Page 349 - Cultures and Organizations

314 CULTURES IN ORGANIZATIONS

particular configuration because it fits their implicit model and that oth-
erwise similar organizations in different countries will resemble different

Mintzberg configuration types because of different cultural preferences.

The link between Mintzberg’s fi ve configurations and the quadrants
of the power distance–uncertainty avoidance diagram is easy to make; it is
presented in Figure 9.2.
Mintzberg uses the term machine in a different sense from that used
by Stevens and by us: in his machine bureaucracy Mintzberg stresses the
role of the technostructure (that is, the higher-educated specialists) but
not the role of the highly trained workers who belong to his operating
core. Therefore, Mintzberg’s machine bureaucracy corresponds not with
Stevens’s machine but rather with his pyramid. In order to avoid confusion,
in Figure 9.2 we have renamed it “full bureaucracy.” This is the term used

FIGURE 9.2 Mintzberg’s Five Preferred Configurations of Organizations

1. Preferred configuration
2. Preferred coordinating
mechanism
3. Key part of organization
low
1. Adhocracy 1. Simple structure
2. Mutual adjustment 2. Direct supervision
3. Support staff USA 3. Strategic apex

Uncertainty Avoidance GERMANY 1. Divisionalized FRANCE
GREAT
CHINA
BRITAIN
form
2. Standardization

of outputs
1. Professional
1. Full bureaucracy
bureaucracy 3. Middle line
2. Standardization of 2. Standardization of
skills work processes
3. Operating core 3. Technostructure
high
low high
Power Distance

According to Henry Mintzberg. Projected onto a power-distance uncertainty-avoidance matrix, with a
typical country for each confi guration.