Organizational structure of the enterprise: types and schemes. Planning and organizational design Why it is necessary to develop the organizational structure of an enterprise

The basis for the implementation of control and planning functions in any company is their clear structuring, that is, the development of an organizational and financial structure.

The organizational structure of the company is a management tool with which the manager can adjust the work of his organization to achieve strategic goals and objectives.

Optimal planning of the organizational and financial structure is the basis for creating a basis for the dynamic development of the company, increasing the degree of its manageability. Organizational structure planning contributes to a faster response to changes in market conditions.

The concept of planning

In a broad sense, planning is the process of choosing the goals and decisions that are necessary to achieve the goals. In a narrower sense, the planning of the organizational structure can be represented as a management activity, a way to optimize the actions of business entities.

In any enterprise, the planning process covers two main stages: strategy and tactics. Strategic planning is planned work, including the development of a forecast, program or plan. It provides for the goals and strategies for the behavior of organizational objects of control for the future, which allows these objects to work effectively, quickly adapting to changes in the external environment.

Tactical planning is the process of making decisions about the actions of the organization and the allocation (use) of resources in the course of achieving the strategic goal.

Organizational planning

Organizational structure planning means determining the structure of a company (enterprise), which is aimed at establishing clear and effective relationships between its individual divisions.

Planning the organizational structure consists in planning the number and size of workshops, their grouping according to the production principle, their organizational attachment; in planning the size and organizational structure of the service; determining the list of necessary services (marketing, material division).

Industrial organizational structures may depend on the size of enterprises, the volume of their production and marketing activities, manufactured products and technologies, the scale of export or import activities.

Organizational structure planning

The organizational structure of any enterprise is closely related to the accepted organizational and legal form, the existence of branches, subsidiaries, joint activities with partners, etc.

Organizational structure planning is carried out in several directions:

1. Planning the number of managerial personnel in accordance with the functions of management,
2. Planning the number of line management personnel,
3. The number of levels of the company management system hierarchy,
4. The number of structural links of each level,
5. The degree of centralization of management.

The main factor that affects the indicator of these characteristics is the amount of work in the process of managing the organization. It depends on the composition and content of management functions, including the complexity and frequency of solving management problems.

Development of the governance structure

Organizational structure planning begins with the construction of the management system, including its organizational structure. To do this, there is a survey of existing (similar) control systems.

In this case, specialists use an archival approach (based on the analysis of documents from a similar management system) or a survey approach (questionnaires or interviews of employees of the management apparatus). In both cases, or in a combination of two approaches, the information can only reflect the opinions (in written or oral form) about them of the employees of the administrative apparatus who are interested in maintaining this structure. This indicates the insufficient effectiveness of the method.

Examples of problem solving

EXAMPLE 1

Exercise

Determine where to start building and planning an organizational structure: 1) Determination of the tasks of the manager in a certain strategic area of ​​management,

Since the purpose of the organizational structure is to ensure the achievement of the objectives of the organization, the design of the structure should be based on the strategic plans of the organization. Some writers, in fact, consider that the choice of the overall structure of an organization is a decision related to strategic planning, since it determines how the organization will direct efforts towards achieving its main goals. However, from Michael Mescon's point of view, the organization of activities is a different, distinct function. In his opinion, it is based on the strategy of the organization, but is not the strategy itself.

STAGES OF ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN

According to the classical theory of the organization, with the conclusions of which most managers agree on this issue, the structure of the organization should be developed from the top down. It is not surprising that the sequence of developing an organizational structure is similar to the sequence of elements of the planning process. Leaders must first divide the organization into broad areas, then set specific objectives - just as planning first formulates general objectives - and then draw up specific rules.

Thus, the sequence of actions is as follows:

1) Carry out the division of the organization horizontally into broad blocks corresponding to the most important areas of activity for the implementation of the strategy. Decide which activities should be carried out by line units and which by headquarters.

2) Establish the ratio of powers of various positions. At the same time, management sets the goal of the teams, if necessary, makes further division into smaller organizational units in order to more effectively use specialization and avoid overloading management.

3) Define job responsibilities as a set of specific tasks and functions and entrust their implementation to specific individuals. In organizations whose activity is largely related to technology, management even develops specific tasks and assigns them to the direct executors, who are responsible for their satisfactory implementation.

It is important to understand that the organizational structure that emerged as a result of the development is not a frozen form, like the frame of a building. Since organizational structures are based on plans, significant changes to the plans may require corresponding changes in the structure. Indeed, in existing organizations, the process of changing the organizational structure should be treated as a reorganization, because. this process, like all functions of the organization, is endless. Currently, successfully functioning organizations regularly assess the degree of adequacy of their organizational structures and change them as required by external conditions. The requirements of the external environment, in turn, are determined in the course of planning and control.

BUREAUCRACY

The word "bureaucracy" usually conjures up images of bureaucratic red tape, bad work, useless activity, waiting hours for certificates and forms that have already been cancelled, and attempts to fight the municipality. All this really happens. However, the root cause of all these negative phenomena is not the bureaucracy as such, but shortcomings in the implementation of the rules of work and the goals of the organization, the usual difficulties associated with the size of the organization, the behavior of employees, inconsistent with the rules and objectives of the organization. The concept of bureaucracy, originally formulated in the early 1900s by the German sociologist Max Weber, is at least ideally one of the most useful ideas in human history.

Weber's theory did not contain descriptions of specific organizations. Weber proposed bureaucracy rather as a kind of normative model, an ideal that organizations should strive to achieve.

Characteristics of a rational bureaucracy:

1. A clear division of labor, which leads to the emergence of highly qualified specialists in each position

2. Hierarchy of management levels, in which each lower level is controlled by a higher one and is subordinate to it.

3. The presence of an interconnected system of public formal rules and standards that ensures the uniformity of the performance of their duties by employees and the coordination of various tasks.

4. The spirit of formal impersonality with which officials carry out their official duties.

5. Implementation of recruitment in strict accordance with technical qualification requirements. Protection of employees from arbitrary layoffs.

Thus, the bureaucratic organizational structure is characterized by a high degree of division of labor, a developed management hierarchy, the purpose of teams, the presence of numerous rules and norms of personnel behavior, and the selection of personnel according to their business and professional qualities. Weber called this structure "rational" because the decisions made by the bureaucracy are assumed to be objective. Weber believed that the personal whims of the owners of the organization and its employees should not conflict with the goals of the organization. (These ideas absolutely did not coincide with practice before 1900.).

Bureaucracy is also often referred to as a classical or traditional organizational structure. Most modern organizations are variants of bureaucracy. The reason for such a long and widespread use of the bureaucratic system is that its characteristics are still quite well suited to most industrial firms, service organizations and all kinds of government agencies. The objectivity of the decisions made allows an effectively managed bureaucracy to adapt to the ongoing changes. Promotion of employees on the basis of their competence ensures a constant influx of highly qualified and talented technical specialists and administrative workers into such an organization.

The concept of social equality embedded in the bureaucratic structure fits very well with the value systems of both democratic and communist countries. In short, as noted management theorist John Child: "Max Weber's analysis of bureaucratic structures continues to be unique and the most significant description of the essence of modern organizations." However, bureaucratic structures have also been criticized for their inability to innovate and lack of sufficient employee motivation.

NEGATIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF BUREAUCRACY

Although bureaucracy is a widely accepted model for organizational formation, it has come under considerable criticism. one of the most important criticisms was formulated by the sociologist R.K. Merton. In his opinion, the difficulties that arise in bureaucratic structures are associated with an exaggeration of the importance of standardized rules, procedures and norms that ensure that employees properly perform their tasks, fulfill the requests of other departments of this organization, as well as interact with customers and the public. This leads to the fact that the organization loses the flexibility of behavior, since all the questions and problems that arise here are solved only on the basis of precedents. Gradually, the careful search for alternatives begins to decline. Clients and the public may feel inadequate response to their needs, as all their problems will be solved in accordance with established rules, procedures and norms. If employees of bureaucratic organizations point out the inadequacy of their actions, they defensively refer to the relevant rule or instruction. This, in turn, can easily damage relationships with clients or the public. However, a bureaucrat cannot be punished because, from the official point of view of his or her organization, he or she is doing the right thing.

