When it comes to structuring a company, there are different models and even more variants, from vertical work organisations to horizontal models and even holocratic organisational charts without bosses.
The choice of one form or the other will depend on the individual case, since all systems have their pros and cons. What are the main organisational systems?
Differences between structures
If, when drawing the organisation chart of the company, the structure simulates a pyramid, then we are dealing with vertical work organisations. On the other hand, if it looks more like a rectangle or a line, we are talking about horizontal or flat models.
In the face of these, the organisations of rope access workers are characterised by a strong hierarchy of human capital, The CEO sits at the top of the top and moves down to the top executives, middle management and employees.
Thus, the major difference between vertical and horizontal work organisations lies in the decision-making process. In this sense, while in the former Any issue has to go through a large number of levels, from the worker to the top manager, In the latter, this process is simplified and fewer scales are available.
On the other hand, the holocratic or flat models are committed to empowering 100% employees through greater decentralisation, leaving them the ability to make decisions for themselves. Hence they are known as ‘bossless’ models.
Advantages and disadvantages of the different models
ROPE ACCESS ORGANISATIONS
Rope access organisations have some of the most important advantages compared to the rest:
- Control. As there are clear lines of command, any action is subject to approval by the corresponding superiors, generating greater control over the work of the staff.
- Task sharing. Since vertical organisations are structured in detail in positions and departments, each professional will have specific functions and objectives, which avoids overlapping tasks among several employees.
- Specialisation. As a general rule, companies operating under this structure have highly qualified professionals to carry out the positions to which they have been assigned.
- Effectiveness. When an optimal communication flow and distribution of tasks is achieved, this organisational model can be very effective, as if it were a large cog in a wheel.
- Promotion. In these companies, employees are clear about the career paths they can develop within the organisation as they move up the pyramid, which contributes to improving employee motivation.
However, rope access organisations also have a number of disadvantages:
- Bureaucratisation. The very distribution of roles and positions in these companies can cause any project to be subject to excessive bureaucracy, slowing down decision-making.
- Wage cost. By having more senior managers than in flat organisations, the wage costs The cost of executive pay may be higher in these companies.
- Loss of opportunities and effectiveness. In these companies, decision making has to come from the top, so the company's ability to react to crises or opportunities is limited.
- Demotivation. If recognition and equity programmes are not activated in the workforce, employees at lower levels may feel undervalued in relation to professionals in the middle or upper echelons, causing demotivation and dissatisfaction of human capital and increasing absenteeism rates and staff turnover.
HORIZONTAL STRUCTURES
In this second model, the following are presented advantages:
- Satisfaction. Staff tend to be more motivated than in the vertical structure, as they have more autonomy and independence to do their work.
- Cooperation. In these organisations, the order-execution system of the vertical model between boss and employee is replaced by a collaborative process in which team collaboration is encouraged.
- Agility. By not being so bureaucratised, the horizontal company gains in speed and adaptability to change.
- Innovation. Whereas in vertical work organisations, opportunities could be lost due to the complex web of decision making, in the horizontal model, fluidity is gained, allowing for greater innovation and competitiveness.
Instead, these are the cons of this organisational model:
- Overlay. If the competencies of each department and employee are not clearly defined, the promotion of collaboration may lead to overlapping of work and uncertainty between teams.
- Poor promotion. Another disadvantage is that employees cannot develop an upward career path, as managerial positions are scarce.
- Out of control. In small and medium-sized companies it is relatively easy for the horizontal model to thrive, but in large companies this organisation can cause problems when it comes to organising the roles and responsibilities of each professional.
FLAT COMPANIES
Based on the conception that if workers are involved in tasks and empowered to make decisions, they will be more productive, flat organisations bring the following benefits benefits:
- Commitment. The empowerment of the workforce leads to a greater individual responsibility of each employee, who will try to carry out his or her job in the best possible way.
- Motivation. Feeling that they are an important part of the company, professionals in these organisations have higher levels of satisfaction and motivation.
- Speed. As it is the employee himself who can decide on the issues that are within his competence, these companies are much more responsive than the organisations of vertical jobs.
- Communication. With no - or very few - superiors, coordination will come from fluid, multidirectional communication, where all employees share their projects or misgivings.
- Savings. Since there are no or minimal top management positions in this organisation chart, salary costs tend to be significantly reduced.
On the contrary, flat or holocratic organisations present the same disadvantages as the horizontal ones but aggravated when there is no cohesive team, prepared, motivated and aligned with the company's objectives. In these cases, With no one to steer the course, each individual will ‘row’ in a different direction, preventing the company from moving forward.
