What are some characteristics of mechanistic structures?

A new company’s small size may not require a strict organization of work and workers, growth demands order. Organizing tasks and employees produces a company structure. “Mechanistic” describes the strictest and most formal of these structures. A mechanistic organization has fine divisions of labor, resulting in highly specialized jobs. As reported in Reference for Business, mechanistic organization also relies on management for control, creating a bureaucracy, and implementing a strict chain of command. The company can be likened to a machine, its many parts synchronized to produce a standard and predictable output.

In the early twentieth century, the Industrial Age was well underway and mass production had taken hold. Business thinkers were studying work and workplaces, coming up with ideas on how to best promote the highest possible efficiency and productivity. They viewed workplaces like machines. The mechanistic organization evolved from this, featuring job specialization, a bureaucratic management hierarchy, centralized power resting at the top of the organization and many rules. As reported by the University of Minnesota Libraries, the mechanistic structure with characteristics such as job specialization, accountability and chain of command would produce efficiency and productivity. The mechanistic organizational structure also lets a company benefit through economies of scale, especially as applied to mass production.

Because of their hierarchy, mechanistic structures are vertically oriented. The most mechanistic is the functional organizational structure, with its tall, triangular shape. The mechanistic organization has many workers forming the structure’s foundation, grouped into departments by similar activities such as production, marketing and finance. Above them sits their managers. When each employee narrowly specializes in some limited part of a larger whole, one manager can easily supervise many employees and has a wide “span of control.” The span of control gets smaller moving up the organization, where managers manage other managers. The central power of the company crowns it all.

As the mechanistic structure gained widespread and prolonged use, researchers and organizational designers found that the very mechanization that allows for productivity, economy and efficiency also causes problems. The structure’s inherent bureaucracy hampers efforts to quickly respond to outside market forces. Innovation has to wait on red tape. Rigid control and job specialization mean employees aren’t free to be creative problem-solvers. As mere cogs, employees’ morale may be impacted. Finally, grouping employees by function contributes to departmental isolation. Interdepartmental cooperation and communication suffer in mechanistic structures.

Despite the disadvantages, the mechanistic organization continues to have relevance to the 21st century’s business environment. Complex or international firms may need the divisional structure, which is the most mechanistic after the functional structure. The divisional structure creates autonomous divisions based on products or geographical lines, and then further subdivides by function. A division’s autonomy grants some adaptability without sacrificing functional control. Companies employing the divisional or functional structures find that the mechanistic structure is a good fit in stable industries. Mechanistic structures are also a valid choice when a company’s strategy requires efficiency, steadiness and cost leadership.

Learning Outcomes

• Discuss organic versus mechanistic models for organizational structure

We’ve spent some time now understanding the elements of an organizational structure, and the types of structures an organization might choose to use when organizing their work and employees. Some of those structures are very strict and hierarchal, like the bureaucratic model, and some of the structures, like boundaryless, are pretty loose and free-wheeling. They all have their advantages and disadvantages.

When managers combine the basic components and elements of an organizational structure together, the result has certain characteristics that are best understood by looking at it through the lens of organic and mechanistic organizations.

Organic Organizations

Organic organizations look a lot like boundaryless organizations. They allow for employees to cultivate more ideas and be more creative because the business is not as rigidly structured. Organic structures are used in dynamic, unstable environments where the business needs to quickly adapt to change, as the structure gives the organization the flexibility to deal with fast-paced environmental change and many different elements.

A good example of an organization that uses an organic structure might be a consulting firm. A consulting firm responds to customer issues as they come up, and those issues change with the business environment. Consulting firms want to respond to change quickly, so by choosing an organic structure they’re able to be nimble and address their customers’ needs.

Mechanistic Organizations

Mechanistic organizations have centralized decision making and formal, standardized control systems. Essentially, they are bureaucracies.

Mechanistic organizations work well in stable, simple environments. Managers integrate the activities of clearly defined departments through formal channels and in formal meetings. Often, they feature many hierarchical layers and a focus on reporting relationships.

General Motors is a good example of an organization using the mechanistic model. Why do they use that? For one, they’re very large, and when that many people and functions are involved, order is needed. But they’re also in a stable, if not somewhat simple, environment. The car market fluctuates with the economy, yes, but the company builds cars and trucks. Across all their divisions, that function is basically the same.

Another example of a mechanistic model is the Department of Motor Vehicles. When you get your new driver’s license, you go from one department to another, taking a written test, taking an eye exam, taking an actual driving test, filling out the paperwork, and then finally, getting your driver’s license. The structure for this is very mechanistic—every person looking to get a driver’s license has to be treated exactly the same. It’s simple and stable.

Here’s a table comparing the basic characteristics of both models:

Most companies find themselves falling somewhere in between the two extremes of organic and mechanistic. Each organization designs its structure to enable its mission, goals, and strategy. If the structure fits with other contextual elements, it has a better chance of being effective in supporting the organization.

Now that we fully understand the difference between organic and mechanistic structures, let’s use those to gain a better understanding of what kind of organizational structures work best for different organizations—and why.

Contribute!

Did you have an idea for improving this content? We’d love your input.

Improve this pageLearn More