The same lack of flexibility can also occur in the relationships of employees within the team. Strict adherence to established rules can give rise to new problems in the course of interaction, exchange of information and coordination of the activities of various parts of the organization. Another negative feature of bureaucratic structures, according to Katz and Kahn, is "the lack of the ability to respond spontaneously and in a new way to environmental conditions, which is essential for the effective functioning of the organization." The almost exclusive emphasis on strict adherence to rules leads to negativity and a complete disruption of the organization's ability to generate and introduce new elements into the process of its activities.

DEPARTMENTALIZATION

The bureaucratic management model has its positive properties, but it cannot be applied without a detailed study and improvement of all its constituent elements, although different organizations have much in common, they differ significantly from each other in many important characteristics. Obviously, when designing an organization, all these differences must be taken into account. Organizations are big and small. It happens that in large organizations, activities are mainly concentrated in one area. Other large organizations are conglomerates, where various companies involved in the film industry, publishing, hotel business, etc. operate under the roof of a single corporation. some organizations work directly to meet the needs of the general public. Other organizations, on the contrary, deal mainly with other large firms. Some large organizations operate only in limited geographic areas, while others operate in almost every country in the world. Some large organizations and governments in industrialized countries operate in almost all of these areas at the same time. In order to take into account and reflect all these differences in the tasks, strategic and operational plans of the organization, managers use various systems of departmentalization. This concept means the process of dividing an organization into separate blocks, which may be called departments, departments or sectors. Below we list the most widely used departmentalization systems. Let's start with the functional structure of the organization of the original and simplest version of the bureaucratic model.

FUNCTIONAL ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

The functional organizational structure is sometimes referred to as traditional or classical because it was the first structure to be studied and developed. The functional organization chart is still widely used in mid-sized companies. Functional departmentalization is the process of dividing an organization into separate elements, each of which has its own well-defined, specific task and responsibilities. In principle, the creation of a functional structure comes down to grouping personnel according to the broad tasks that they perform. The specific characteristics and features of the activities of a particular unit correspond to the most important activities of the entire organization. Since the functional departmentalization of the organization is divided into blocks with clearly defined tasks, in manufacturing companies this is a division according to mass production technologies.

The traditional functional blocks of a company are the departments of production, marketing and finance. These are the broad areas of activity or functions that every company has to ensure that the organization's goals are achieved. However, the specific names of such departments may vary, and traditional designations do not accurately describe the essential functions of some business activities, especially in the service sector.

If the size of the entire organization or a given department is large, then the main functional departments can in turn be subdivided into smaller functional divisions. They are called secondary or derivative. The main idea here is to maximize the benefits of specialization and not allow leadership to be overloaded. However, some care must be taken to ensure that such a department (or unit) would not put their own goals above the general goals of the entire organization.

The idea of ​​secondary divisions applies to any organizational structure. On fig. 3 shows the structure of the organization, the functional departments of which are divided into secondary divisions.

The advantages and disadvantages of the functional structure are shown in Table. one.

Those who have experience say that it is advisable to use the functional structure in those organizations that produce a relatively limited range of products, operate in a stable external environment and require the solution of standard management tasks to ensure their functioning. The functional structure is not suitable for organizations with a wide range of products, operating in an environment with rapidly changing consumer and technological needs, as well as for organizations operating on a large international scale, simultaneously in several markets in countries with different socio-economic systems and legislation. For organizations of this type, a divisional structure would be most appropriate.

DIVISIONAL STRUCTURE

At the beginning of the twentieth century, the most astute executives of some companies realized that the traditional functional structure no longer met their needs. When analyzing the size to which these organizations have grown and planned to grow in the near future, it became obvious that the continued use of the functional organization chart will lead to serious problems. If a huge firm seeks to squeeze all its activities into three or four main departments, then in order to reduce the scope of control of each manager to an acceptable scale, each such department will have to be divided into hundreds of departments. In turn, this leads to the fact that the chain of commands becomes incredibly long and unmanageable. In addition, many of these large firms have spread their activities over wide geographic regions, so one by one, so it is very difficult for one head of any functional area (for example, marketing) to control all this activity.

The situation was complicated by the increased diversification of the activities of a number of firms. In previous centuries, even very large firms were only doing business in one or two areas. Modern firms very often conduct operations in completely different areas of activity.

To cope with the new challenges of firm size, diversification, technology, and changing environments, the management of these forward-thinking firms developed a divisional organizational structure, whereby the organization is divided into units and blocks by type of product or service, customer group, or geographic region.

PRODUCT STRUCTURE

One of the most common ways of development of firms is that they increase the range of manufactured and sold products. If this process is managed successfully, then several product lines can achieve such high sales volume that they themselves may require significant structuring and become a decisive factor in the success of the organization as a whole. This is precisely the problem faced by the pioneers of the divisional structure. The solution was found using the divisional-product structure of the organization, in which departments were created for the main product. Currently, most of the largest consumer goods manufacturers with diversified products use a divisional product structure of the organization.

Under this structure, the authority to manage the production and marketing of any product or service is transferred to one manager, who (or who) is responsible for this type of product. Heads of secondary functional services should report to the manager on this product (Figure 4).

The product structure allows a large firm to give as much attention to a particular product as a small firm producing one or two types of products pays to it. Firms with a product system achieve greater success in the production and sale of new products than firms with other types of organizational structures. Perhaps this is because the product structure is very clear who is responsible for making a profit: it is characterized by successful cost control and adherence to the shipment schedule. Organizations with such a structure are also able to respond faster than firms with a functional structure to changes in competitive conditions, technology and customer demand. Another positive effect of the fact that all activities for this product are under the direction of one person is to improve the coordination of work.

A possible disadvantage of the product structure is the increase in costs due to the duplication of the same types of work for different types of products. Each product department has its own functional divisions, but perhaps not of such a size as to make the most efficient use of the available facilities and equipment. This is especially a problem in factories with mass production and equipment that can usually work 24 hours a day.

CUSTOMER ORIENTED ORGANIZATION

Some organizations produce a wide range of products and services that meet the needs of several large customer groups and markets. Each group or market has well-defined or specific needs. If two or more customers become particularly important to a firm, it may use a customer-centric organizational structure in which all of its divisions are grouped around specific customer groups (Figure 5). The purpose of such a structure is to satisfy these customers as well as an organization that serves only one group of them.

The advantages and disadvantages of a customer-facing structure are broadly the same as those of a product structure, given the differences associated with different objective functions.

REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

If the activities of the organization cover large geographical areas, especially on an international scale, then it may be appropriate to structure the organization on a territorial basis, i.e. according to the location of its subdivisions (Fig. 6). The regional structure facilitates the solution of problems associated with local laws, customs and consumer needs. This approach simplifies the communication of the organization with customers, as well as communication between members of the organization.

SELECTING THE ORIENTATION OF PARTS

Different types of divisional structure have the same advantages and disadvantages because they have the same goal - to ensure a more effective response of the organization to a particular environmental factor. The product structure makes it easy to deal with the development of new types of products, based on considerations of competition, technology improvement or customer satisfaction. The regional structure allows the organization to more effectively take into account local laws, socio-economic system and markets as its geographical expansion of market areas. With regard to the customer-oriented structure, it enables the organization to most effectively address the needs of those customers on whom it most depends. Thus, the choice of divisional structure should be based on which of these factors is most important in terms of ensuring the implementation of the strategic plans of the organization and the achievement of its goals.

