the organization, is endless.

CONCLUSION

The organizational structure of the enterprise is created as something that ensures the stable operation of the enterprise, puts in order all the ideas for the organization of the enterprise, therefore it is sometimes difficult for the manager to realize that in modern world the organizational structure, being, on the one hand, the embodiment of orderliness and stability of the company, on the other hand, is the most dynamic structure of the enterprise.

According to the experience of developing projects to improve the organization of management, typical problems of organizational structures that traditionally develop in enterprises are: the lack of a clear distribution of the areas of activity of the first managers, violation of manageability standards, duplication of functions, lack of regulation of a number of vital functions for the enterprise, etc. In general, this indicates the absence of a systematic approach to the development of the organizational structure, leads to non-optimal business processes and reduces the efficiency of the company.

The organizational structure of the enterprise should be:

First, it must correspond to the enterprise itself, reflect its scale, products, territorial dispersal, take into account the efficient use of resources, both internal and external.

Secondly, the effective organizational structure of the enterprise makes it a well-developed relationship with the mission, strategy of the company.

Thirdly, the organizational structure should ensure the optimality of doing business, i.e. optimal flow of business processes.

Fourthly, it must integrate in itself as a meta-structure all vital structures: functional structure, resource structure, financial, information and other structures.

Fifthly, it should contribute to the development of the enterprise's competencies, the fuller use of the abilities of its employees.

Sixthly, it must correspond to the organizational culture of the enterprise, contribute to its improvement.

The study of the forms of organization of enterprises allows us to conclude that the principle of diversity is gradually being recognized. The search for a single concept, an ideal structure adapted to any organization, is replaced by a desire for a diverse concept, in relation to which the idea of ​​an optimal model is completely absent.

Thus, we examined the improvement of the management structure based on a systematic approach using the example of Brücke LLC, analyzed the sources of information. proposed ways to improve, in general, the goals and objectives were fully implemented.

We hope that the organizational structure proposed by us will be in demand.

In conclusion, it is important to emphasize that experimentation with the development and introduction of new governance structures has become feature last decade of the 20th century. These experiments often use a wide variety of combinations. known species and types of structures adapted by organizations to the specific conditions of their functioning. But still, the main trend is that each subsequent structure becomes simpler and more flexible than the previous ones.

There is no doubt that in the near future there will be an even greater variety of structures, each of which will meet the needs of a particular organization.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Vesnin V.R. Practical personnel management: A manual for personnel work. - M .: Yurist, 1998. - 496 p.

Vikhansky O.S., Management: Textbook for economics. specialist. universities. / Vikhansky O.S., Naumov A.I. - M.: Higher. school., 1994.- 224 p.

Vladimirova I.G. "Organizational structures of company management" // Management in Russia and abroad. - 1998. - No. 5 - p.5-8

Kabushkin N.I. Fundamentals of management: Proc. allowance.- 3rd ed.-Mn.: New knowledge, 2OOO.- 336 p.

Meskon M.X., Fundamentals of management: per. from English. / Meskon M.X., Albert M., Hedouri F. - M.: Delo, 2OOO.- 704 p.

Milner B.3. Organization Theory: Textbook. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: INFRA - M, 2OOO. - 480 s.

Paturel Robert, Creation of network organizational structures // Problems of theory and practice of management. - 1999. - No. 2. - p.6-9

Russian Internet weekly http://www.consulting.ru/

Trenev N.N. Enterprise and its structure: Diagnostics. Control. Recovery: Tutorial for universities. - M.: PRIOR, 2OOO. - 240 s.

management …………………………………….….. 10 2.2. Analysis organizational structures management in order to determine...

1. General characteristics of software "BelAZ", analysis organizational structures management and manufactured products

   Abstract >> Economics

   GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS RUE "BelAZ", ANALYSIS ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES MANAGEMENT AND MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS" MINSK, 2009 ... Improvement of social and personnel support. 3. Organizational structure management The main site is carried out by the management and...

2. General characteristics and analysis organizational structures management JSC "Mozyr Oil Refinery"

   Abstract >> Economics

   SUMMARY on the topic: " general characteristics and analysis organizational structures management OJSC "Mozyr Oil Refinery" "MINSK, 2008 ... by the General Meeting of Shareholders of the Audit Commission. Analysis organizational structures management enterprise Today, the staff of OJSC "Mozyrsky ...

