This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: pose you
could build a dream car that included the styling of
a Jaguar, the power plant of a Porsche, the suspension of a BMW, and the interior of a Rolls Royce. Put
them together and what have you got? Nothing. They
weren’t designed to go together. They don’t fit.
The same is true of organizations. You can have
stellar talent, cutting-edge technology, streamlined
structures and processes, and a high-performance
culture—but if they aren’t designed to mesh with
each other, you’ve got nothing.
Indeed, the congruence model suggests that the
interaction between each set of organizational
components is more important than the components themselves. Put another way, the degree to
which the strategy, work, people, formal organization, and culture are tightly aligned will determine
the organization’s ability to compete and succeed
(see Figure 5).
For example, consider two components: the work
and the people. When the skills, knowledge, and
aptitude of the individuals involved match the job
requirements of the work at hand, you can reasonably expect a relatively high degree of performance. The Concept of Fit Now let’s assume that a restructuring has reassigned people doing related work to different parts
of the organization, separating them into tightly
bound units that lack sufficient processes for
sharing information and coordinating activity.
In that case, the formal organization will inevitably
hinder performance, even if the right people are
separately doing the right work. The final element in the congruence model is the
concept of fit. Very simply, the organization’s performance rests upon the alignment of each of the
components—the work, people, structure, Taking the argument one step further, assume that
the work at hand requires considerable autonomy,
real-time decisions, and occasional risks. However, The Congruence Model 9 Figure 5: Determining Degree of Fit
FIT THE ISSUES Individual—Formal
Organization To what extent individual needs are met by the organizational arrangements; to
what extent individuals hold clear or distorted perceptions of organizational
structures; to what extent individual and organizational goals converge. Individual—Work To what extent the needs of individuals are met by the work; to what extent
individuals have skills and abilities to meet work demands. Individual—Informal
Organization To what extent individual needs are met by the informal organization; to what
extent the informal organization makes use of individuals’ resources, consistent
with informal goals. Work—Formal
Organization Whether the organizational arrangements are adequate to meet the demands
of the work; whether organizational arrangements tend to motivate behavior
consistent with work demands. Work—Informal
Organization Whether the informal organization structure facilitates work performance;
whether it hinders or promotes meeting the demands of the work. Formal Organization—
Informal Organization Whether the goals, rewards, and structures of the informal organization are
consistent with those of the formal organization. if people have been conditioned over...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 11/22/2009 for the course HR GM600 taught by Professor Na during the Spring '09 term at Keller Graduate School of Management.
- Spring '09