Organizational Structure Design in Australia

Question: Discuss about the Organizational Structure Design in Australia. Answer: Introduction In this assignment, different types of organizational structure design used in Australia have been discussed. The importance of maintaining appropriate organizational structure in a business has also been analyzed in this research work. As Pinheiro and Stensaker (2014) stated that organizational structure of most of the small companies in Australia have to major areas of working. They are such as functional area and product area. According to Kelly et al. (2014), functional area of an organizational structure includes areas like engineering report, marketing or CEO in a functional organizational structure. As Stonier (2012) stated that, product structures are used by organizations when they produce numerous types of products or brands. As Rasula et al. (2012) stated that, all the formal organizations are usually delineated by an organizational chart and job descriptions. Every company in Australia has developed official reporting relationship for their managers. Alongside the formal reporting relationship, an informal reporting relationship also exists in companies that are used to control human interaction patterns within a company. It has been found that most of the companies of Australia use mainly different types of organizational structures. They are such as line organizational structure, staff or functional authority organizational structure, and divisional organizational structure. The other organizational structures used in Australian business are such as project organizational structure, matrix organizational structure and hybrid organizational structure. All the advantages and disadvantages of these organizational structures have been discussed in these assignments as well. After analyzing all types of or ganizational structures, some recommendations have been given for Australian companies so that they can improve their organizational structure. Components of organizational structure design It has been found that an effective organizational design requires five interdependent components. They are such as leadership, structure and decision making, people, work processes and systems and culture of the organization. Importance of every component in the organizational structure design has been mentioned below: Leadership Development of clear vision and priorities An organization needs to develop cohesive leadership team to maintain the behavior of employees and their performance (lugge et al. 2013). Decision making and structure The management of an organization needs to develop clear role and responsibilities for all the employees so that they can take right decisions. As Rasula et al. (2012) mentioned that, organizational structure has to be developed in such a way that supports business objectives of the business entity. People Management of an organization needs to select employees depending on their talent and qualification required for success All types of discrimination related with religion, culture, sex of employees have to be prohibited from employee selection procedure (Buckley 2014). All the incentive schemes and performance measures have to be aligned with the objectives of the organization. Work processes and systems The management of an organization needs to develop effective execution of the programmatic work processes. The management needs to develop efficient and effective systems and support process in order to improve business performance of the company. Culture Pinheiro and Stensaker (2014) stated that, in order to become successful in market, a company has be culturally diversified. A company needs to give high value to the high performance and ethical behaviour of employees. Management of an organization has to acknowledge and influence their employees to adopt change. Figure 1: Importance of the five components in organizational structure design (Source: Buckley 2014) The main principles of organizational design It has been found that, there are three major principles are related with organizational design. They are mentioned below: 1. Management needs to consider all the five components of the organizational design wheel. Stonier (2012) argued that, the common mistake that most of the organizations make is to concentrate on structure alone (reporting lines and boxes) as the solution. 2. Management of an organization needs to align the five components of the organizational structure with one another. As Kelly et al. (2014) mentioned that One element that doesnt fit can limit the performance of the whole system. 3. Management has to align organization and all the relevant strategies with one another. According to Plugge et al. (2013), strengths and weakness of an organization can influence wide range of feasible strategies for that organization. Organizations must adopt new strategic directions in order to overcome all the weaknesses. When an organizational structure becomes ineffective It has been found that there are some major symptoms that indicate the inefficiency of an organizational structure design. They are such as excessive amount of conflict, inappropriate coordination, misuse of resources, low level of staff morale, poor flow of work, reduced responsiveness. There is a table given below in order to describe the how these symptoms have affected leadership, structure and decision making, people, work processes and systems and culture of the organization. Figure 2: Ineffectiveness of structure design (Source: Stonier 2012) Five grouping model organizational design It has been found that there are mainly five types of grouping model used in organizational structure design. They are such as functional design, geographic design, Program (product) design, market/ customer and matrix. All these Structures