3. Organizational structure management (4)

   Abstract >> Management

   system, organizational structure management is a subsystem in the system management enterprise. In this way, organizational structure management and system management are...

The organizational structure of the enterprise LLC "STROYKOMPLEKS-M" can be attributed to the type of linear-functional.

10 people report directly to the director. If we consider the process management approach, then there, the norm of subordination is 12 (+/-5) people.

Figure 1. Organizational structure of the enterprise.

In turn, each of the deputy directors has 2-8 departments in his subordination. Also, some deputy directors have assistants or just some specialists in direct personal submission. So, for example, a lawyer, according to this organizational structure, is subordinate to the Deputy Director for Finance.

Linear - functional organizational structure is sometimes called traditional or classical, because it was the first structure to be studied and developed. Such structures are based on the one hand on linear powers. Linear powers are powers that are transferred directly from the boss to the subordinate and further to other subordinates (hierarchy of management levels). An important feature of such a structure is the unity of command and the chain of command.

In addition, such management structures are based on the principle of functional departmentalization (the process of dividing the organization into separate elements, each of which has its own clearly defined, specific task and responsibilities). Specific characteristics and features of the activities of a particular unit correspond to the most important activities of the entire organization. The combination of linearity of powers and functional departmentalization in a linear - functional structure provides the advantages and disadvantages of this type of structures.

The advantages of using a linear-functional organizational structure are that such a structure encourages business and professional specialization, reduces duplication of effort and consumption of material resources in functional areas, and also improves coordination in functional areas. Speaking directly about the enterprise LLC "STROYKOMPLEKS-M", it should be said that in this case the principle of unity of command is almost completely observed, which ensures greater efficiency work. In addition, by highlighting the main and auxiliary processes, the fulfillment of the tasks set is greatly facilitated. It should be added that it is the linear-functional structure that is characterized by its detailed elaboration.

Of course, the functioning of the organization according to the linear functional organizational structure may not be good enough and effective based on theoretical foundations this structure. As regards LLC STROYKOMPLEKS-M directly, it can be seen that in some cases the chain of commands from the manager to the direct executor becomes too long. Also, one can notice the fact that departments may be more interested in achieving the goals and objectives of their departments than the overall goals of the entire organization. Although, given the not too large number of employees, this shortcoming may not be taken into account.

The organization of work according to the type of linear-functional structure suggests that the company OOO "STROYKOMPLEKS-M" is characterized by stability, has permanent suppliers of basic resources and a wide customer base.

When using the linear-functional structure of the enterprise in the conditions of the process approach in managing the owners of the main and auxiliary processes, the heads of the main and functional services, that is, the top management of the organization, become the owners. In this case, the process network is managed by the CEO.

Attention should be paid to the fact that many of the processes occurring in this organization have their own auxiliary processes, they are smaller in scale and are characterized by less responsibility and workload.

The strengths of this organizational system include:

Its detailed elaboration;

· Facilitate the task of determining the main and auxiliary processes and their owners;

· The principle of unity of command is respected.

The weaknesses of the linear functional system include the fact that the use of this system is preferable when the organization is engaged in the provision of one type of service or the production of one type of product. In this case, the company has a wide range of products. Displaying this on the diagram makes it cumbersome and complicates its perception.

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………...3

Chapter 1. The essence of the organizational structure……………………………......5

Scheme of the organizational structure……………………………………………...5

Classification of organizational structures………………………………….… 7

Principles and methods of formation of structures…………………………………………………………………11

Chapter 2. Construction of the organizational structure of the limited liability company "MMC"……………………………………………………….….…13

General characteristics of the enterprise………………………………………...…………13

Analysis of the organizational and managerial structure…………………………15

Chapter 3. Improving the organizational structure of the enterprise ...... 16

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………38

References………………………………………………………………39

Appendix No. 1…………………………………………………………………..40

Appendix No. 2………………………………………………………………….41

Appendix No. 3………………………………………………………………….42

Appendix No. 4………………………………………………………………….43

Annex No. 5………………………………………………………………….46

Introduction

Improving the efficiency of the enterprise is largely determined by the organization of the management system, which depends on the clear structure of the enterprise and the activities of all its elements in the direction of the chosen goal.