ADAPTIVE STRUCTURES

Beginning in the 1960s, some organizations found themselves in a position where their environment changed so rapidly, projects became so complex, and technology advanced so rapidly that the disadvantages of the bureaucratic organization of management described by Merton and other critics outweighed their merits. As such, the thinness of the traditional organizational structure (especially where the chain of command is long) can slow communication and decision-making to the point where the organization can no longer respond effectively to ongoing changes. To enable organizations to respond to environmental changes and adopt new technology, adaptive organizational structures have been developed.

ADAPTIVE AND MECHANICAL ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES

Since the beginning of the 1960s, many organizations began to develop and implement new, more flexible types of organizational structures, which, in comparison with bureaucracy, were better adapted to the rapid change in external conditions and the emergence of new high technology. Such structures are called adaptive because they can be quickly modified in accordance with changes in the environment and the needs of the organization itself. Another name for these more flexible systems is organic structures. It is related to their ability to adapt to changes in the environment, just as living organisms do. Organic or adaptive structures are not just some variation of bureaucracy, which is the divisional structure. The organic structure is built on goals and assumptions that are radically different from those that underlie the bureaucracy.

Here is a comparison of organic and bureaucratic structures given by Tom Burns and H.M. Stalker, English behavioral scientists who studied the dependence of the successful functioning of an organization on its structure. bureaucratic structures they call MECHANICAL:

“In the mechanical structure, the problems and challenges faced by the organization as a whole are broken down into many small components for individual specialties. Each specialist solves his task as something separate from the real tasks facing the organization as a whole, as if his task is the subject of a subcontract. “Someone up there” must decide how these particular tasks correspond to the tasks of the entire organization. Technical methods and means of solving problems, the rights and obligations of each functional element of a mechanical system are precisely defined. Interaction in the control system occurs mainly from the vertical, i.e. between superior and subordinate. The production activities and behavior of the personnel are regulated by the instructions and decision of the management. Such a management hierarchical system is based on the fact that all information about the position of the company and its tasks is available or can be available only to the head of the company. The management of such an organization, well known in many ways as a complex hierarchical structure, uses a very simple system of control, where information flows from the bottom up, being progressively reinforced.

When the problems that arise and the actions required cannot be decomposed into individual elements and distributed among specialists in accordance with a well-defined hierarchical role of each, organic systems adapt to unstable conditions. In this case, the employees have their specific tasks in light of the objectives of the firm as a whole. A significant part of the formal characteristics and definitions of job responsibilities (in the categories of authority, responsibility, as well as methods) disappears, because. they need to be constantly reviewed as a result of interaction with other participants in this task. This interaction occurs both vertically and horizontally. The interaction between employees of different ranks is more like a consultation between two colleagues than an order from a superior to a subordinate. The leaders of such an organization are no longer considered omniscient.”

As we have already noted, these new organic types of organizational structures cannot in any situation be noted as more effective than mechanical ones.

Moreover, as Burns and Stalker have shown, organic and mechanical structures are only two extremes on a continuum of such forms. The real structures of real organizations lie between them, having signs of both mechanical and organic structures in different proportions. In addition, it is quite common for different departments within the same organization to have different structures. So, in large organizations, some units may have a mechanical structure, while others may have an organic one. Often the management of the organization uses mechanical structures in production units, and organic ones in research and development.

The two main types of organic structures in use today are project and matrix organizations.

PROJECT ORGANIZATION

A design organization is a temporary structure created to solve a specific problem. Its meaning is to bring together the most qualified employees of the organization into one team to implement a complex project on time with a given level of quality, without going beyond the established budget. When the project is completed, the team disbands. Its members transfer to a new project, return to full-time work in their "home" department, or leave this organization.

The main advantage of a design organization is that it concentrates all efforts on solving a single task. While the head of a regular department must be torn between several projects at the same time, the project manager concentrates exclusively on him.

There are several types of design organizations. In so-called clean or consolidated design structures, a temporary team of specialists is essentially a scaled-down copy of the organization's permanent functional structure. In this case, the project manager is fully subordinate to all members of the group, and all the resources allocated to solve this problem. Purely design structures are used only for solving some particularly large-scale problems, for example, to create a spacecraft. In the case of smaller projects, the cost of duplicating the services already existing in the organization in the project structure becomes unaffordable. In these relatively small projects, the manager is basically a consultant to the top management of the firm. Someone from the top management of the organization coordinates the implementation of the project within the normal functional structure.

Achieving high performance results is what all companies strive for without exception. However, without a well-established organizational structure, the enterprise runs the risk of failing.

In this article, we will analyze what the organizational structure of enterprise management is and how to choose it correctly.

Features of choosing the organizational structure of the enterprise

The organizational structure is the basis for performing the functions of enterprise management. So, it is understood as the composition, subordination, interaction and distribution of work between individual employees and entire departments.

In simple terms, the organizational structure of an enterprise is a set of departments, as well as managers, headed by a general director. Her choice depends on many factors:

• age of the organization (the younger the company, the simpler its organizational structure);
• organizational and legal form (JSC, LLC, IP, ...);
• field of activity;
• scale of the company (number of employees, departments, etc.);
• technologies involved in the work of the company;
• communications within and outside the firm.

Of course, when considering the organizational structure of management, it is necessary to take into account such features of the company as levels of interaction. For example, how departments of the company interact with each other, employees with employees, and even the organization itself with the external environment.

Types of organizational structures of enterprise management

Let's take a closer look at the types of organizational structures. There are several classifications, and we will consider the most popular and at the same time the most complete of them.

Linear

The linear structure is the simplest of all existing types of enterprise management structures. At the head is the director, then the heads of departments, then ordinary workers. Those. everyone in the organization is connected vertically. Typically, such organizational structures can be found in small organizations that do not distinguish the so-called functional units.

This type is characterized by simplicity, and tasks in the organization, as a rule, are completed quickly and professionally. If for some reason the task is not completed, then the manager always knows that he needs to ask the head of the department about the task, and the head of the department, in turn, knows who in the department to ask about the progress of the work.

The disadvantage is the increased requirements for management personnel, as well as the burden that falls on their shoulders. This type of management is applicable only to small businesses, otherwise managers will not be able to work effectively.

Linear staff

If a small firm that used a linear management structure develops, then its organizational structure changes and turns into a linear-staff one. Vertical connections remain in place, however, the leader has a so-called "headquarters" - a group of people who act as advisers.

The headquarters does not have the authority to give orders to the performers, however, it has a strong influence on the leader. Based on the decisions of the headquarters, managerial decisions are also formed.

functional

When the load on employees increases, and the organization continues to grow further, the organizational structure moves from a linear-headquarters to a functional one, which means the distribution of work not by departments, but by functions performed. If earlier everything was simple, now managers can safely call themselves directors of finance, marketing and production.

It is with the functional structure that one can see the division of the organization into separate parts, each of which has its own functions and tasks. A stable external environment is a mandatory element to support the development of a company that has chosen a functional structure for itself.

Such companies have one serious drawback: the functions of management personnel are very blurred. If in a linear organizational structure everything is clear (sometimes even too much), then with a functional organizational structure everything is a little blurry.

For example, if there are problems with sales, the director has no idea who exactly to blame. Thus, the functions of managers sometimes overlap, and when a problem occurs, it is difficult to establish whose fault it occurred.

The advantage is that the company can be diversified and do a great job of it. Moreover, due to the functional separation, the firm can have several goals.

Linear-functional

This organizational structure only applies to large organizations. So, it combines the advantages of both organizational structures, however, it has fewer disadvantages.

With this type of control, all the main connections are linear, and the additional ones are functional.

Divisional

Like the previous one, it is only suitable for large companies. Functions in the organization are distributed not according to the areas of responsibility of subordinates, but according to the types of product, or according to the regional affiliation of the division.

The division has its own divisions and the division itself resembles a linear or linear-functional organizational structure. For example, a division may have a procurement department, a marketing department, and a production department.

The disadvantage of such an organizational structure of the enterprise is the complexity of relations between departments, as well as high costs for the maintenance of managers.

matrix

Applicable to those enterprises that operate in a market where products must be constantly improved and updated. To do this, the company creates working groups, which are also called matrix. It follows from this that a double subordination arises in the company, as well as a constant collaboration of employees from different departments.

