Organizational Structure - Revision history

Paulreed: /* Criticisms */

2012-10-31T16:05:35Z

Criticisms

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:05, 31 October 2012
Line 18:		Line 18:
	==Criticisms==		==Criticisms==
	*1. No academic link between relatedness and performance more to do overcoming issues with Industry structure and firm specific characteristics		*1. No academic link between relatedness and performance more to do overcoming issues with Industry structure and firm specific characteristics
	*2. [[author::Prahalad and Hamel]] decry the tyranny of the SBU as it does not facilitate complex interactions		*2. [[author::Prahalad]] and [[author::Hamel]] decry the tyranny of the SBU as it does not facilitate complex interactions. See [[The Core Competency of the Organization]]

	[[Category:Strategy]]		[[Category:Strategy]]

Paulreed: /* Criticisms */

2012-10-31T14:54:56Z

Criticisms

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:54, 31 October 2012
Line 18:		Line 18:
	==Criticisms==		==Criticisms==
	*1. No academic link between relatedness and performance more to do overcoming issues with Industry structure and firm specific characteristics		*1. No academic link between relatedness and performance more to do overcoming issues with Industry structure and firm specific characteristics
	*2. [[Prahalad and Hamel]] decry the tyranny of the SBU as it does not facilitate complex interactions		*2. [[author::Prahalad and Hamel]] decry the tyranny of the SBU as it does not facilitate complex interactions

	[[Category:Strategy]]		[[Category:Strategy]]

Paulreed at 14:51, 31 October 2012

2012-10-31T14:51:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:51, 31 October 2012
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[U-form]] unitary form - split functional responsibilities Mfg. Marketing , Personnel, Finance etc		[[U-form]] unitary form - split functional responsibilities Mfg. Marketing , Personnel, Finance etc
	When firms got too larger especially when the diversified firm made it ineffective. In response Duport, GM etc developed the Multi-divisional [[M-form]] that allowed semi-autonomous divisions each with its own set of functions based on Brand, ~~Produduct~~ or Regional Lines. Successful because Execs could focus on [[Corporate Strategy]]		When firms got too larger especially when the diversified firm made it ineffective. In response Duport, GM etc developed the Multi-divisional [[M-form]] that allowed semi-autonomous divisions each with its own set of functions based on Brand, Product or Regional Lines. Successful because Execs could focus on [[Corporate Strategy]]

			Advantages of [[M-form]]
			*1. Addition / deletion is easier
			*2. Accountability,
			*3. Comparison


	~~Advanatges of [[M-form]]~~
	~~1. Addtion / deletion is easier~~
	~~2. Accountability,~~
	~~3. Comparision~~
	[[Chandler]] says these can lead to Scales / Scope advantages but also higher admin costs.		[[Chandler]] says these can lead to Scales / Scope advantages but also higher admin costs.

	Organizational structures		==Organizational structures==
	Functional - Centralized around key functions		*Functional - Centralized around key functions
	Functional Holding - core centralized around key function - rest is decentralized		*Functional Holding - core centralized around key function - rest is decentralized
	Holding - Highly decentralized		*Holding - Highly decentralized
	Multi-divisional, ~~centraized~~ strategically, decentralized ops		*Multi-divisional, centralized strategically, decentralized ops

	Criticisms		==Criticisms==
	1. No academic link between ~~relatededness~~ and performance more to do overcoming issues with Industry structure and firm specific characteristics		*1. No academic link between relatedness and performance more to do overcoming issues with Industry structure and firm specific characteristics
	2. [[Prahalad and Hamel]] decry the tyranny of the SBU as it does not facilitate complex interactions		*2. [[Prahalad and Hamel]] decry the tyranny of the SBU as it does not facilitate complex interactions

	[[Category:Strategy]]		[[Category:Strategy]]

Paulreed: Created page with "U-form unitary form - split functional responsibilities Mfg. Marketing , Personnel, Finance etc When firms got too larger especially when the diversified firm made it ineffec..."

2010-12-22T23:40:46Z

Created page with "U-form unitary form - split functional responsibilities Mfg. Marketing , Personnel, Finance etc When firms got too larger especially when the diversified firm made it ineffec..."

New page

[[U-form]] unitary form - split functional responsibilities Mfg. Marketing , Personnel, Finance etc
When firms got too larger especially when the diversified firm made it ineffective. In response Duport, GM etc developed the Multi-divisional [[M-form]] that allowed semi-autonomous divisions each with its own set of functions based on Brand, Produduct or Regional Lines. Successful because Execs could focus on [[Corporate Strategy]]

Advanatges of [[M-form]]
1. Addtion / deletion is easier
2. Accountability,
3. Comparision
[[Chandler]] says these can lead to Scales / Scope advantages but also higher admin costs.

Organizational structures
Functional - Centralized around key functions
Functional Holding - core centralized around key function - rest is decentralized
Holding - Highly decentralized
Multi-divisional, centraized strategically, decentralized ops

Criticisms
1. No academic link between relatededness and performance more to do overcoming issues with Industry structure and firm specific characteristics
2. [[Prahalad and Hamel]] decry the tyranny of the SBU as it does not facilitate complex interactions

[[Category:Strategy]]