The need to improve the management system for present stage determined by many factors. This includes optimizing the size of the administrative apparatus and its functions; introduction of automated control systems and development of decision-making systems.

There are various types of organizational structures (linear, linear-functional, functional, matrix, project, divisional, brigade). But not every type of organizational structure fits the organization. Therefore, each organization itself develops an organizational structure that should set a system of responsibility, reporting relationships, and principles for combining employees into groups. In addition, the structure must contain the mechanisms of communication and coordination of the elements of the organization into a coherently working whole.

The consulting project revealed the concept of the organizational structure, the need for its competent construction in accordance with the goals and objectives of the organization, to analyze the current organizational structure in MMC LLC, identify problematic moments and conflict zones, determine the causes of their occurrence and develop ways to solve existing problems.

When collecting information for this work, I used the method of questioning and analysis of documents of the organization.

theoretical object this work is - the organizational structure of the enterprise.

theoretical subject- organizational structure of OOO MMC.

empirical object– fundamental documents of OOO MMC.

Target:analysis of the existing organizational structure of MMC LLC and development of documents for the approval of the organizational structure.

The first chapter is devoted to the disclosure of the concept of organizational structure and its scheme, as well as the classification of organizational structures and the principles of their formation.

In the second chapter, an analysis was made of the construction of the organizational structure of MMC LLC.

The third chapter proposes a solution to existing problems - the lack of an organizational structure scheme, job descriptions and internal labor regulations.

The project consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion and a list of references.

Chapter 1 . The essence of the organizational structure.

Organizational structure diagram.

An organizational structure is a holistic system specifically designed so that people working within it can most effectively achieve their goals.

Within the framework of this structure, the entire management process takes place (the movement of information flows and the adoption of managerial decisions), in which managers of all levels, categories and professional specializations participate. Under organizational structure of management it is necessary to understand the totality of management links located in strict subordination and providing the relationship between the control and managed systems. For the effective operation of the organization, it is important to clearly and clearly define the functional responsibilities and authorities, as well as their relationship. Each employee of the company must understand what is expected of him, what powers he has, what his relationship with other employees should be. This is achieved with the help of an organization scheme, supplemented by appropriate reference books (instructions), and the distribution of responsibilities.

Organizational charts are necessary to ensure effective management, their absence creates chaos: employees do not understand what they should do, how they should do it and with whom they should work; heads of various departments have no idea how their work is combined with the work of other departments. In the absence of an organizational chart, illogical relationships can appear, creating confusion. Organizational charts should be supplemented with a written specification of the basic requirements for each level of management, each department, each position or group of similar positions. These materials will provide workers and groups with additional information to help them understand how their efforts compare with those of others. That is why they will be able to devote all their efforts to the effective performance of their duties, avoiding duplication with other individuals and organizational units. To create a workable mechanism, management must design it according to organizational principles, and not according to individual principles. Moreover, without an accurate job description, the foundations for training other employees to perform the jobs of those employees who are promoted cannot be established. Organizational charts and supporting documentation are needed from the start of a firm, not when it becomes too big to be managed by one person.

Organizational charts do not show important relationships between workers and organizational units. In fact, exactly what they show can be misleading. For example, they do not depict informal lines of communication and influence. The organizational chart depicts the hierarchy of positions, implying that the higher they are, the more important and influential. This is not always true, as some employees are influential in some decisions and lack influence in others. Organizational charts contribute to a very narrow view of employees about their positions. Job definitions mean what people can not do, as well as explaining what they should do. The result is an organization that is not responsive to change. Organizational charts and all supporting documentation (job descriptions and instructions) become only a surrogate for action, not a constructive response.

Attention should be paid to the creation of a well-thought-out, and most importantly, effective scheme of organizational structures.

Classification of organizational structures

In essence, the organizational structure determines the distribution of responsibilities and authorities within the organization. As a rule, it is displayed in the form of a graphic scheme, the elements of which are hierarchically ordered organizational units (divisions, job positions).

There are the following organizational structures:

line / line-headquarters organizational structure;

functional;

divisional;

matrix;

Often, the organizational structure is adjusted to the production process of products or services, depending on the type and type of production.