are described below. However, Pryke and Smyth (2012) argued that, Most organizations end up with a hybrid structure, combining elements of different models but with one dominant approach. Functional design This type of organizational structure is organized around the major functions and departments of a company. As Pryke and Smyth (2012) mentioned that, this model is most suitable for small sized organization that has single programmatic focus. It is not suitable to manage a company across large geographic area. The major advantage of this model is that it can develop depth of skills for a particular function or department. As Stonier (2012) stated that, this model promotes lower costs, scale and functional innovation. The major disadvantage of this model is that organizational functions can break down if individuals do not have clear understanding about their role. Geographic design This type of organizational structure is most applicable for companies that organized around major geographies. This model is most appropriate for large companies with multiple programs. It is appropriate when an organization has local differences, which can become barrier to success. These differences are related with economics, fundraising and regulations. The advantage of this model is that it allows better customization of programs and services in accordance to the region (Pryke and Smyth 2012). However, implication of this model can lead a company to become heterogeneous. Program (product) design This model is organized mostly around major programs. As Plugge et al. (2013) stated that, this model is appropriate when programs are very different from one another such as economics and customer care. It promotes in-depth understanding within a specific program area. It enables clear focus with accountability for program results. In order to apply this model strong skills are required along with specific program head. However, this model can lead potential loss of control and functional duplication. It becomes difficult for organizations contact common customers across different programs. Market/ customer This type of organizational structure is appropriate for companies, which serve for customer or client beneficiaries. As Pinheiro and Stensaker (2014) stated that, this model is most suitable for companies, which have different types of customers and different service requirements. It helps to develop clear focus on important clients. However, it can lead to duplication of function and potential loss of controls. Matrix This structure helps to manage multiple dimensions of an organization simultaneously like geography and program (Plugge et al. 2013). However, disadvantage of this model is that it leads to unclear accountability and decision making. Due to complex structure, employees become confused about whom they report to. However, it has been found that most of the organization uses hybrid structure where any one model is dominant. The example of the hybrid model has been given below. Figure 3: Hybrid model of organizational structure (Source: Plugge et al. 2013) The importance of organizational structure It has been found that most of the organizational structures used by Australian companies have two major divisions. They are such as financial and structure. As Pryke and Smyth (2012) mentioned that functional area of an organizational structure includes engineering and marketing report. On the other hand companies use product structure when it sells various products and brands. According to Kelly et al. (2014), it is important for any company to develop organizational structure that suits its needs. Function As Stonier (2012) stated that, organizational structure is an important part decision making process. It has been found that most of the companies use flat organizational structure. For instance, in most of the small companies, manager reports directly to the president instead of directors. According to Pryke and Smyth (2012), flat structures help small companies to take quicker decisions. It has been analyzed that small companies should never worry about organizational structure unless they have 15 employees. It has been found that employees in small organizations have multiple responsibilities. Communication According to Kelly et al. (2014), organizational structure is important for communication. It helps to make effective distribution of authority. It enables every employee to understand whom they have to report for their work. It has been found that most of the companies sue to funnel their communication through department leaders. For instance, marketing employees discuss various issues with the director of the organization. On the other hand, the director of the organization discusses all important issues with the vice president or upper management. Evaluation of employee performance According to Stonier (2012), organizational structure is highly significant to evaluate employee performance. It has been found that the linear structure of product and organizational structures help supervisors to evaluate the performance of their subordinates in efficient manner (Buckley 2014). It also helps supervisors to evaluate the skill level of employees. It also helps to analyze the relationship between co-workers and the timeline in which they conduct their job. In addition, it also helps supervisors to conduct semiannual and annual appraisal of performance, which is an important part of company operation. Goal Achievement As Pinheiro and Stensaker (2014) mentioned that, organizational structure is significant to achieve results and goals. It allows develop an efficient chain of command. It has been found that department leaders are assigned as project in charge so that they can complete task within time. Organizational structure also helps to foster team spirit, where every member in