Tall Organizational Structures VS Flat Organizational Structures!

There is always an argument over which organizational structure is best. Today we are going to closely assess tall structures and flat structures. The most common ones. When we talk about tall structures the term bureaucracy comes to mind which means a non elective body of individuals in charge of certain operations. When we think of bureaucracy we must recall the works of Max Weber, a German sociologist who emphasised how a tall bureaucratic structure was the best one to apply in organizations. Weber believed that companies needed to find specialized people for each task and that those people had to work under a certain set of rules. This is one of the main characteristics of tall structures. Tall structures pay close attention to hierarchy. Organizations with tall structures will usually have one person at the top and a long chain of command. Tall structures have a rules, which are enforced upon the employees. The problem with that is that the business may lack creativity and innovation. The employees do have promotional opportunities. However the pay is only based around the position and not the person. The managers aren't very pressurized as they do not have a large group of people to manage, this allows them to keep a very close watch on the small amount of people they do head. Organizations with tall structures are inflexible, i.e. they find it difficult to adapt to rapidly changing market conditions. Also tall structures are known to have red tape. A very good example of a company that uses a tall structure would be the NHS.

Tall NHS structure

The NHS Structure explained in video

An approach more commonly used nowadays is the flat structure approach. Flat structures do not have a long chain of command. It has a few managers who are in charge of a large amount of people. There is less red tape. Employees have decision making powers. However this can result in chaos for managers as they are under a lot of pressure. Despite that organizations with flat structures are seen to be more creative and innovative. These organizations are flexible, i.e they adapt to changes quickly. Communication is difficult and is done usually via email which slows things down. Employees also have little promotion opportunities. A couple of companies that use this approach are Google and Apple.

Apple's relatively flat structure.

Apple claims to have a cult like culture. Steve Jobs made his employees believe that they had the opportunity to change the world because he said to them that those who are crazy enough to believe they can change the world actually end up doing so. He never set down a set of strict rules. Apple employees are allowed to come and go out the office freely as long as the do 110% of a "good" job. The main point that Steve Jobs was known to emphasis to his employees was to always think different, i.e to be creative, twisted or innovative. 

Steve Jobs's on Thinking Different

Choosing the right structure depends on what source of business environment you are going into. If Google used tall structures it may not be as successful as it today because they rely a lot on creativity and innovative ideas. NHS however is an organization that does not. It's a very straight forward health system and everyone knows what needs to be done. Not any one specific is best. It simply depends. I'd personally prefer a mix of both. I would want creativity and innovation but I would also want some degree of control. If I was the CEO of a major "tech" company I'd ensure my employees would keep secrets. I would not the world to know of my activities. I would instill just enough fear in my employees to prevent them from losing control.