Linear / line-headquarters organizational structure

At the core linear organizational structure of the enterprise(organizations, companies) lies principle of unity of command, according to which each employee of the organization has only one immediate supervisor. Traditionally, a linear organizational structure is understood as a hierarchy of positions in which the top manager of the organization is connected with each of the subordinate employees by a single chain of command that passes through the corresponding intermediate levels of management (Appendix 1, Fig. 1.).

The advantages of the linear structure are explained by the ease of application. All duties and powers are clearly distributed here, and therefore conditions are created for an operational decision-making process, to maintain the necessary discipline in the team.

Among the shortcomings of the linear construction of the organization, rigidity, inflexibility, unsuitability for further growth and development of the enterprise are usually noted. The linear structure is focused on a large amount of information transmitted from one level of management to another, limiting the initiative of workers at lower levels of management. It makes high demands on the qualifications of managers and their competence in all matters of production and management of subordinates. No more than some variation of the linear organizational structure is the so-called line-staff organizational structure , in which there are positions and divisions that support the adoption of managerial decisions (Appendix 1, Fig. 2.).

It should be noted that based on the approach described above, almost any organizational structure of a modern enterprise can be characterized as linear or linear-headquarters. Matrix or project organizational structure is superimposed on the linear one, and does not eliminate either it or the principle of unity of command as the basis for the stability of the organization's existence.

Advantages:

efficient use of production and management potential to solve extreme problems;

efficiency of decisions.

Flaws:

violation of the principle of unity of command;

the difficulty of coordinating production tasks and headquarters programs;

the emergence of social and psychological problems in the team;

Full name of the Company: Orbita Limited Liability Company.

Location of the Company and its postal address: Russia, 156026, Kostroma region, Kostroma district, Kostroma, Severnaya Pravdy street, 41/21.

The form of ownership is private property.

LLC "Orbita" refers to the enterprises of the clothing and textile industry, which is based on the production of garments (without tailoring according to the orders of the population), including children's clothing.

The factory produces various children's clothing, mainly outerwear.

Purpose of the organization: Making a profit from textile activities and meeting the needs of society in textile products.

Mission of the organization: To achieve and maintain the highest customer satisfaction, meaning satisfactory product quality at an acceptable price for the buyer.

The organizational structure of the company in appearance refers to linear-functional structures. Linear-functional structure - a structure in which specialists of the same profile are united in structural units and make decisions that are binding on production units.

The organization is headed by director Maxim Nikolaevich Yakubovsky, who has 656 workers under his command. The following functions are assigned to the director of the enterprise:

1. General management of the production, economic and financial and economic activities of the enterprise.

2. Organization of interaction of all structural divisions, workshops and production units.

3. Ensuring the fulfillment of all obligations assumed by the enterprise, including obligations to budgets of different levels and extra-budgetary funds, as well as under contracts.

4. Creation of conditions for the introduction of the latest equipment and technology, progressive forms of management and organization of labor.

5. Taking measures to ensure healthy and safe working conditions at the enterprise.

6. Monitoring compliance with the law Russian Federation in all services.

7. Protection of the property interests of the enterprise in court, public authorities.

Reporting to the General Director are the Production Director, the Factory Director, the Financial Director, the Organizational Director, the Head of the Business Protection Service, the Development Director, the Head of the Logistics Department, the Technical Control Department, the Assistant Secretary and the QMS specialist.

The production director reports to the experimental workshop 1 and 2, the order placement department (Russian placement group, foreign placement group), the chief economist's department, the production planning engineer, the raw material rationing department, and the supply department. The Production Director is responsible for:

Proper organization of production work in accordance with the approved programs (plans) of the Company;

Performing and labor discipline of employees of production units;

Safety of information (documents) containing information constituting the trade secret of the Company, other confidential information, including personal data of the Company's employees;

Ensuring safe working conditions, maintaining order, complying with fire safety rules in industrial premises.