a team can work towards a common goal (Buckley 2014). Solution/ prevention Organizational structure helps organizations to effectively manage change in market place. It includes factors such government regulations, new technology and consumer needs. The owners need to conduct meeting with all the members of organizational structure. They need to address all the issues they have to face while operating in the organization and have to come up with certain solutions as a group. According to Rasula et al. (2012), change is inevitable in any industry. Hence, it is the responsibility of owners to find out the most effective organizational structure to meet those changes. Different types of organizational structure Divisional Organizational Structure Divisional organizational structure categorizes the activities of an organization based on different departments. The businesses are classified around geographic, service and product group and market. It groups each organizational function into various divisions. According to Lee et al. (2013), most of the large-scale organizations in Australia follow divisional organizational structure for their business. On the other hand, Plugge et al. (2013) opined that divisional structure increases organizational flexibility by breaking down the business further into different product line, geographical structure and market structure. The organizations, which follow divisional organization structure in Australia, have separate management for each of the division (Lin 2014). Therefore, each department of the organizations is effectively and smoothly managed by having direct control. Apart from that, organizations having this kind of organizational structure, group employees based on their respon sibility in respective division (Bidwell 2012). Each division has control over day-to-day operation of the organization. However, those departments are answerable to the central authority of the organization to maintain overall strategy of the organization. It also increases the coordination of each department in the organization (Bidwell 2012). The example of divisional organizational structure can be found in Eagle Boys Australia. The commercial department of this organization focuses on commercial customers by having its own separate production, product, accounting and sales employees. The retail division takes care of retail customers in Australia through customized departmental control (Lee Kozlenkova and Palmatier 2015). Apart from that, International division takes care of the retail customers outside of Australia. The organization shares product development and production facilities with the retail division through having own sales and accounting employees (Plugge Bouwman and Molina-Castillo 2013). The divisional structure has many advantages and disadvantages. Benefits of the divisional organizational structure include some factors like accountability, culture, competition, local decisions, speed and multiple offerings. Regarding accountability, divisional structure is much easier in assigning actions and responsibilities to the different divisions. In a competitive market, this structure works best while managers can shift their decision at ease. Using this structure, organizational culture can be maintained in a particular strategic division. This organization helps in moving downward decision of the managers while improving the ability of the company to respond towards local market responses. Divisional structure supports multiple offerings of different product categories. Disadvantages include economies of scale, rivalries, cost, inefficiencies and strategic focus. A Huge amount of cost is incurred in maintenance of the divisional structure. The structure of the organizati on cannot take the advantage of economies of scale. The different functional departments of an organization sometimes operate inefficiently due to lack of centralization. Sometimes the strategic focus of each division deviates from the original strategic direction of the company. Another example of a company following divisional structure is IGA (Independent Grocers of Australia). The parent company of IGA is Metcash. IGA is the subsidiary of Metcash. The divisional structure of Metcash is divided into the retail division, international division, and commercial division. This structure helps the company in maintaining its operations smoothly in different geographic locations in Australia as well as outside Australia. The above-listed advantages are availed by IGA in its various retail division. Project Organizational Structure In project organizational structure, direction of workflow depends on distribution of abilities and talent of the organization. It also depends on the need to apply the talent on the organizational problems. According to Bidwell (2012), project work may flow horizontally, vertically, upward, downward or diagonally. Therefore, organization should follow project organizational structure based on the types of projects. Organizations, which follow project organizational structure, are adaptive and dynamic in nature and take this approach for its survival. On the other hand, Wu (2015) opined that project organizational structure is followed temporarily by the organization for achieving some specific objective within specified period. In this organizational structure, projects are executed through a team, which is formed of the specialists from different functional departments (Lee et al. 2015). The IT organizations of Australia mostly follow this structure for executing their dynamic proj ects. An effective team is formed in those organizations, which follow all its resources, energies and results on the assigned project (Bellini et al. 2016). When a piece of work has a particular deadline as well as specified goal then project organizational structure is