Metrics in organizational centralization and decentralization

• Autorzy: Modrak V. , Radu S. M. , Modrak J.

Warianty tytułu

PL

Wskaźniki w centralizacji i decentralizacji organizacji

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Continual improvement of business processes requires, apart from other efforts, to develop effective metrics, by which managers and/or process engineers will be able to manage the organization's growth. Obviously, there are plenty measures that can be taken to optimize processes. Once effective metrics are identified, the assessment team should do what works best for them. In this paper, an organizational “centralization” or “decentralization” is a matter of interest. The dichotomous term “centralization/decentralization” itself is somewhat inappropriate in the sense that an organizational centralization is not a goal, but rather a means to help us plan and to set goals. Naturally, approaches to the “centralization/ decentralization” measures depend on many factors. The paper's scope is explicitly limited to the vertical decentralization that is concerned with the delegation of decision-making power down the chain of authority. Subsequently, we are also interested to explore network centralization issues.

PL

Ciągłe doskonalenie procesów biznesowych wymaga, oprócz innych działań, opracowania skutecznych wskaźników, dzięki którym menedżerowie i / lub technolodzy będą mogli zarządzać rozwojem organizacji. Oczywiście, istnieje wiele działań, które mogą zostać podjęte w celu optymalizacji procesów. Kiedy oznaczone są skuteczne wskaźniki, zespół oceniający powinien robić to, co jest dla nich najlepsze. W niniejszym artykule przedmiotem zainteresowania jest organizacyjna "centralizacja" lub "decentralizacja". Dychotomiczne pojęcie "centralizacja / decentralizacja" samo w sobie jest nieco niestosowne w tym sensie, że centralizacja organizacyjna nie jest celem, lecz środkiem, aby pomóc nam planować i wyznaczać cele. Oczywiście podejścia do środków „centralizacji / decentralizacji" zależą od wielu czynników. Zakres artykułu jest wyraźnie ograniczony do decentralizacji pionowej, która dotyczy delegowania uprawnień decyzyjnych w dół łańcucha władzy. W późniejszym czasie, jesteśmy również zainteresowani zbadaniem kwestii centralizacji sieci.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

structural analysis; discrete probability distribution; graph theory; structure centralization

PL

analiza strukturalna; dyskretny rozkład prawdopodobieństwa; teoria grafów; centralizacja struktury

• Wydawca: Czestochowa University of Technology
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Management Studies
• Rocznik: 2014
• Tom: Vol. 10, No. 2
• Strony: 104--114
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 37 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Modrak V.

• Faculty of Manufacturing Technologies, TUKE, Bayerova 1, Presov 080 01, Slovakia

autor

Radu S. M.

• University of Petrosani

autor

Modrak J.

• T-Systems Slovakia Ltd., Žriedlová 13, 040 01 Košice, Slovakia

Bibliografia

• • Alonso R., Dessein W., Matouschek N., 2008, When Does Coordination Require Centralization? “American Economic Review”, 98(1).
• • Blair G., Meadows S., 1996, A Real-life Guide to Organizational Change, Aldershot, England, Brookfield, Vt., Gower.
• • Borgatti S.P., 2005, Centrality and network flows, “Social Networks”, 27(1).
• • Borgatti S.P., Everett M.G., Freeman L.C., 2002, Ucinet for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis, Harvard, MA, Analytic Technologies.
• • Christofides N., 1975, Graph Theory-An Algorithmic Approach, London, Academic Press.
• • Currie W.L., 1996, Organizational Structure and the Use of Information Technology: Preliminary Findings of a Survey in the Private and Public Sector, “International Journal of Information Management”, 16(1).
• • Davenport T.H., 1993, Process Innovation: Reengineering Work through Information Technology, Boston, Harvard Business School Press.
• • Davenport T.H., Short J., 1990, The new industrial engineering: information technology and business process redesign, “Sloan Management Review”, 31(4).
• • Drucker P.F., 1994, Managing for results, New York: Harper and Row.
• • Fredrickson J.W., 1986, The strategic decision process and organizational structure, “Academy of Management Review”, 11(2).
• • Freeman L.C., 1977, A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness, “Sociometry”, 40(1).
• • Freeman L.C., 1979, Centrality in social networks: Conceptual clarification, “Social Networks”, 1(1).
• • Hall R.H., 1977, Organizations: Structure and Process, 2d ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall.
• • Hall D.J., Saias M.A., 1980, Strategy Follows Structure, “Strategic Management Journal”, 1(2).
• • Hammer M., Champy J., 1993, Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution, New York, Harper Business Books.
• • Hanneman R. A., Riddle M., 2005, Introduction to social network methods, Riverside, CA, University of California Publisher.
• • Kock N., 2005, Business Process Improvement through E-Collaboration: Knowledge Sharing Through the Use of Virtual Groups, Hershey, PA, IGI Global.
• • Lin N., 1976, Foundations of Social Research, New York, McGraw Hill.
• • Mintzberg H., 1980, Structure in 5's" A synthesis of the Research on Organization Design, “Management Science”, 26(3).
• • Mintzberg H., 1983, Structures in Fives: Designing effective organizations, Englewood Clifs, N.J., Prentice-Hall.
• • Modrak, V. (2007). On the conceptual development of virtual corporations and logistics, [In:] IEEE Proceedings of the International Symposium on Logistics and Industrial Informatics - LINDI 2007, University of Applied Sciences, Wildau.
• • Modrak V., Marton D., 2013, Complexity Metrics for Assembly Supply Chains: A Comparative Study, “Advanced Material Research”, 629(1).
• • Modrak V., Pasko J., Pavlenko S., 2003, Alternative solution for a robotic stereotactic system, “Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems”, 35.
• • Nagelkerk J., 2005, Leadership and Nursing Care Management, (3rd ed.), Elsevier Health Sciences.
• • Naisbitt J., 1982, Megatrends, New York, Warner Books, Inc.
• • Nikolaev V.I., Bruk V.M., 1985, Sistemotechnika: metody i prilozhenija, Leningrad, Machinostrojenie.
• • Robbins S.P., 1990, Organization theory: structure, design, and applications, (3rd ed.), New Jersey, Prentice Hall.
• • Ross D.T., 1977, Structured Analysis: A language for communicating ideas, “IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering”, 3(1).
• • Ross D.F., 1991, Aligning the organization for world class manufacturing, “Production and Inventory Management Journal”, 32(2).
• • Sabidussi G., 1966, The centrality index of a graph, “Psychomatrika”, 31(1).
• • Scott J., 2002, Social Network Analysis: Critical Concepts in Sociology, New York, Routledge Publisher.
• • Siggelkow N., Levinthal D.A., 2003, Temporarily Divide to Conquer: Centralized, Decentralized, and Reintegrated Organizational Approaches to Exploration and Adaptation, “Organization Science”, 14(6).
• • Soffer P., Wand Y., 2007, Goal-driven multi-process analysis, “Journal of the Association for Information Systems”, 8(3).
• • Stoner J., Freeman R.E., 1989, Management, (4th ed.), Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice Hall.
• • Toffler A., 1981, The Third Wave, London, Pan Books Ltd.
• • Treisman D., 2002, Defining and Measuring Decentralization: A Global Perspective, Unpublished typescript, UCLA.
• • Wasserman S., Faust K., 1994, Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications, Cambridge, University Press.