Simplicity as a feature of an organizational structure

Abstract

Among the desirable features of an organizational structure is simplicity. Its opposite, i.e. complexity, expresses a lack of order and entanglement, which are the source of waste. Although the desire for the simplicity of a structural solution is not new, in recent years it has been more clearly emphasized. Therefore, Ashby's law stating that variety has to be balanced by a different kind of variety, is questioned. The purpose of this article is to present the concept of simplifying an organizational structure. The concept of a simple organizational structure offered in this paper is the result of a thorough analysis of the literature on this topic. However, the views concerning the level of simple structure centralization were verified by means of a fractal calculus. The article presents the results of the study concerning the factors influencing the simplicity of the structural solution as well as the procedure of simplifying the organizational structure.

Towards organisational simplexity — a simple structure in a complex environment

“…The research results support the concept of a simple structural solution that is centred around the absorption of the environmental complexity rather than its reduction. Accepting that the organisational structure is as a set of rules ordering the behaviour of the organisation's members (Hopej-Kamińska et al, 2015), it can be stated that the simpler is the structural solution, the more freedom it gives organisational members (and the fewer restrictions it imposes on them). It is in line with the views on the concept of a simple organisational structure of such authors as Ahmos et al (2002), Cunha and Rego (2010) or Hopej-Kamińska et al (2015).…”

“…In such a case, "the simplicity of the structural solution boils down to the limitation and simplification of all topdown imposed rules" (Hopej-Kamińska et al, 2015, p. 264). Hence, the simple structure is a flat structural solution, characterised by a small number of hierarchical levels and a large span of control, low degree of centralisation, formalisation, specialisation and standardisation (Hopej-Kamińska et al, 2015). The second approach is in line with those adopted by Cunha and Rego (2010) in their simplexity concept.…”

“…For example, in already cited research of The Economist, more than a half of the Engineering Management in Production and Services managers perceived the structure of their organisations as very or extremely complex, and only 1% of them found the structure to be sufficiently simple (Leff & Zolkos, 2015). The very concept of a simple structure is still ambiguously understood (Hopej-Kamińska et al, 2015). Therefore, the term will be approximated in the context of different and often conflicting views.…”

“…However, a different approach is also present in the literature. Hopej-Kamińska et al (2015) argue that a simple structural solution is the one, which maximises the freedom of organisation's members. Using fractal calculus, they verified and confirmed the developed concept.…”

“…The question arises why the efforts to simplify organisations do not bring the expected results? It is argued that there is an unresolved contradiction in the postulate of the organisational simplification as it questions Ashby's law (Cunha & Rego, 2010;Hopej-Kamińska et al, 2015;Hopej et al, 2017). Modern organisations function in an increasingly more complex, dynamic and uncertain environment.…”