i. the structural systems have their advantages and

i. More organic structure

ii. Less formalization of behaviour

Your time is important. Let us write you an essay from scratch
100% plagiarism free
Sources and citations are provided


Get essay help

iii. Specialization-based formal training

iv. Encouragement of mutual adjustment

v. Low standardization of procedures

vi. Roles are not clearly defined

vii. Selective decentralization

viii. Work of the organization rests on specialized team; hence, they become the power centre

ix. Horizontal job specialization

x. High cost of communication

xi. Culture based on democratic and non-bureaucratic work

xii. Cross-departmental task forces

In adhocracy form of organizations, hierarchical barrier being absent, people across the functions get authority to make decisions and take actions concerning organizational interests.

The structure of any organization facilitates achievement of organizational goals and objectives. Hence, decisions on the type of organizational structure are very important. The most common type of organizational structure is bureaucracy. However, the bureaucratic model in itself is not an organizational structure; it can only provide hypothetical guidelines to create own business design, more of a blue print type and descriptive in nature.

Thus, bureaucracy, per se, is not the final product. Adhocracy, on the other hand, is a structural system that does not consider traditional ways of bureaucracy, i.e., minus formal rules and regulations. It is flexible and quickly adaptive to the dynamic environmental changes.

Both the structural systems have their advantages and disadvantages. Each deals with situations differently. Bureaucracy is mechanical. It approaches problems systematically through predetermined guidelines. Adhocracy, on the other hand, challenges problems with a more flexible approach to ultimately achieve the final goals.

Organizations with adhocracy structure can respond to the changes quickly, but bureaucratic organizations need time to respond to change, they being more rigid about procedural norms. Again in adhocracy, conflict and group rivalry may be more, whereas, in bureaucracy such occurrences are less since interpersonal relationships are more formal and the entire system is regimented.

Therefore, we cannot say that a particular system is good or bad. Whether an organization is functioning well or otherwise, it generally depends on the nature and type of the activities of the organizations. The latter may be the right-fit to wither both adhocracy and bureaucracy.