The advantage of such an organizational structure of the enterprise is the ease of introducing new products into production, as well as the flexibility of the company to the external environment. The disadvantage is double subordination, which often causes conflicts in work groups.

conclusions

So, the organizational structure of an enterprise is a company management system and the ease of performing tasks, the flexibility of the company to the external environment, as well as the burden that falls on the shoulders of managers depends on its choice.

If the company is small, then at the stage of formation, as a rule, a linear organizational structure naturally arises in it, and as the enterprise develops, its structure becomes more and more complex, becoming matrix or divisional.

Video - an example of the organizational structure of the company:

The following are involved in the planning process:

first, the top management of the organization;

second, the planning team;

thirdly, heads and specialists of departments.

Ideal, as already mentioned, is a situation where all employees of the organization are involved in the discussion and drawing up plans.

How are responsibilities distributed among the participants in the planned activity?

Top management is the architect of the planning process, determines its main phases and planning sequence.

Top management must make the planning process accessible and understandable to every employee of the organization, he must be able to involve his employees in it as much as possible.

Rice. one.

Another function of top management is to develop the firm's strategy and make strategic planning decisions. The management of the company determines the general goals of its development and the main ways to achieve them. Developing a strategy requires top management to be analytical and think big.

The management of the middle and lower levels, as well as the specialists of the departments, are involved in the development of operational plans. The duties of specialists also include an analysis of the internal and external environment of the organization, making forecasts. Department heads and staff members come together in evaluating alternative strategies proposed for the organization.

In recent years, in many large organizations, the functions of strategic planning have been transferred to departments, that is, decentralization of intra-company planning has taken place. This process is carried out as follows.

The entire range of the organization's activities is divided into main segments - there is a "strategic segmentation" (the term was proposed by a well-known firm specializing in the analysis and development of strategies - the "Boston Consulting Group" - BCG).

There is a redistribution of strategic powers in favor of segment managers.

The top administration remains responsible for the overall direction of the organization: allocation and structure of capital investments, overall output and profits. In addition, the central leadership determines the resource (mainly financial) restrictions on the activities of lower levels.

Decentralization of the planning service is being carried out - the number of central departments is being reduced, planning departments are being created in the field.

A strategic economic center (SHC) is being formed at the level of a separate subdivision. He is engaged in the development and implementation of his own strategic plans. Examples of companies that created SCC are the well-known American company General Electric, the British company Imperial Chemical Industries, and some others.

Advantages of SCC:

SHZ allows you to most accurately take into account the conditions of management at the level of individual large divisions, creates opportunities for a more flexible adaptation of the division to consumers, to the external environment as a whole;

within the framework of the SCC, the time for passing basic information is reduced, decision-making is accelerated;

the existence of SCC makes it possible for employees to participate more widely in planning their activities.

Disadvantages of SCC:

the information overload of the company's top management increases dramatically, as information is now generated simultaneously in several places;

there is a threat that the very strategy and tactics of the organization's actions will be buried under the avalanches of planned activities in the SCC and the central services of the company (an overabundance of planning);

there is a danger of blurring corporate goals and replacing them with a multitude of inconsistent goals of departments.

If for large firms a pronounced trend is the decentralization of planning activities, then small organizations, on the contrary, strive for greater centralization of planning, the creation and expansion of a central planning service.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

• Introduction 4
• 1. Theoretical foundations of planning and control at the enterprise 7
• 1.1 Goals and objectives of planning and controlling the activities of enterprises at the present stage 7
• 1.2. Forms and systems for planning the activities of enterprises 14
• 2. Organizational structure of the enterprise in the planning system 27
• 2.1 The structure of the enterprise as the basis for planning its activities 27
• 2.2. Development of the optimal structure of the enterprise 35
• 3. The financial structure of the enterprise and its role in the planning and control of activities 42
• 3.1 Planning the activities of the enterprise based on a modern financial management system 42
• 3.2. Financial planning system 46
• Conclusion 58
• References 59
• Introduction
• Today, domestic enterprises operate in an economic environment that requires new approaches to the organization of control and planning of the economic activity of the enterprise. Having lost state support as a result of market transformations, having acquired economic freedom, enterprises are forced to independently look for forms and methods of effective control and planning of their activities. To work effectively in today's market conditions, enterprises must have a certain organizational potential that would allow them to survive, grow and develop.
• The managerial problems that have arisen in connection with the transition to market conditions of management, such as: the complication of the competitive environment and the strengthening of its impact, the individualization of consumer behavior and the high mobility of other environmental factors to which enterprises must respond, indicates the need for constant work on the organizational development of enterprises , require the creation of more effective flexible and mobile organizational control structures.
• Business leaders are beginning to understand the need for a gradual transition from bureaucratic control structures, in which management interactions are predominantly vertical, to so-called adaptive organizational structures, in which hierarchical subordination relationships are built horizontally.
• In order to increase the efficiency, flexibility and adaptability of the organization, formalized horizontal connections and relationships may prevail. Increasing the ability to quickly respond to emerging situations can be achieved by granting greater powers to lower levels of control, transferring management decision-making centers to the places where problems arise, from where operational information comes.
• Thus, the basis for the implementation of the functions of control and planning at the enterprise is their clear structuring, i.e. development of the organizational and financial structure of the enterprise.
• The company structure is a management tool with which the manager adjusts the work of his company to achieve strategic goals.
• The developed optimal organizational and financial structure is the basis for creating a basis for the dynamic development of the enterprise, increasing the degree of its manageability, and faster response to changing market conditions.
• All of the above indicates the relevance of the problems of structuring the activities of enterprises, creating a logically interconnected chain of interaction between structural divisions of an enterprise.
• The purpose of the thesis is to develop theoretical and methodological provisions for the formation and development of the organizational and financial structures of enterprise control.
• The purpose of the study necessitated the formulation and solution of a number of tasks, such as:
• - definition of goals, objectives and prerequisites for presenting the enterprise control system in a structured form;
• - analysis of the theoretical and methodological foundations of the formation of the organizational and financial structure of the enterprise;
• - practical implementation of theoretical approaches to the creation of an organizational and financial structure on the example of an industrial enterprise
• The goals and objectives of the study determined the structure of the work, consisting of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion, a list of references and applications.
• The object of study of the thesis is the activities of enterprises in the field of formation of an effective organizational and financial structure, which allows to fully mediate the functions of planning and control.
• The subject of the research is the theoretical, methodological and practical issues of the formation of the organizational and financial structure in modern enterprises.
• In the course of writing the thesis, the works of domestic and foreign scientists and specialists on the problems of theory and practice of structuring the activities of enterprises were used.
• 1. Theoretical foundations of planning and control in the enterprise

1.1 Goals and objectives of planning and controlling the activities of enterprises at the present stage

To develop and apply the strategy and tactics of the enterprise, an appropriate organizational structure is needed to ensure effective planning.

Planning in its broadest sense is the process of choosing goals and the decisions needed to achieve the chosen goals. In a narrower sense, planning is a type of management activity, a way to optimize the actions of an economic entity.

In the conditions of market relations, the main regulator of the actions of business entities are the prices for goods and services. Entrepreneurs, as business owners, are forced to obey the economic laws of cost, supply and demand, market pricing, due to the fact that these laws operate objectively, regardless of the will and consciousness of people.

On the other hand, entrepreneurs not only obey the laws of the market, but also strive for independent decision-making, their behavior in decision-making is purposeful and conscious. In other words, entrepreneurs plan the activities of the enterprise.

Any enterprise in its activities is faced with uncertainty. The tool for overcoming uncertainty is planning. Enterprise planning is classified according to three criteria "Strategic planning" ed. E.A. Utkin:

1. The degree of uncertainty in planning.

2. Temporal orientation of planning ideas.

3. Planning horizon.

Depending on the degree of uncertainty, planning systems are divided into deterministic and probabilistic. Deterministic systems assume a completely predictable environment and the availability of reliable information. Probabilistic planning systems are formed in conditions of incomplete information and uncertainty of results.