The director of the factory reports to the production planning engineer, the department of the chief mechanic, the equipment engineer, the head of production (sewing flows 6, the area for reworking defects, the cutting shop, the cutting warehouse, the printing shop). It performs the following functions:

1. Generalized report for the week, month, quarter.

2. Distribution of received funds and other resources, control over their use.

3. Profit.

4. Develop a system of motivation.

5. Distribution of duties, formation of corporate culture.

6. Creation of competitive advantages.

7. Organization of the execution of decisions made by the company's management.

8. Development of client orientation.

9. Organization of personnel development.

10. Organization of internal processes.

The Financial Director reports to the Financial Department and the Accounting Department. The functions of the financial director are to manage their own financial department and coordinate the cross-functional interaction of the entire structure of the company. The organization of the work of the financial service consists not only in its creation, but also in regular adaptation to changes within the business and its external environment. The structure and staff of the financial service, the distribution of functions, powers and responsibilities, the processes of interaction with production, marketing, personnel and all other departments, methodological support and control of activities - all these components of the company's financial system are kept up to date by the financial director, which should effectively ensure achievement of the set goals.

The head of organizational matters reports to the personnel development department, the legal department, the IT department, the HSE engineer, the canteen, and the AHO. He recruits and trains new employees.

The control group reports to the head of the business protection service. The head of the business protection service creates security units, organizes work to protect the organization's business from unlawful encroachments on its property and other rights: protection of facilities, personal protection of the management, engineering and technical protection, information and analytical support for decision-making by the management of the organization, economic and Information Security‚ interaction with law enforcement agencies, legal entities and individuals.

The director of development reports to the director of marketing (marketing department) and the design laboratory. The Development Director performs the following functions:

1. Study of all commercial and production processes of the enterprise, a full assessment of the potential of the enterprise.

2. Identification of negative and positive trends in the processes at the enterprise, development of measures to eliminate the former and stimulate the latter.

3. Justification of the goal of the overall development of the enterprise, the definition of a general concept and policy for the development of the enterprise.

4. Development of an effective development strategy and the main provisions of the enterprise development plan.

5. Adoption and implementation of plans and decisions for the development or restructuring of the enterprise.

Subordinate to the Commercial Director are the Franchising Department, the Corporate Retail Development Department, the Merchandising Department, the Group of Order Managers, the Project Manager, the Internet Sales Department, the Sales Market Department (Operating Directors, Stores), the Wholesale Department (Regional Wholesale Department, Wholesale Pavilion ). The Commercial Director is responsible for:

Proper organization of work on the sale of products in accordance with the approved programs (plans) of the Company;

Performing and labor discipline of employees of commercial services;

Safety of information (documents) containing information constituting the trade secret of the Company, other confidential information, including personal data of the Company's employees;

Ensuring safe working conditions, maintaining order, complying with fire safety rules in the premises of the sales service.

The head of logistics reports to the transport department, the warehouse for receiving and picking, the warehouse logistics manager (a group of operators, GP5 warehouses, the shipping warehouse), the warehouse logistics manager (returns warehouse, accessories warehouse, fabric warehouse). The head of the logistics department performs the following functions:

1. Management of logistics services to consumers;

2. Forecasting demand for products (industrial consumption of material resources);

3. Inventory management;

4. Procurement management;

5. Warehousing management;

6. Transport management;

7. Management of consumer orders;

8. Selection of locations for elements of production and logistics infrastructure;

9. Managing the provision of spare parts to consumers and assisting them with maintenance;

10. Organization and provision of logistics communications;

11. Input transportation;

12. Acceptance, sorting, storage and storage of stocks;

13. Cargo handling;

14. Order picking (commission);

15. Packing;

16. Output transportation;

17. Logistics of return flows and waste disposal.

The main task of the technical control department is to prevent the occurrence of marriage, i.e. the technical control service must constantly influence the technological process of all types Maintenance I repair rolling stock.

The secretary-referent performs technical functions for the provision and maintenance of work Director General Society or its divisions.

The duties of a QMS specialist include the development of a quality management system (QMS) and control of its implementation. He works with a large number of documents: he draws up instructions, quality manuals, monitors the statistics of customer and buyer satisfaction with the company's goods and services, develops an action plan for the implementation or implementation of an already implemented QMS and monitors its timely implementation at each stage. The QMS specialist also prepares reports for submission to senior management. He oversees the compliance of the developed QMS with international standards and actively contributes to the company obtaining a certificate of conformity with them. In addition to the above responsibilities, this specialist should advise company employees on all issues related to the quality of goods or services, and make presentations in order to teach them new QMS items.