best for this situation. The nature of work is very critical regarding profits or losses project structure is suitable in this scenario. Unfamiliar and unique works in an organization follow this structure. In this structure, communication is maintained between each department of the organization. The whole department is having a particular objective of accomplishing a specific task. Hence, project managers depend on their subordinates for the quick accomplishment of their missions (Bellini et al. 2016). Support is provided by quality control, production department and engineering to the project manager in reaching the goals. Free communication is maintained among the higher-level officials with the lower subordinates for delivering quality work on the project. As communication is open of this type of organizational structure, hence there is a less possibility of miscommu nication, conflicts, etc. The IT companies usually break various departments of the organization and delegate themselves in a stipulated task. The employers of different departments of IT companies work together on a project and follows project organizational structure for that period. IT companies of Australia follow project structure for a temporary basis. There are many advantages of using this structure in construction, software companies. The most important factor is the flexibility. Flexibility is well maintained in this structure of the organization. Companies like Torus Games, Sausage software, etc. are technology-based businesses that follow the project organizational structure (Bellini et al. 2016). Apart from that Australian construction companies also follows this structure for better productivity and quality output from the project managers. Another example of project organizational structure can be evidently found in Westnet Internet Service Provider in Australia. A clear line of authority can be found in this organization, where the team has to report the project team leader directly regarding the project progress (Bidwell 2012). Apart from that, organization also follows single reporting system and this shorter line of communication establishes strong communication in the organization. Single authority system followed by the organization leads to fast concern for the stakeholders (Plugge Bouwman and Molina-Castillo 2013). In this organizational structure, the team members of the organization become flexible and versatile due to different types of project executions. Functional organizational structure The type of organization structure where corporate functions are grouped into divisions. After that, the units correspond in terms of geographies and products. Each newly formed group contains all vital requirements and resources that might support the particular product line or the geography of the market. For instance, marketing division, IT, finance, etc. are the resources that must be present in the strategic segments. The multidivisional form is defined as a legal structure that consists of a parent company that owns subsidiary companies. Subsidiary companies have different functionalities that give birth to various functional departments. It is known as functional organization structure (Lin 2014). An organization follows a particular style of organization structure depending on the nature of the company and the manner of operating procedure of the enterprise. This structure is responsible for organizing different activities of the company regarding different functionalities of the enterprise. Different departments of the company are linked with each other. Australian companies follow functional structure follows a good communication flow. Functional departments of companies include enhanced efficiency of operations. It happens because employees of various departments share their level of skills and expertise with each other for performing their functions in a particular team. However, workers from different departments such as marketing, productions, finance share their skills. This is possible in a functional structure. Australian companies following this structure enjoy many advantages. A variety of enterprises of different sectors of industries can use this structure (Bellini et al. 2016). Large corporations of Australia usually manufacture comparable products that can be handled using functional organizational structure. The vision and mission of more major firms are aligned to the goals of individual technical departments of the companies. Apart from having advantages, there are few disadvantages of functional structure. The structure is not suitable for small and medium sized enterprises. This is because; the number of departments in a small company is less. Hence functional organization structure will not yield maximize productivity for the small firms (Lin 2014). For small companies, line structure is perfect as the chain of command is flowing in this structure without any problem. For instance, King Living is a furniture manufacturing and retail company in Australia that follows functional organization structure. Several functional departments are controlling the business operations of the company in different areas as well as they are aligned with one another. The central head of King Living is linked with various functionalities of the enterprise. It represents maintenance of effective communication within the organization. Matrix Organizational Structure Unlike project organizational structure, Matrix Organizational Structural is a permanent form of organizational structure. Organizations achieve specific results by employing specialists from different functional areas. In matrix organizational structure, managers are grouped as functional manager and product manager. According to Lee et al. (2013), functional managers remain in charge of specific resources like