Temporal orientation allows us to distinguish 4 types of planning:

1. Reactive planning aimed at the past. Any problem is examined from the point of view of its past development. Reactive planning is carried out from the bottom up.

2. Inactive planning is based on satisfaction with the present. Entrepreneurs in this case do not show any desire for any major changes in the activities of their enterprise.

3. Preactive planning, focused mainly on future changes and on finding optimal solutions, is carried out from the top down.

4. Interactive planning, built on the assumption that the future of the enterprise is subject to control and largely depends on the conscious actions of people making management decisions. Interactive planning is actually an ideal construction, but not a practical model for enterprise control.

Until recently, the most common type of planning was inactive planning, although it gradually begins to give way to preactive planning.

According to the duration of the planning horizon, 3 types are distinguished:

1. Long-term planning covering a period of 10 years or more.

2. Medium-term planning for a period of 3 to 5 years.

3. Short term planning, usually 1 year.

The planning process in an enterprise is divided into two main stages: strategic planning and tactical planning.

Strategic planning is planned work, including the development of forecasts, programs and plans that provide for goals and strategies for the behavior of control objects in the future, allowing these objects to function effectively and quickly adapt to changing environmental conditions.

Tactical planning is the process of deciding what an enterprise should do and how resources should be allocated and used to achieve strategic goals.

The main difference between strategic and tactical planning can be seen as the difference between goals and means to achieve goals.

In planning the activities of the enterprise, the concept of operational planning is used. Operational planning is actually an integral part of tactical planning, but it can cover a short period of time (a decade, a month, a quarter, etc.) and is associated with the planning of individual operations in the general business cycle (for example, marketing planning, enterprise planning, budgeting, etc.). d.).

Planning in an enterprise can bring a positive result if it is properly organized. All employees of the enterprise should be involved in the discussion and preparation of plans, however, top managers of the enterprise, employees of the planning department (or a group of planners as part of the economic department), heads and specialists of departments are directly involved in the planning process.

Top management determines the main stages and sequence of planning, develops the company's development goals, enterprise strategy, and makes decisions on strategic planning.

Planners, middle and lower managers are engaged in the development of tactical and operational plans, with the main part of planning being the planners.

For better planning, it is advisable to involve a planning consultant.

The final decisions related to the approval of the prepared draft plan are taken by the top management.

The content of planning as a function of control by an enterprise consists in a reasonable determination of the main directions of activity and further development, taking into account material sources and market demand. The essence of planning is manifested in the specification of the development goals of the entire enterprise and each unit (service) separately for a specified period of time; determination of marketing objectives, means of achieving them, timing and sequence of implementation; identification of material, labor and financial resources necessary to solve the tasks.

Thus, the purpose of planning as a control function is to seek to take into account in advance, if possible, all internal and external factors that provide favorable conditions for normal functioning and development. It provides for the development of a set of measures that determine the sequence of achieving specific goals, taking into account the possibilities for the most efficient use of resources by each service and the entire enterprise as a whole. Therefore, planning is designed to provide interconnection between individual structural divisions of the enterprise, including the entire technological chain: research and development, production and provision of services. This activity is based on the identification and forecasting of consumer demand, analysis and evaluation of available resources and development prospects. Hence the need to link planning with marketing and control in order to constantly adjust the indicators of quality of service and the range of services following changes in market demand. Aistova M.D.. Enterprise Restructuring: Management Issues. Strategy, coordination of structural parameters, reduction of resistance to change. Moscow: Alpina Publisher, 2002. 287 p.

The need for planning in modern ones arises from a large number of competitive enterprises that are increasing during the period of a market economy, a variety of possible forms of control by an enterprise (an independent enterprise, chains of enterprises, a franchise agreement, a control contract), the presence of numerous structural divisions within an enterprise, close interfirm ties with suppliers of various goods (products, equipment, etc.), agent firms involved in the customer service process, as well as from the requirements of scientific and technological progress - to quickly take into account and master the latest achievements of science and technology. In the same direction, there is such a factor as the desire of the enterprise to subjugate the market, to strengthen its influence on the formation of consumer market demand.

Planning as a function of control by an enterprise depends on the characteristics of the control structure. The structure of control, its functioning and development allows us to characterize one of the most important functions of control - planning.

Based on the foregoing, the planned development of the economy can be understood as development that corresponds to the tasks set by a certain control body. Thus, systematic development, in fact, is the opposite of spontaneous, devoid of targeted management of the development of the economy.

In this sense, planning is inherent in the economy in general, regardless of the mode of enterprise. After all, there is no such economic system, the development of which would take place without any influence on the part of interested subjects or certain control bodies. Any more or less large entrepreneur, firm, state, cooperative enterprise always has a well-known plan for conducting its activities.

Thus, there is no doubt that the construction and use of plans and programs is one of the most important prerequisites for optimal control by an enterprise.

In a purely logical sense, the plan, first of all, contains the system of prospects and results, the implementation of which is meant or has already been planned by the relevant control body for this economic object. This may include, for example, the prospects for growth in production volumes, an increase in labor productivity, the development of technology, enterprise technology, its cooperation, etc. Such prospects should be built on the basis of taking into account not only the goals of the enterprise, but also on the basis of an analysis of the objective conditions of activity.

Consequently, these prospects are an expression of the desired results of management within the framework possible for a certain period.

Proceeding from this, it is possible to characterize two other most important elements of planning, an element of any plan: firstly, an analysis of the current economic situation and trends in its development, and, secondly, the construction of a system of measures and the choice of means of influencing the development of an enterprise in order to direct it along the desired path. It is easy to see that these elements largely coincide with the stages of formation of an enterprise development model, which once again proves the importance of planning for any development in general.

Thus, the definition of development prospects, the analysis of the current situation and the development on this basis of a program of measures to achieve the set goal are the three main and necessary elements of building a plan. The essence of these elements indicates their closest connection with the problem of foresight, forecasting the course of socio-economic development.

Socio-economic phenomena are characterized by extreme complexity and a low degree of stability due to the influence of a huge number of factors on them. Hence the high demands placed on the analysis and the program of action developed on its basis.

The complexity of socio-economic phenomena, their analysis and development forecasting also lies in the complexity of the economic system in which they take place: a special, complex organization of this system needs the coordinated functioning of its individual elements. Therefore, we can say that regularity also means constant, consciously maintained correspondence (proportionality) of individual parts, structural links of the economy. All aspects of economic life, the correlations and connections between them, the directions and rates of development are subject, on this basis, to mandatory analysis and reflection in the plan.

Therefore, planning and forecasting are the most important functions of the enterprise control process; without them, the successful operation of the enterprise is difficult. Planning and forecasting allow:

to foresee the prospects for the development of the enterprise for the future, to use future favorable conditions or to solve emerging problems;

more rationally distribute and use all the resources of the enterprise;

ensure the stability of the business and avoid the risk of bankruptcy;

Purposefully, consistently and effectively pursue a scientific and technical policy at the enterprise;

timely update and modernize products and improve their quality in accordance with market conditions;

improve the efficiency of the enterprise and improve the financial condition of the enterprise;

ensure coordination of activities in the enterprise;

· stimulate the collection, analysis and use of the necessary information;

Improve control over the course of production and economic activities.

1.2. Forms and systems of enterprise activity planning

The development of planning is directly related to the growing trend towards centralization in enterprise management and is designed to link the activities of all departments (services), subordinating it to a single development strategy. Intra-company planning within the enterprise covers both current and long-term planning, carried out in the form of forecasting. If long-term planning is designed to determine the general strategic goals and directions for the development of the enterprise, the resources necessary for this and the stages of solving the tasks set, then the current plans developed on its basis are focused on the actual achievement of the intended goals based on the specific conditions and market conditions at each given stage of development. Therefore, the current plans complement, develop and correct the promising directions of development, taking into account the specific situation.

