Form follows function—that has been misunderstood. Form and function should be one, joined in a spiritual union. Frank Lloyd Wright
The performance of radiology organizations is a product of two key factors: the people who make them up, and the form in which they are structured. Even organizations made up of the very best people may perform poorly, if they are organized in ways that pit people against one another or prevent them from working together productively. Conversely, even organizations that are perfectly structured may not perform well if the people who occupy key positions are not well suited to the challenges the organization faces ( ). Leaders who are committed to the success of their organizations need to attend carefully to both of these essential success factors, personnel and structure ( ).
Yet how do we identify the best people? And how do we determine what organizational structure would be best suited to an organization’s mission? Before we can answer these questions, we need to determine what the organization is trying to accomplish. The right group of people for accomplishing one mission may turn out to be poorly suited to accomplishing another. Likewise, an organizational chart that serves one mission well may spell disaster in another setting ( ). Consider, for example, what would happen if we transposed the personnel and organization charts of a small, entrepreneurial Silicon Valley software firm and the vast, bureaucratic United States Army. Each organization would likely suffer if forced into the other’s mold.
This article focuses on the second of these key performance parameters, organizational structure. Organizational design is a vast field, to which no single article could do justice. In order to provide a helpful introduction, this article focuses on the work of one of the most influential contemporary organizational theorists, Henry Mintzberg ( ). Mintzberg’s taxonomy of organizational forms provides a theoretical scaffolding for radiology leaders who seek to understand the impact of structure on organizational performance. He describes four basic organizational forms ( ). These are: the machine bureaucracy, the entrepreneurial startup, the professional organization, and the “adhocracy.”
Each of these organizational forms tends to be found in a distinct setting, as suggested by two key environmental factors: the degree of environmental complexity and the pace of environmental change. Machine bureaucracies are found in stable environments where the level of complexity is low. Entrepreneurial startups are found in environments where the level of complexity is low, but the pace of change is rapid. Professional organizations are found in environments where the environment is stable, but the level of organizational complexity required is high. Finally, adhocracies are found in environments where the pace of change is rapid and a complex organization is required.
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Machine bureaucracy
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Entrepreneurial startup
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Professional bureaucracy
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Adhocracy
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Matrix organization
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
Conclusion
Get Radiology Tree app to read full this article<
References
1. Gunderman R.B., Willing S.J.: Motivation in radiology: implications for leadership. Radiology 2002; 225: pp. 1-5.
2. Chan S.: The importance of strategy for the evolving field of radiology. Radiology 2002; 224: pp. 639-648.
3. Weidner W.A.: The organization and philosophy of a vertical department of radiology. Radiology 1973; 109: pp. 601.
4. Mintzberg H.: The Structuring of Organizations.1979.Prentice-HallEnglewood Cliffs, NJ
5. Mintzberg H.: Mintzberg on Management.1989.The Free PressNew York
6. Galbraith J.R.: Matrix organization designs: How to combine functional and project forms. Bus Horizons 1971; 17: pp. 29-40.