Yet the activities of most companies are too complicated to be organised in a single hierarchy. Shortly before the First World War, the French industrialist Henry Fayol organised his coal-mining business according to the functions that it had to carry out. He is generally credited with inventing functional organisation. Today, most large manufacturing organisations have a functional structure, including (among others) production, finance, marketing, sales, and personnel or staff departments. This means, for example, that the production and marketing departments cannot take financial decisions without consulting the finance department.

Functional organisation is efficient, but there are two standard criticisms. Firstly, people are usually more concerned with the success of their department than that of the company, so there are permanent battles between, for example, finance and marketing, or marketing and production, which have incompatible goals. Secondly, separating functions is unlikely to encourage innovation.

Yet for a large organisation manufacturing a range of products, having a single production department is generally inefficient. Consequently, most large companies are decentralized, following the model of Alfred Sloan, who divided General Motors into separate operating divisions in 1920. Each division had its own engineering, production and sales departments, made a different category of car (but with some overlap, to encourage internal competition), and was expected to make a profit.

Businesses that cannot be divided into autonomous divisions with their own markets can simulate decentralization, setting up divisions that deal with each other using internally determined transfer prices. Many banks, for example, have established commercial, corporate, private banking, international and investment divisions.

An inherent problem of hierarchies is that people at lower levels are unable to make important decisions, but have to pass on responsibility to their boss. One solution to this is matrix management, in which people report to more than one superior. For example, a product manager with an idea might be able to deal directly with managers responsible for a certain market segment and for a geographical region, as well as the managers responsible for the traditional functions of finance, sales and production. This is one way of keeping authority at lower levels, but it is not necessarily a very efficient one. Thomas Peters and Robert Waterman, in their well-known book In Search of Excellence, insist on the necessity of pushing authority and autonomy down the line, but they argue that one element – probably the product – must have priority; four-dimensional matrices are far too complex.

A further possibility is to have wholly autonomous, temporary groups or teams that are responsible for an entire project, and are split up as soon as it is successfully completed. Teams are often not very good for decision-making, and they run the risk of relational problems, unless they are small and have a lot of self-discipline. In fact they still require a definite leader, on whom their success probably depends.

Task 2. Comprehension 1

Which of the following three paragraphs most accurately summarises the text, and why?

First summary

Although most organisations are hierarchical, with a number of levels, and a line of command running from the top to the bottom, hierarchies should be avoided because they make decision-making slow and difficult. A solution to this problem is matrix management, which allows people from the traditional functional departments of production, finance, marketing, sales, etc. to work together in teams. Another solution is decentralisation: the separation of the organisation into competing autonomous divisions.