Depending on the content, goals and objectives, the following forms of planning can be distinguished Anti-crisis management: Textbook / Ed. EM. Korotkov. M.: INFRA-M, 2000. 432 p.

Forms of planning depending on the duration of the planning period:

Long-term planning (forecasting);

Medium-term planning;

Current (budgetary, operational) planning.

The level and quality of planning is determined by the following essential conditions:

Competence of enterprise management at all levels of control;

Qualification of service personnel working in functional units;

Availability of information base and provision of computer equipment.

There are some characteristic features of planning depending on the goals:

In American companies, the main thing is the unification of the strategies of all departments and the allocation of resources;

In English companies - orientation to the distribution of resources;

In Japanese companies - focus on innovation and improving the quality of solutions.

Planning involves:

Reasonable choice of goals; policy definition;

Development of an effective structure of the enterprise (organizational and financial), allowing to achieve the set goals of the enterprise;

Development of measures and activities (mode of action); methods for achieving goals;

Providing a basis for future long-term decision making.

Planning ends before the start of actions to implement the plan.

Planning is the initial stage of control, but it is not the only act, but a process that continues until the completion of the planned set of operations.

Planning is aimed at the optimal use of the enterprise's capabilities, including the best use of all types of resources and the prevention of erroneous actions that could lead to a decrease in the efficiency of the enterprise, loss of customers.

Planning includes determining:

Final and intermediate goals;

Tasks, the solution of which is necessary to achieve the goals;

Means and ways to solve them;

Required resources, their sources and method of distribution.

Depending on the direction and nature of the tasks to be solved, there are three types of planning: strategic or long-term; mid-term; tactical or current (budget).

Strategic planning consists mainly in determining the main goals of the enterprise and is focused on determining the intended final results, taking into account the means and methods for achieving the goals and providing the necessary resources.

At the same time, new opportunities for the enterprise are also being developed, for example, the opening of additional food outlets: bars, restaurants, etc. By refurbishing idle areas, acquiring equipment, changing the profile of an enterprise or a radical change in technology. Strategic planning covers a period of 10-15 years, has long-term consequences, affects the functioning of the entire control system and is based on huge resources Krasovsky I.D. Organizational Behavior: Proc. allowance. M.: UNITI, 1999. 473 p.

Current planning is to determine intermediate goals on the way to achieving strategic goals and objectives. At the same time, the means and methods for solving problems, the use of resources, and the introduction of new technology are developed in detail.

Of interest is the following interpretation of terms related to planning:

Consistency is the basis of control;

Planning is the principle of control;

Planning is the most important function of control;

Scheduled tasks - method of control;

The development and implementation of the plan is the main content of the control process.

forward planning

In modern conditions, it is important for any enterprise to pay more and more attention to the development of long-term planning as a tool for centralized control. Such planning, covering a period of 10 to 20 years (usually 10-12 years), provides for the development of general principles for orienting the enterprise to the future (development concept); determines the strategic direction and development programs, content and

the sequence of implementation of the most important activities that ensure the achievement of the goals set. Long-term planning helps to make decisions on the complex problems of an enterprise's activities on an international scale:

Determination of directions and sizes of investments and sources of their financing;

Introduction of technical innovations and progressive technology;

Enterprise diversification and product renewal; forms of foreign investment;

Improving the organization of control for individual divisions and personnel policy.

In the long-term planning system, depending on the methodology and goals, they usually distinguish between long-term planning and strategic planning.

The system of long-term planning uses the extrapolation method, i.e., the use of the results of the indicators of the past period and, based on the setting of optimistic goals, the distribution of somewhat inflated indicators for the future period. Here, the expectation is that the future will be better than the past.

Strategic planning aims to give a comprehensive scientific justification for the problems that an enterprise may encounter in the coming period, and on this basis to develop indicators of the enterprise's development for the planning period.

This method is most applicable to the hospitality industry. The plan is based on:

Analysis of the prospects for the development of the enterprise, whose task is to clarify the trends and factors influencing the development of relevant trends;

Analysis of positions in the competitive struggle, the task of which is to determine how competitive the services provided by the enterprise are and what the enterprise can do to improve results

Works in specific directions, if it follows optimal strategies in all activities;

Choosing a strategy based on an analysis of the prospects of the enterprise in various types of activities and determining priorities for specific types of activities in terms of its effectiveness and availability of resources;

Analysis of directions for diversification of activities, search for new more efficient activities and determination of expected results.

When choosing a strategy, it must be borne in mind that new strategies, both in traditional industries and in new business areas, must correspond to the accumulated potential of the enterprise.

Figure 1 - Scheme of long-term planning

In the system of long-term planning (Fig. 1), the goals are translated into action programs, budgets (annual plan), profit plans developed for each of the main divisions of the enterprise. Then the programs and budgets are carried out by these departments and the deviations of the actual indicators from the planned ones are determined.

Drawing. 2- Strategic planning scheme

As can be seen from the diagram (Fig. 2), perspectives and goals are linked to develop a strategy. Current programs (budgets) guide the operational divisions of the enterprise in their daily work aimed at ensuring current profitability; strategic programs and budgets lay the foundation for future profitability, which requires the creation of a special execution system built on project management.

Long-term planning systems are used in 70-80% of the largest Japanese corporations, where planning is organized as follows:

1) 5-10 key strategies are selected, and a long-term development policy is formed around them;

2) at the same time, medium-term plans are adopted to combine strategies into a single whole and link with the allocation of resources;

3) top management defines goals for each unit, and the latter develops quantitative plans to achieve these goals using the bottom-up method.

The strategic plan is expressed by the strategy of the enterprise. It contains decisions regarding areas of activity and the choice of new directions. It can list major projects and set their priorities. It is developed at the level of the highest level of control. Usually the strategic plan does not contain quantitative indicators.

Medium-term and budget planning

Medium-term plans most often cover a five-year period, as the most convenient for updating the production apparatus and the range of products and services. They formulate the main tasks for a specified period, for example, the production strategy of the enterprise as a whole and each division (reconstruction of the building, development of new products and expansion of the range);

Service sales strategy (attracting new customers, i.e. entering new markets, improving service and other activities that help increase sales); financial strategy (volumes and directions of investments, sources of financing, structure of the securities portfolio);

Personnel policy (composition and structure of staff, their preparation and use);

Determination of the volume and structure of the necessary resources and forms of material and technical supply. Medium-term plans provide for the development in a certain sequence of measures aimed at achieving the goals outlined by the long-term development program.

Current planning is carried out by detailed development (usually for one year) of operational plans for the company as a whole and its individual divisions, in particular, marketing programs, research plans, production plans, logistics.

The main links of the current plan of the enterprise are calendar plans (monthly, quarterly, semi-annual), which are a detailed specification of the goals and objectives set by long-term and medium-term plans. Calendar plans are compiled on the basis of information about the availability of pre-orders (reservations), their availability, i.e. availability of rooms - for the hotel. The calendar plans provide for expenses for the reconstruction of existing facilities, replacement of equipment, construction of new enterprises, training of maintenance personnel.

The implementation of operational plans is carried out through a system of budgets, or financial plans, which are usually drawn up for a year or for a shorter period for each individual profit center unit, and then consolidated into a single budget, or financial plan of the enterprise.

Thanks to financial forecasting and financial planning, the head of the enterprise is able to determine the future financial needs of the company and determine the goals, the achievement of which will help maintain the planned levels of profitability. If the forecast indicates a lack of funds, the director has the opportunity to say when and how much money the company will need. This is necessary in order to determine the financial and credit policy that should be carried out in order to successfully solve the tasks set for the company.

The development of a detailed budget enables the company to compare the actual results of its activities with the planned ones. This comparison is made from month to month, and it is the CFO's responsibility to identify and correct any major deviations from the predicted level.