The study of organizational management structures is an analysis of existing organizational management structures, as well as a synthesis of these management structures.

The analysis of the current organizational structure of management is intended to establish to what extent it meets the requirements for the organization, i.e. determine how rational the management structure is in terms of established evaluation criteria that characterize its quality. Evaluation criteria include:

management principles - the relationship between centralization and decentralization (how many and what decisions are made at the lower level? what are their consequences? how much control functions lie at each level of management?);

The management apparatus is a regrouping of departments, a change in the relationship between them, the distribution of powers and responsibilities, the allocation of some links into independent structures, a change in the nature of intercompany relations, the creation of the necessary intermediate links in the management apparatus, etc.;

management functions - strengthening strategic planning (adjusting the "business plan"), strengthening control over product quality, involving employees in management through the sale of shares, changing approaches to labor motivation, etc.

As a result of the analysis, it is possible to identify "bottlenecks" in the organization's activities. This may be a large linkage of management, parallelism in work, a lag in the development of the organizational structure from ongoing changes in the external environment.

Let's take the first linear organizational structure of management. Here, vertical lines denote organizational communications built on the principle of a leader - a subordinate (or vice versa - in the case of feedback). Horizontal lines indicate business connections between managers of the same level, between colleagues (the linear structure does not provide for horizontal communication links). This kind of structure has a hierarchical chain extending downwards vertically. In other words, each leader is subordinate to several (more than one) members of the organization.

The linear structure does not provide for the specialization of managers as managers, and the problems of managing departments of the organization and the organization as a whole are solved by specialists of a narrow profile. Linear structure in pure form assumes that in his area of ​​work the manager must solve all the problems of production (technological, personnel, problems of supply, control, planning, etc.).

The behavior of members of the organization within the linear structure is completely focused on the immediate leader. Any issue must be resolved only through the immediate supervisor. At the same time, without the permission of the leaders, initiatives of subordinates and innovations are not allowed. Of course, this is unrealistic without strict, if possible, comprehensive managerial control. The unconditional behavior of subordinates in relation to the norms in a linear structure is achieved due to the absence of horizontal connections that ensure collegiality in solving production problems and a certain independence in decision-making at lower management levels.

Successful leadership within a linear structure is possible only if managers at all levels exercise their authority in terms of accounting and control of literally all the actions of subordinates. As a result, the leaders of linear structures use punishments and rewards of subordinates as a motivating incentive. Other methods of motivation are practically not used. As a rule, linear structures are appropriate in cases where team members have a low degree of maturity, have mastered a small number of organizational roles and are not prone to independent decisions and initiative.

In general, we can say that linear structures have the following advantages:

The ability of the organization to function in the mode of simple and quick solutions. At the same time, there is practically no uncertainty in the perception of decisions and the most complete control is exercised over literally all the actions of the members of the organization;

Minimizing the possibility of creating coalitions of managers of the same level, which greatly reduces the resistance of middle managers in relation to the decisions of top managers;

Minimizing the number of managers in the organization. The lack of specialization, the multifunctionality of managers at various levels, the formalization and rigidity inherent in the very basis of the linear structure lead to a reduction in the number of specialized functions, and the main emphasis is on control functions. The latter can be carried out with a minimum of costs if the leader has authority among subordinates.

But the shortcomings of these structures are so significant that modern organizations are practically not built on the basis of purely linear structures. Their shortcomings, first of all, include;

extreme difficulties in adapting to any changes in the external environment

· the lack of originally foreseen specialization, as a result of which managers in linear structures have to perform not only the functions of managing all processes at the level of their department, but also the role of experts on all technical issues, i.e. specialists-professionals in a narrow production area;

· the presence of only vertical communication links and a multi-level management structure causes the absence of collective, coordinated decisions at the level of management of departments.

Linear organizational structures are effective only in a very limited number of cases of the functioning of the organization, in particular, in the presence of simple goals and an unchanged external environment. In the case of a real complex market environment, the creative nature of work or goals associated with the need to adapt to the external environment, such structures are not effective and their real application should be abandoned.

Linear-functional structures. The presence of functional elements in management structures is due to the constant desire of the management of organizations to use the high managerial and leadership qualities of managers and at the same time make competent, informed decisions in highly specialized areas that require special education and specialized knowledge and skills.