production, inventory, quality control marketing and scheduling. On the other hand, Lee et al. (2015) opined that product managers remain in charge of one or more products. These managers are authorized to make product and business strategies. While, framing product and business strategies, these managers call on the functional managers for allocation of necessary resources (Lin 2014). Functional managers and product managers have equal power in the organization Lee et al. (2015). However, functional managers are to depend on product managers in regards to product budget. Thi s organizational structure maintains horizontal flow of information and skills necessary for accomplishing the work (Bidwell 2012). The example of Matrix organizational structure can be effectively found in Telstra Australia. The employees of this organization have more than one formal boss. The employees are to report the day-to-day performance to the product development manager (Lee et al. 2015). In this communication, horizontal structure is followed. Apart from that, the product development managers are to report the overall performance to the functional head (Plugge et al. 2013). It is usually based on vertical structure. Matrix organizational structure allows the organizational supervisors to focus on their areas of expertise (Plugge et al. 2013). Effective collaboration among different functional departments, allows the organization to handle complex projects easily and effectively. Hybrid Organizational Structure Hybrid organizational structure builds shared organizational mission and allows the employees to work with different types of project based on their expertise (Lee et al. 2015). This structure creates unified team with common goal from different interest level. According to Wu (2015), in this organizational structure, management first divide the employees into different department based on their specialized areas and each of the department are responsible to accomplish their respective goals towards organizational success. On the other hand, Bellini, Pereira and Becker (2016) opined that most of the multinational organizations in Australia follow hybrid organizational structure for keeping effective control over the organizational process. Hybrid Organizational structure can best be seen in MYOB software accounting organization. This structure is followed in the organization for maintaining high level of international commitment and orientation Lee et al. (2013). The organization keeps centralized control over the business process through this organizational structure. Shared organizational talent and skills make most efficient use of organizational resources and gives best organizational outcome. Interdepartmental coordination and cooperation between the international divisions makes smooth global business for the organization (Lee et al. 2015). Line organizational structure Line organizational structure is a typical organizational structure that is supported by most of the companies in Australia. The structure is responsible for bringing the workers of a particular company together towards accomplishing mission and goals. The structure influences vertical relationships between various levels of Australian companies. Line organization structure is a permanent form of structure that does not change with the modification of project or time (Plugge et al. 2013). There are many advantages of the line structure. They are flexibility in using resources, decentralization in terms decision making, active coordination of project and products, faster response towards change, efficiency in using supporting systems, and advanced environment monitoring (Lin 2014). The line structure enhances the democratic and participative style of leadership. The input of the team members is very necessary for maximization of the productivity of the team. Teamwork is incorporated b y this structure. For instance, employees of marketing finance and operations department can communicate with each other without facing any problem. It is one of the biggest advantages of line organization structure. Various departments of companies work together and discuss with each other related to frequent issues. Specialized information exchange is practiced between the managers that enhance quick responses to the customers. Expertise and skills of each employee are forecasted in the structure that helps in increased employee relations. Employees get motivated resulting in improved individual performance (Plugge et al. 2013). It also enhances the performance of the team. The teams are usually small and hence group cohesiveness is maintained. Chain of command is kept in line structure. For instance, Australian Broadcasting Corporation is an organization following line structure. It is a media based company having a different department of production and marketing. The line structure of the business mainly divided into two groups of output and commercialization. Again, the marketing department is divided into different levels. On the other hand, production department is again split into few categories. The structure is a very simple promoting decision making process and simple in understanding the chain of commands between the different services of the company (Lin 2014). Apart from this company, small businesses follow line structure for maintaining clarity among various levels of the enterprise. Small, medium businesses of Australia are giving emphasis on this structure for the development of the efficiency of the rate of productivity. Committee organizational structure Committee organization structure is different from the line and functional structure. However, it is similar to staff organization. The decisions of the top level management of the company are implemented whereas the inputs of the staffs are not applied in this type of