The Relation between Structure and Strategy Isomorphism in Public Organizations by Anders R. Villadsen - Article Example

The paper “The Relation between Structure and Strategy Isomorphism in Public Organizations by Anders R Villadsen" is a great example of an article on management. Organizational structure can be defined as the principles and comportments of management that underwrite to the exceptional social and psychological atmosphere in an organization. It includes the organization’s anticipations, experiences, values, and philosophies that hold its success. The structure is expressed in the organization’s actions and interactions.

It can also be called corporate culture and is often shown in extent to which an organization has the freedom in decision making and development of new ideas, the manner in which it conducts its business and treat it employees and the flow of power and information through its hierarchy and the commitment of employees towards achieving the objectives (Alvesson, p. 12). The structure often influences organizations performance and productivity while providing procedures on customer care and service delivery, product quality and safety standards, it also monitors attendance and punctuality concern in the organization’s environment.

The culture can be extended to control production-methods, marketing techniques, and advertising activities. This culture is unique in every organization and is always the hardest thing to change (Alvesson, p. 22). Concise synthesis of the article you have selected article The article, “Similarity or Difference? The Relation between Structure and Strategy Isomorphism in Public Organizations” by Anders R. Villadsen gives the similarities and differences between organization structure and strategy.

The article argues that organizations in a similar environment tend to resemble in their structure. The factors that facilitate resemblance in organizational structure are network size and relations to institutional consequents. According to the network and relation to institutional constituents approach, norms and mimetic forces spread across per network while coercive pressure-flow vertically from the organization’s consequents such as governmental institutions (Villadsen, p. 70). The article also states the reasons for organizational structure differences.

It argues that organizations can improve performance by being different from others in the same environment. Research has shown that firms that operate differently have less competition, and thus, improves performance. This often occurs when organizations build a brand, products, and services that cannot be easily imitated by competitors (Villadsen, p. 70). The organizational different in structure from others in the same environment can be a question of identity. This can be significant in attracting clients and more resources like competent and skilled employees.

Research as shown that firms that practice organization structure divergence have attracted more attention in their market niche and was better performing than other firms. Analysis of the article with an explicit use/application of relevant course concept from the topic area The advantages that firms can derive from similarities and differences in organizational structure can best be obtained from the relationship between the structural and expenditure strategy isomorphism in a company. An organization can choose to satisfy normative requirements on expenditure strategy while being divergent of organization structure to foster distinctive identity (Villadsen, p. 66). In the article, some municipality used radical measures to attract the elderly by offering paid holidays and vacations to warmer climates abroad, this organization structure of rewarding gained national attention attracting more people-[p but collapsed due to scandals involving sources of funding.

Banks that exhibit intermediate levels of organizational structure and expenditure structure often realize superior financial performance than banks exhibiting less level of isomorphism (Villadsen, p. 67). The organizational structures in the Danish municipality were homogenous and stable in the 1990s but have since changed to depict differential structure designs due to modernization and technological improvements in the Danish public sector. The administrative structures that were once based on common principles for most municipalities by the Ministry of Interior have since changed and municipalities have adopted nonbureaucratic and efficiency and customer-focused management style in the organization structure (Villadsen, p. 68). Brief conclusion focusing on the implication of the article for how we think about management and organization today In this article and in the context of the Danish municipalities, just like most public sector organizations, stakeholders often assess Danish Municipalities.

This is done on the basis to which they strive to achieve the institutional expectations. Currently, with the diversification in management and organizations today, they should strive to deliver timely, fair and equal manner of services clients. This expectation has enabled the municipalities to participate in isomorphic behaviors so as to the level to reduce uncertainties (Villadsen, p. 74). The expectation of management and organizations today requires them to develop some degree of idiosyncrasy that would enable them to appoint and inspire top-class employees, draw and retain the taxpaying citizens and businesses.

In order to satisfy these contrasting necessities, it important for organizations to more or less similar to other organizations whenever it comes the organizational structures and strategies (Villadsen, p. 75). Due to the management and organization’s requirements today, the management is faced with a dilemma in decision making on how to make a balance between isomorphism on significant dimensions. Little isomorphism usually has a disadvantageous influence on legality while excess isomorphism often troubles organizational requirements for diversity in its domain (Villadsen, p. 75).