Attribution - Mechanistic and Organic Organizations

Marketing and design schools differ when it comes to how they teach students about these two concepts. Organic organizations and mechanistic ones are both based around the study of human behavior, the market, and the way it affects people's lives. Organizational design gives more emphasis on the concept of organization with the various components that go into creating an organizational structure as well as how they interact with each other. Mechanistic learning organizations differ from organic learning ones in that they encourage members to express themselves creatively through their creative forms and functions rather than practicing the same routines over again. Here, we'll take a closer look at these two concepts and see how each one influences the way marketing and design is taught in schools.

Divisional Structures

In marketing and design schools, the concept of divisional structures is taught first. This is used to explain why marketing works in spite of technological advancements. Marketing still works using traditional methods, or via advanced methods such as websites that allow businesses to buy Twitter followers and boost social media engagement. 

The different divisional structures in an organization allow for duplication, sharing, accountability, motivation, and so much more. These include direct relationships between departments like marketing and service, human resources, and so on. Once these are clearly delineated, we can move onto the idea that marketing works because people can easily identify with what their departments do.

On the other side of things, organic organizations stress the lack of divisions within an organization and the importance of a relatively high degree of flexibility. These types of structures also allow for a relatively high degree of creativity and adaptability, since members can use their skills and talents in a number of different ways. Organic learning often promotes the idea that people can become much more effective when given more freedom and opportunities to test out their ideas and creativity. This idea is closely associated with the importance of flexibility and personal initiative within organizations.

On the other hand, the most rigid structure is the one which makes itself relatively hard to replicate and implement changes. This structure is usually identified by a highly formalized structure in which different levels of managers are employed to oversee various departments and activities. Also, there is usually a fairly clear demarcation between workers and leaders. Workers are usually paid according to their productivity, while leaders are generally compensated by way of a commission. Although it may sound appealing from an economic point of view to pay employees more if they perform better, this type of organization tends to be very rigid in its organizational forms.

Connecting The Two Types

This concept of a mechanistic and organic organization may seem highly abstract. However, it is possible to draw connections between the theories of these two models. In both theories, top-down controls and bottom-up approaches are used to implement change. However, with mechanistic planning, there is usually a strong emphasis on implementing change through a process of feedback and continuous improvement. With organic management, top-down control is less important.

In some ways, the two organizational models may resemble each other. For example, both involve the development of specific protocols or rules for the organization. They also both require certain levels of expertise to administer those rules. Lastly, both procedures and rules must be periodically reviewed to assure that they are still effective. The key difference between the two however, is that with mechanistic organizational design, there is very little room for periodic review or for making changes to the procedures themselves. This means that the organization relies almost entirely on the performance of its employees.

Organizational systems which are based upon the principles of either mechanistic or organic organization styles are very difficult to replicate, even though businesses which are part of these types of systems may find it easier to thrive. The reason for this is that even if you pay employees more, the process of supervision can be quite difficult. For instance, in a business where top managers are very hands-on, it can be difficult to ensure that the correct protocols and rules for the particular situation have been followed. The systems which allow top managers to be extremely involved in their company's day-to-day activities are therefore not very applicable.

Organizational systems are designed with the principle in mind that human actions are usually governed by individual accountability. Therefore, if an employee commits a violation of the company's rules or regulations, it is up to that employee to either understand what action caused them to commit the violation or to explain why they did so. An organizational design which does not take this principle into consideration is likely to result in a system which is difficult to replicate, even though businesses which use such organizational designs may find it much easier to do so. For more information on CC: OpenStax, visit the OpenStax website.