structure. This structure is characterized by a formal organizational structure where members of companies are given priorities (Pryke and Smyth 2012). As the meaning of the word committee suggests, the structure follows a line structure that is formed by a group of people. Australian companies usually follow this structure. This is not so popular like that of other organizational structures. This structure is a combination of all the forms of organizational structures. Australian companies following this structure can generate integrated ideas. This structure includes various people in different levels of management. One most valuable perspective of this form of organization structure is a participative style of leadership. Participative leadership involves the participation of various executives of different levels of management. It is also known as democratic leadership. Participative leadership is a famous form of direction and is known for giving increased performance of the company (Plugge et al. 2013). In Committee organizational structure, control and coordination are easy as open discussion is followed by the enterprise. For instance, ABC Learning is a website that follows committee organizational structure. Organizational structure of Australian Sports Commission Company overview Australian Sports Commission is focused on getting more Australian participant and excels in sports activity (Pryke and Smyth 2012). The key objective of the company is to achieve: Deliver key programs in line with the Australian Governments sport policy objectives Provide financial support and other assistance to national sporting organizations to deliver participation and high performance results and improve their capability, sustainability and effectiveness Build collaboration, alignment and effectiveness within the Australian sport sector. Structure of the organization During the year of 2011-2012 Australian Sports Commission (ASC) realigned it organizational structure. This structure helps to meet the role required by the sector of Australian sports and Australian Government. There are mainly three divisions exists in the organizational structure of ASC. They are described below in the chart: Figure 4: Organizational Structure of Australian Sports Commission (ASC) (Source: Ausport 2016) Australian Institute of sports This division has the major responsibility to lead the strategic direction of sports in Australia. The Australian Institute of sports has three key roles: Providing strategic leadership and direction of high performance sport (including capability building and the delivery of national programs) delivery of world-class athlete preparation (including coaching, sports science and sports medicine, program management, vocational/pastoral care and competition opportunities) Fostering a national approach to applied performance research. Partnership and sustainable sports Partnership and sustainable sports division mainly focuses on providing specialist sport support. It also helps to develop the capacity and capability National Sporting Organizations (NSOs). This division is mainly focused on gathering all arrangements of funding. It also helps to make compliance with different partners of sport sectors. It develops community sport programs and sporting school program to excel in sports activities. Corporate operations It is the role of corporate operations to develop business capability and services in order to give support all other divisions of the Australian Sports Commission (ASC). The key areas include focus on: Human resource capabilities Information technology capabilities Sound financial and asset management practices Managing the ASCs responsibilities within the compliance framework Providing high quality facilities and services. Recommendation It has been found that most of the small businesses of Australia start with few employees and very few amounts of managers. When a business starts to grow, owners often try to create organizational structure to adopt with business changes rather than creating attentive plan to enhance future growth for an organization. For any company irrespective of its size, future planning is the most effective way to create an appropriate organizational structure that can help a business to expand. Now some specific recommendations are provided for the Australian companies so that they can improve their organizations structure. Developing a dream structure The best way to develop the optimal organizational structure for a business is like a new coming company. It helps the owners to develop a management structure that is able to mitigate all the needs of their business model, rather than one that best suits the needs of the current staffing levels. It order to do that, owners should not regard any staff they currently have or honoring any commitments they have to make. They have to develop organizational structure depending on the realties that they have to face in Australian market. Organize according to function Organizational structures have to be developed in such a way that it can meet all the business functions. These business functions are such as sales, marketing, production, human resources, finance and information technology. Even if a company is using contractors to handle some of these functions, someone in that organization must be in charge of the contractors. This person has all the organizational responsibilities related with these functions. Combining functions It has been found that most of the small organizations give multiple responsibilities to various function heads or departments to save money (especially when a function requires part time attention). For instance, most of the small companies in Australia combine human resources with bookkeeping, sales and marketing, office administration and information technology. When the