Introduction Every company has a particular structure. This week’s discussion investigates various types of the workplace structures. The workplace organization is critical for the productivity enhancement since the choice of a structure can lead a company either to success or failure (Joshi, 2015). According to Arvanitis, Loukis, and Diamantopoulou (2013), there is a direct connection between management and organization of the workplace and the quality of employees’ performance. This paper discusses the research made on some notable workplace structure types, their efficiency and the downsides they may have. Structures Types and Their Efficiency A traditional workspace structure is referred to as an organizational structure. It determines the way the workflow, communication, coordination, and power are managed within the company. There are many approaches to organization: workplaces can have different formats, which depend on the span of control, and various structures, which define the responsibilities of employees, as well as the way they communicate and interact with each other to complete their tasks. Studies show that some structure types of the workplace are significantly more effective than others. This week’s discussion features a traditional type of workspace structure; however, there are many other approaches to its organization. For instance, researchers note that the implementation of the structure where the decision making is delegated to self-directed teams can, compared to a “traditional form of the workplace”, improve communication, eliminate conflict, and reduce the number of human sources required (Arvanitis et al., 2013). The same studies reveal that decentralized decision-making combined with the elements of traditional structure and written plans can improve the performance of the company and lead it to success. Some reports show that centralization is associated with low-performance improvement while collaboration of employees in teams has a positive impact on their performance (Arvanitis et al., 2013). This data indicates that traditional approach to organization can be improved or adjusted by implementing the results of these studies. However, as it has been discussed during the course, different structures imply the presence of various behaviors and conflicts. Even the most “trusted” models have their downsides. For example, the decentralized decision-making type of organization described above can improve communication within the teams but also undermine knowledge creation process (Arvanitis et al., 2013). Groups of employees who regularly communicate with each other can be defined as so-called “communities of practice” (Holmes & Stubbe, 2015, p.16). Knowledge creation within such communities is at a relatively low level compared to the results shown in a classic centralized decision-making model. Organic structures with all their benefits tend to have conflicts related to the lack of leadership while mechanistic ones show problematic issues due to the excess of management and control. For some companies, innovations in organization, even if they may have positive outcomes in the future, are destructive because of human factors such as resistance to change. These facts show that