The essence of the functional structure of the organization lies in the fact that all complex decisions that require technical, economic, legal, psychological and other special knowledge should be made only by employees who specialize in these areas and have the necessary competence, which ordinary line managers do not have.

The functional structure allows you to manage organizational processes with the inclusion of the largest number of competent managers, professionals in narrow areas of knowledge and activity, but it is practically not used in modern organizations due to its inefficiency.

Experience shows that from the activities of organizations, the effect is achieved only if one person, the only leader, is responsible for the entire production process in a unit or in one area. in fact, it is a line manager. The constant change of specialist managers inevitably gives rise to irresponsibility, lack of control over activities; double subordination, as well as role conflicts and uncertainty of role settings. Due to these circumstances, the functional structure in its pure form is not currently used.

The practice of using linear structures suggested some ways to overcome their shortcomings, in particular, the combination of a centralized linear structure and a highly specialized functional structure. The essence of the linear functional structure is that the organizational structure includes separate structural units: (divisions) that perform highly specialized functions at a high professional level. The influence of the activities of these structural units extends to certain aspects of the linear structure in this way: at some point in the activity, the line manager transfers his management rights to representatives of the functional structure, but makes sure that the prerogatives of the functional manager do not go beyond his competence.

The unity of such an organization is not easy to achieve. All the problems of combining linear and functional structures are connected with the law of the action of power in an organization. Each line manager believes that only he is able to make the right decisions and contribute to their implementation. At the same time, a specialist in a narrow field of activity - a functional manager - believes that no one understands his issues except him. This attitude towards decision-making in the organization's divisions can create tension and conflict between line and functional managers, as well as the problem of dual leadership in relation to performers.

divisional structures. One of the noticeable trends in the organizational restructuring of enterprises in a transitional economy is a significant increase in the independence of individual links in management structures and the creation of subsidiaries on this basis. Around large enterprises, a network of small mobile firms is being formed that can quickly rebuild in relation to changing demand. Thanks to this, the enterprises of manufacturers of products are approaching the consumer sector, and the process of selling products is accelerating. From the production and organizational structure of many large enterprises, subdivisions with a complete production cycle stand out. On the one hand, independent economic entities are created, focused on certain consumers, and on the other hand, the integrity of the production and technological complex, the general focus and profile of its activities are preserved.

The divisional form can be viewed as a combination of organizational links serving a specific market and managed centrally. Its logic is to combine the autonomy of units with a central controlled process allocation of resources and evaluation of results.

Matrix structures. Modern market relations, especially relations such as producer - consumer or producer - competitors, as well as producer - social institutions undergo constant changes to which the organization must respond in order to maintain a balance between input and output. For example, if a change in market conditions requires the release of a different product (or another modification of the product), some of the organizational units of the organization must be changed or replaced with new structural units and temporarily withdraw from production process. However, all parts of the former structure are rigidly interconnected, all the roles of members of the organization are rigidly fixed, so it is necessary to carry out major structural changes at high costs on the part of the organization.

The need to take into account these circumstances ultimately led to the search for new organizational structures that could easily respond to such external influences as changes in situations in the market and institutional environment. These structures are called flexible. Their flexibility manifests itself in two main aspects:

Structural flexibility - the mobility of relationships between structural units;

· Numerical flexibility - the variability of the quantitative composition of personnel focused on certain areas of organizational activity.

In a matrix organization, project managers are responsible for coordinating all activities and using resources related to a given project. To this end, all material and financial resources for this project are transferred to their disposal. Project managers are also responsible for the planning of the project and the progress of its implementation in all quantitative, qualitative and temporal terms. As for the heads of functional units, they delegate some of their responsibilities to the project manager, decide where and how this or that work should be done.

The matrix structure contributes to the collective expenditure of resources, which is essential when the output is associated with the need to use rare or expensive types of resources. At the same time, a certain flexibility is achieved, which, in essence, is absent in functional structures, since in them all employees are permanently assigned to certain functional units. Along with flexibility, the matrix organization opens up great opportunities for effective coordination of work.

At present, the linear-functional structure continues to exist along with project management, hence it follows that the project structure is most likely one of the ways to overcome the shortcomings and complement the specified structure, and not as its replacement.