The process of developing an enterprise budget begins with the creation of a budget commission. The Commission is usually chaired by the Director General and includes the heads of all major departments.

Budget development requires studying the external and internal economic conditions of the organization, part of which are possible changes in the inflationary policy of the country in the near future.

The market should be studied in terms of changes in demand caused by increased competition from newly opened enterprises.

Functional divisions are divided into two categories: revenue and expenditure. Divisions present their financial statements for past periods. This information is used as the basis for preparing the budget for the coming period.

Organizational forms of intercompany planning

Previously, the organizational process of central planning in most of the largest firms was carried out "top down". This means that the planning directives were developed at the highest level of control, where the goals, main directions and main tasks of the development of the enterprise were determined and attempts were made to interconnect all links of the production mechanism.

Then, at lower levels of control, these goals and objectives were specified in relation to the activities of each unit. This is purely technological planning, which establishes the proportions and volumes of services provided. After the appropriate coordination of plan targets with specific executors, the plans were finally approved by the top management.

To be able to correctly define the goals and objectives for each department, top management had to have data on the status and development of each service and each service provided by the enterprise. This data is usually contained in the marketing programs that form the basis for the development of the plan in all departments.

The apparatus that carried out intra-firm planning included functional units at different levels of control. The highest level of the planning system is made up of Committees under the Board of Directors. In some companies, these are Planning Committees; in others, they are Development Committees or Central Development Controls. They, as a rule, included representatives of the top management of the enterprise, who prepare decisions on the most important problems of the enterprise's strategy and policy, perform technical, coordinating and analytical functions, participate in the formulation of the main goals and objectives of the enterprise for the long term. The recommendations prepared by them were submitted for consideration by the Board of Directors and, after approval, were included in the form of specific measures in the long-term plan for the development of the enterprise.

The next link in the planning apparatus was the central planning service, whose functions included the development of long-term and current plans, the adjustment and refinement of planned indicators. She drafted forms of planning documentation, advised senior management on planning issues.

Central planning services were available in almost all large companies. However, organizationally and structurally, the central service could be built in different ways and differ in the nature of the functions performed. In some companies, the functions of the central planning service were performed by planning departments that are part of other central services. In other companies or at individual enterprises, the planning functions were performed by operational and current planning and control services, whose task was to draw up plans for the day, week, month, quarter, half year, year, taking into account the restrictions that are determined by corporate goals.

Practice shows that now the trend of indicative planning has intensified, which is already used in Russian enterprises, where plans are drawn up, as a rule, in production departments.

According to some data, about 2/3 of American companies plan "from the bottom up", 1/3 - based on the interaction of all levels of control, and there is no "top-down" planning at all. Milner B.Z. Theory of organization: Proc. M.: INFRA-M, 1999. 480 p.

The plans developed by the operational units are reviewed by the central planning service, the labor relations service and then by the board of governors under the chief administrator. Once approved by the Board of Directors, the plan takes on a directive character.

In English companies, the formation of plans in the functional divisions, where the initial plan is prepared, also prevails. The planning department (service) of the company develops directives that are sent to the functional units to take into account its performance when drawing up the initial plan. Here, just as in American companies, the planning is based on the principle "the contractor plans."

The process of making strategic decisions in Japanese companies is carried out either "top down" or interconnected by higher and lower levels of control.

In Japanese companies, innovation is more often introduced from the top down. At the same time, the tactics of operational activities are usually developed by the personnel management department, and decision-making is of a group nature.

The central planning department in Japanese companies plays a much more important role than in American ones. It is usually the planning department that develops the plan. Drawn up by the planning department, the plan is reviewed by the management committee, and the final decision is made by the management committee and the president of the firm, who is also the general manager. In Japanese companies, this is largely due to the fact that their degree of diversification is less than that of American and British companies.

The management committee in Japanese companies is the most important group decision-making body, it is at the highest level of the organizational structure. Characteristically, in Japanese companies, long-term plans are rarely submitted to the Board of Directors for consideration.

Since most of the Board members are permanent employees of Japanese companies, duplication of decisions taken by the management committee does not seem necessary.

The organization of the planning process in different enterprises has its own distinctive features, due to differences in the organizational structure of control in general and the nature of the production and technical process. These differences relate both to the timing of planning periods, and the planning procedure itself and the functions of individual units involved in planning issues. When developing long-term plans, enterprises often set different planning periods, as well as different time frames for different types of plans (for example, a 15-year term for a research and development plan and a seven-year term for a strategic plan).

Summing up what has been said, we can conclude that intra-company planning at the enterprise is turning into a special sphere of economic activity, objectively necessary at the current level of socialization of the enterprise.

2. Organizational structure of the enterprise in the planning system

2.1 The structure of the enterprise as the basis for planning its activities

The organization's management structure or organizational management structure (OCS) is one of the key concepts of management, closely related to the goals, functions, management process, the work of managers and the distribution of powers between them. 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.

The management structure is understood as an ordered set of stably interconnected elements that ensure the functioning and development of the organization as a whole. OSU is also defined as a form of division and cooperation of management activities, within the framework of which the management process is carried out according to the relevant functions aimed at solving the set tasks and achieving the intended goals. From these positions, the management structure is presented as a system of optimal distribution of functional duties, rights and responsibilities, the order and forms of interaction between the governing bodies and the people working in them.

The effectiveness and efficiency of the organizational structure is affected by:

1) the actual relationships that arise between people and their work. This is reflected in organizational charts and job descriptions;

2) current management policies and practices that influence human behavior;

3) the powers and functions of employees of the organization at various levels of management (lower, middle, higher).

With the skillful combination of these three factors in the organization, such a rational structure can be created in which there is a real and favorable opportunity to achieve a high level of production efficiency.

The organizational structure of a particular enterprise is a combination of various types of departmentalization. The simplicity and clarity of functioning should ensure its understanding by the environment, minimize costs and orient the members of the organization to the results of the activity, and not to the efforts expended. The optimal organizational structure creates favorable conditions for the process of making managerial decisions, including planning, its stability makes the organization sustainable and at the same time allows you to successfully respond to changes in the internal and external environment.

There are many requirements for the management structure, as an element of enterprise activity planning, reflecting its key importance for management. They are taken into account in the principles of formation of the management structure, the development of which was devoted to many works of domestic authors in the pre-reform period. The main of these principles can be formulated as follows:

1) The organizational structure of management should, first of all, reflect the goals and objectives of the organization, and, therefore, be subordinate to production and its needs;

2) an optimal division of labor between management bodies and individual employees should be envisaged, ensuring the creative nature of work and normal workload, as well as proper specialization;

3) the formation of the management structure should be associated with the definition of the powers and responsibilities of each employee and management body, with the establishment of a system of vertical and horizontal links between them;

4) between functions and duties, on the one hand, and powers and responsibilities, on the other hand, it is necessary to maintain correspondence, the violation of which leads to dysfunction of the management system as a whole;

5) the organizational structure of management is designed to be adequate to the socio-cultural environment of the organization, which has a significant impact on decisions regarding the level of centralization and detail, the distribution of powers and responsibilities, the degree of independence and the extent of control of leaders and managers. In practice, this means that attempts to blindly copy management structures that function successfully in other socio-cultural conditions do not guarantee the desired result.

The implementation of these principles means the need to take into account the formation (or restructuring) of the management structure of many different factors influencing the organizational structure of management.

The main factor that sets the possible contours and parameters of the management structure is the organization itself. It is known that organizations differ in many ways. A wide variety of organizations in the Russian Federation predetermines the plurality of approaches to building management structures. These approaches are different in organizations commercial and non-commercial, large, medium and small, located at different stages of the life cycle, having different levels of division and specialization of labor, its cooperation and automation, hierarchical and "flat", and so on. Obviously, the management structure of large enterprises is more complex than that required by a small firm, where all management functions are sometimes concentrated in the hands of one or two members of the organization (usually a manager and an accountant), where, accordingly, there is no need to design formal structural parameters. As the organization grows, and hence the volume of managerial work, the division of labor develops, and specialized units are formed (for example, in personnel management, production, finance, innovation, etc.), the well-coordinated work of which requires coordination and control. Building a formal governance structure that clearly defines roles, relationships, powers, and levels becomes imperative.

