Organigramme et structure
•Transferir como PPT, PDF•
8 gostaram•47,555 visualizações
Cours donné à ICHEC Entreprises
![Structure ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (20)
Destaque
Destaque (20)
Semelhante a Organigramme et structure
Semelhante a Organigramme et structure (20)
Mais de Prof. Jacques Folon (Ph.D)
Mais de Prof. Jacques Folon (Ph.D) (20)
Último
Último (18)
Organigramme et structure
- 1. Management La structure et l’Organigramme Jacques Folon Chargé de cours ICHEC Professeur invité université de Metz Partner EDGE Consulting http://www.linkedin.com/in/folon
- 18. Product Departmentalization © 2007 Prentice Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 10– + Allows specialization in particular products and services + Managers can become experts in their industry + Closer to customers – Duplication of functions – Limited view of organizational goals Source: Dr. Robin Teigland Stockholm School of Economics http://www.slideshare.net/eteigland/leveraging-social-networks-for-results/download
- 19. Process Departmentalization © 2007 Prentice Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 10– + More efficient flow of work activities – Can only be used with certain types of products Source: Dr. Robin Teigland Stockholm School of Economics http://www.slideshare.net/eteigland/leveraging-social-networks-for-results/download
- 20. Customer Departmentalization © 2007 Prentice Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 10– + Customers’ needs and problems can be met by specialists - Duplication of functions - Limited view of organizational goals Source: Dr. Robin Teigland Stockholm School of Economics http://www.slideshare.net/eteigland/leveraging-social-networks-for-results/download
- 24. Spans of Control © 2007 Prentice Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 10– Source: Dr. Robin Teigland Stockholm School of Economics http://www.slideshare.net/eteigland/leveraging-social-networks-for-results/download Rule of 7
- 25. La ligne hiérarchique C’est la ligne d’autorité, composée de cadres, contremaîtres, etc., qui joint le sommet stratégique au centre opérationnel. Chaque membre de la chaîne hiérarchique accomplit, à son niveau, le travail du sommet hiérarchique. Henri Mintzberg Les Éditions d’organisation, Paris. 1994, Structure et dynamique des organisations
- 27. Latéral Relations entre différentes personnes ou départements qui sont situés au même niveau hiérarchique
- 29. Dans de nombreuses organisations,(publiques ou privées) les organigrammes peuvent être très complexes. Ils sont alors parfois divisés en organigrammes plus petits correspondant à une division, un département
- 31. Hiérarchique
- 34. Matrice
- 39. Un « bel » organigramme !
- 48. La structure des entreprises 2.0
- 49. Uncovering networks in an organization Teigland et al. 2005 Formal organization Informal organization
- 50. Everyone is talking about networks National Innovation Networks Formal Networks Entrepreneurial Networks Ego Networks Regional Networks Infrastructure Networks Social Networks FAS.research Electronic Networks Informal Networks Networks of Practice Networked organization Source: Dr. Robin Teigland Stockholm School of Economics http://www.slideshare.net/eteigland/leveraging-social-networks-for-results/download
- 51. Individuals within a firm Mattsson 2004 Source: Dr. Robin Teigland Stockholm School of Economics http://www.slideshare.net/eteigland/leveraging-social-networks-for-results/download < 1 yr 1-5 yrs 5-10 yrs 10-15 yrs > 15 yrs Time at firm
- 52. Networks of firms Dahlin 2007 Nocom Ericsson Telia Nokia TietoEnator
- 55. The positive spiral of social networks tschaut’s photos Contribution Reciprocity Accumulation Value Source: Dr. Robin Teigland Stockholm School of Economics http://www.slideshare.net/eteigland/leveraging-social-networks-for-results/download
- 57. New types of organizations Source: SP Robbins & M Coulter : http://www.slideshare.net/dmattison2005/chapter-10-organizational-structure-and-design-ppt10/download Team Structure • What it is: A structure in which the entire organization is made up of work groups or teams. • Advantages: Employees are more involved and empowered. Reduced barriers among functional areas. • Disadvantages: No clear chain of command. Pressure on teams to perform. Matrix-Project Structure What it is: A structure that assigns specialists from different functional areas to work on projects but who return to their areas when the project is completed. Project is a structure in which employees continuously work on projects. As one project is completed, employees move on to the next project. • Advantages: Fluid and flexible design that can respond to environmental changes. Faster decision making. • Disadvantages: Complexity of assigning people to projects. Task and personality conflicts.
- 64. Organizational behavior in movement TIME Organizational chart Corporate culture Power Leadership Strategy Authority OB
- 66. QUESTIONS ?
Notas do Editor
- Large majority of work done through informal networks, some even say approx 80%.
- Networks find everywhere… From Fas.research at www.fas.at Where do we find networks? physics, chemistry, biology : network laws of physics, animal food chains, metabolic networks of cells, neural networks of brain… technology, information technology : phone networks, information networks, railway networks… communication, sociology : communication networks, social networks, relationship networks… mathematics : network theory, graph theory… management, economics : networked enterprise, network strategy, supplier network… It’s a small (but complex) world… Better understanding of networks helps us in the modern world, as more complex phenomena demand faster reactivity (and preferably proactivity) every day Networks are everywhere – organizations are networks as well Every one of us is a part of a global network that connects all people
- How well members of this organization are aware of each other’s skills and capabilities? Mari Mattsson, Master's Thesis. Transactive Memory - &quot;know-who&quot; as resource in work organization. 2004
- Peter Dahlin [peter.dahlin@mdh.se] This is an &quot;ego-network&quot; of Nocom meaning that it has Nocom as its hub. From there, it extends two steps out, i.e. includes those related to Nocom + those related to some company that is related to Nocom. The same goes for M&As (two steps out..) The relationships are of different kinds: customer-buyer relationships (black lines), partnerships (yellow) and ownerships (blue). This is a bit problematic since there can be several types of relations between two actors and only one will show when presented like this.. Note that this is based on the descriptions found in the newspaper articles on which I have based my data collection, so if a relationship is mentioned there it is included in my data (no further check-ups). There are naturally many actors and relationship missing in this picture. From the labels and sizes you can see that some of the central actors are Ericsson, Telia, Tietoenator, Merkantildata, Skandia, Nokia. The nationality is not easy to make out from the picture I'm afraid. I could naturally make the shape or color of the actors represent nationality, but I have decided not to emphasize the (inter)national aspects as my data collection is strongly focused on Swedish companies. The nationality of the actors in this picture is however varied but mostly Swedish.. Nocom AB (publ), www.nocom.se, är ett IT-företag, verksamt inom distribution och programvara. Huvudkontoret är beläget i Kista, Stockholm. Företaget grundades 1985 och noterades på Stockholmsbörsen 1999. Nocomaktien handlas på OMX Small Cap lista och det finns cirka 17 500 aktieägare. Verksamheten bedrivs i självständiga dotterbolag som arbetar under egna namn och affärsidéer. Totalt har koncernen cirka 270 anställda.
- Rob Cross, Nitin Nohria and Andrew Parker, Six Myths About Informal Networks -- and How to Overcome Them, Sloan Management Review, 2002
- Photo courtesy of tschaut’s photos, http://www.flickr.com/photos/tschaut/ Stocks of socialt kapital tend to be self-reinforcing and cumulative based on the principle of contribution and reciprocity Successful collaboration in one endeavor builds stronger relationship and trust socialt kapital facilitates future collaboration on other, unrelated tasks As with conventional kapital, those who have socialt kapital tend to accumulate more Goes against knowledge is power