companies start to expand, they have to expand these functions due to the increase of the workforce. Development of chain of command An organizational structure should clearly designate the superior of each person working within the company. It will help to develop effective communication system within the organization. All the superiors have to report directly to the chief operating officer or owner. Communicating the structure with others Owners need to understand that organizational structure is not a top-secrete document. It has been found that organizational structure operates well when every employee in an organization (even the lowest employees on the chain of command) knows the organizational structure. Owners need to organize meeting to explain the reason of creating such organizational structure. In this meeting, owners need to explain how this structure can benefit the organization. Conclusion In this assignment, various theories related with organizational structure have been discussed. These theirs are like classical organizational theories; Neoclassical Organization Theory, Contingency Theory and Systems Theory. After analyzing all these theories, it has been found that Classical organizational theory is not appropriate in the modern business condition as it addresses motivation only as an economic reward. Hence a new theory named as Neoclassical Organization Theory has been developed. In the Contingency Theory, it has been discussed that conflict cannot be avoided but it can be managed. The importance of organizational structure in the changing market environment of Australia has been discussed. It has been analyzed that small companies should never worry about organizational structure unless they have 15 employees. It has been found that employees in small organizations have multiple responsibilities. In addition, organizational structure helps to make effective distr ibution of authority. Organizational structure also helps to foster team spirit, where every member in a team can work towards a common goal. It also helps organizations to effectively manage change in market place. In the next section different types of organizational structures used in Australia has been discussed along with examples. They are such as line organizational structure, staff or functional authority organizational structure, line and staff organizational structure and divisional organizational structure. The four other organizational structures used in Australian business are such as project organizational structure, matrix organizational structure and hybrid organizational structure. In addition, the advantages and disadvantages of all these organizational structures have been discussed here. In the next section, the organizational structure for Australian Sports Commission has been discussed. At first a general overview of the company has been provided. Then the organizational chart used by the company Australian Sports Commission has been analyzed. After that some recommendations have been provided so that Australian companies can improve their organizational structure. It has been found that most of the small businesses of Australia start with few employees and very few amounts of managers. When a business starts to grow, owners often try to create organizational structure to adopt with business changes rather than creating attentive plan to enhance future growth for an organization. These companies can adopt these recommendations in order to improve their business structure. References Ausport. 2016.Ausport.gov.au. Retrieved 23 August 2016, from https://www.ausport.gov.au/ Bellini, C.G.P., Pereira, R.D.C.D.F. and Becker, J.L., 2016. Organizational structure and enterprise systems implementation: Theoretical measures and a benchmark for customer teams.Information Technology People,29(3), pp.527-555. Bidwell, M.J., 2012. Politics and firm boundaries: How organizational structure, group interests, and resources affect outsourcing.Organization Science,23(6), pp.1622-1642. Buckley, P.J., 2014. International integration and coordination in the global factory. InThe Multinational Enterprise and the Emergence of the Global Factory(pp. 3-19). Palgrave Macmillan UK. Kelly, J., Male, S. and Graham, D., 2014.Value management of construction projects. John Wiley Sons. Lee, H., Lim, H., Moore, D.D. and Kim, J., 2013. How police organizational structure correlates with frontline officers attitudes toward corruption: A multilevel model.Police Practice and Research,14(5), pp.386-401. Lee, J.Y., Kozlenkova, I.V. and Palmatier, R.W., 2015. Structural marketing: using organizational structure to achieve marketing objectives.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,43(1), pp.73-99. Lin, L.H., 2014. Organizational Structure and Acculturation in Acquisitions Perspectives of Congruence Theory and Task Interdependence.Journal of Management,40(7), pp.1831-1856. Pinheiro, R. and Stensaker, B., 2014. Designing the entrepreneurial university: The interpretation of a global idea.Public Organization Review,14(4), pp.497-516. Plugge, A., Bouwman, H. and Molina-Castillo, F.J., 2013. Outsourcing capabilities, organizational structure and performance quality monitoring: Toward a fit model.Information Management,50(6), pp.275-284. Pryke, S. and Smyth, H., 2012.The management of complex projects: A relationship approach. John Wiley Sons. Rasula, J., Vuksic, V.B. and Stemberger, M.I., 2012. The impact of knowledge management on organisational performance.Economic and Business Review for Central and South-Eastern Europe,14(2), p.147. Stonier, T., 2012.Information and the internal structure of the universe: An exploration into information physics. Springer Science Business Media. Wu, Y., 2015. Organizational Structure and Product Choice in Knowledge-Intensive Firms.Management Science,61(8), pp.1830-1848.