The formation of the management structure is influenced by changes in the organizational forms in which enterprises operate. So, when a company joins an association, for example, an association or a concern, management functions are redistributed (of course, some of the functions are centralized), so the management structure of the company also changes. However, even if an enterprise remains independent and independent, but becomes part of a network organization that temporarily unites a number of interconnected enterprises (most often to take advantage of a favorable situation), it has to make a number of changes to its management structure. This is due to the need to strengthen the functions of coordination and adaptation to the management systems of other companies in the network.

An important factor in the formation of management structures is the level of development of information technology at the enterprise. The general trend towards decentralization of "electronic intelligence", that is, to an increase in the number of personal computers while expanding the use of local networks at the enterprise level, leads to the elimination or reduction of the amount of work on a number of functions at the middle and grassroots levels. This applies, first of all, to the coordination of the work of subordinate units, the transfer of information, and the generalization of the results of the activities of individual employees. A direct result of the use of local area networks can be to expand the scope of control of managers while reducing the number of levels of management in the enterprise.

Depending on the nature of the links between the departments of the organization, the following types of organizational structures are distinguished: linear, functional, linear-functional and matrix.

Linear organizational structure of management. This is one of the simplest organizational structures of management. With a linear structure at the head of the production link at any level is a leader - a single leader who performs all management functions and is subordinate to a superior leader in all matters. This is how the subordination of managers of various levels along the vertical (line) develops, which carry out administrative and functional management at the same time.

The linear organizational structure of management has its advantages and disadvantages (table 1).

Table 1 Advantages and disadvantages of a linear structure

This structure is typical for small enterprises, where the range of issues to be resolved is insignificant and there are few industrial ties. When the scale of production is larger, and the range of problems to be solved increases, the technical and organizational level rises, the linear structure turns out to be inefficient, since the manager cannot know everything and therefore cannot manage well.

Serious shortcomings of the linear structure to a certain extent can be eliminated by the functional structure.

The functional organizational structure of the organization's management. The idea is that the performance of individual functions on specific issues is assigned to specialists, that is, each management body (or performer) is specialized in performing certain types of activities.

The performers are in double subordination. So, the worker is obliged to simultaneously fulfill the instructions of his line manager and the functional specialist. With a functional management structure, the line manager has the opportunity to deal more with operational management issues, since functional specialists free him from solving special issues. But control commands come from many functional services to one production unit or to one performer, and therefore the problem of mutual coordination of these commands arises, which creates certain difficulties. In addition, the responsibility of performers for the performance of their duties is reduced.

Like the linear structure, the functional structure has its advantages and disadvantages (Table 2).

The shortcomings of both linear and functional management structures are largely eliminated by linear-functional structures.

Table 2 Advantages and disadvantages of the functional structure

Advantages	Flaws
1. High competence of specialists responsible for the implementation of specific functions; 2. release of line managers from solving some special issues; 3. standardization, formalization and programming of phenomena and processes; 4. elimination of duplication and parallelism in the performance of managerial functions; 5. reducing the need for generalists.	1. Excessive interest in the implementation of the goals and objectives of "their" units; 2. difficulties in maintaining constant relationships between various functional services; 3. emergence of tendencies of excessive centralization; 4. lengthy decision-making procedure; 5. a relatively frozen organizational form that hardly reacts to changes.

Linear-functional (headquarters) management structure

Under the line management, specialists form a headquarters that prepares data for them in order to competently solve special problems. In this case, the functional bodies are subordinate to the line manager. Their orders are given to production units only after agreement with the latter. This makes it possible to resolve issues more competently. But with a linear-functional management structure, the load on the line manager increases sharply, who must play the role of an intermediary between functional services and production units subordinate to him. He perceives information flows from subordinate units, gives tasks to functional services, develops decisions, issues commands from top to bottom.

At present, the headquarters structure in industry plays a leading role. The basis of this structure is linear control. The role of functional bodies varies depending on the level of management. The higher the level, the greater the role played by functional organs. At the level of site management, the influence of functional services is insignificant, but at the level of enterprise management, they do a great job of planning, technical preparation for production, and development of management decisions.

The linear-functional structure also has its positive and negative sides (Table 3).

Table 3 Advantages and disadvantages of a linear functional structure

Matrix organizational structure of management

The matrix structure combines two types of structures: linear and program-target. Vertically (linear structure), the board is built in separate areas of activity (production, supply, sales). Horizontally (program-target structure) management of programs, projects, topics is carried out. When determining horizontal links, a program or project manager and his deputies for individual topics, a responsible executor in each specialized unit are appointed, and a special program management service is organized.

The work is ensured through the creation of target units, where leading specialists are brought together to jointly develop the program. The program manager determines what and when should be done, and who and how will perform this or that work is decided by the line manager.

Thus, the matrix management structure supplemented the linear-functional organizational structure with new elements. This created a qualitatively new direction in the development of program-targeted and problem-targeted forms of management. These forms contribute to the rise of the creative initiative of managers in the matter of increasing the efficiency of production. Matrix management structures promote the restructuring of production based on the latest technological processes and more productive equipment. The matrix structure has its advantages and disadvantages (Table 4).

Similar Documents

The concept and principles of building the organizational structure of management, the significance of this category of management in the activities of the enterprise. Classification and types of management structures, goals and objectives of their formation, existing problems and solutions.

term paper, added 02/10/2014


Theoretical foundations of the formation, analysis and evaluation of the organizational and managerial structure of the enterprise LLC "Health-M", its essence, types and principles of construction. Development of recommendations for improving the organizational structure of this enterprise.

term paper, added 10/23/2010


The concept of the organization, the task and functions of the organization. Forms and structures of organization management. Principles of formation of the organizational structure of management, their classification and main types, advantages and disadvantages, ways of development and improvement.

abstract, added 09.10.2009


The concept of the organizational structure of enterprise management and the principles of its formation, types; design process, analysis and performance criteria on the example of OJSC "Selmash-Uryupinsk": characteristics of the enterprise, assessment of financial and economic indicators.

thesis, added 02/11/2011


The concept of organization. Personnel management as part of the organization. Organizational relations in the management structure. The concept of organizational structure and its types. Bureaucratic management structures. Linear organizational structure of management.

term paper, added 08/07/2008


The concept of the organizational structure of the organization. Classification and characteristics of bureaucratic and organic (adaptive) organizational structures of management. Analysis of the mechanism of formation and development of the organizational structure of enterprise management.

term paper, added 12/24/2010


Principles of building organizational structures of management. The concept, types and classification of organizational management structures, their advantages and disadvantages. Measures to improve the organizational structure of the management of the enterprise CJSC "Tirotex".

term paper, added 12/16/2010


Requirements, principles of formation, specific features of the organizational structure of the management apparatus of machine-building enterprises. Goals, objectives, legal regulation, level of independence, governing bodies of the Swiss National Bank.

term paper, added 11/23/2009


The concept, essence and types of the organizational structure of the enterprise. Characteristics of the service station "Garage". Analysis of the organizational structure in the light of the enterprise development strategy. Methods of personnel management, personnel planning.

term paper, added 05/28/2017


Types of organizational management structures and the basic principles of their construction. Production structures and dynamics of the main technical and economic indicators of housing and communal services. Design and justification of the choice of organizational structure.

 

It might be useful to read:

• Minerals: Coal;
• Development of coal mines and basins;
• Formation of professional competencies;
• Why Russia never learned how to build its own turbines Turbine manufacturing company;
• ISO International Standards System (ISO) and its requirements;
• International Quality System: ISO standards;
• History of MMK: from the first five-year plans to the present day Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works year of establishment;
• Holiday organization plan;