For example innovation, flexibility and differentiation are better supported by an loose organic design. Efficiency, stability and cost control may be better supported by a tight mechanistic design. The size may preclude an informal structure. With age, organizations tend to become more inflexible and mechanistic. Today, many organizational design changes are being driven by technology changes, forcing organizations to change or perish.
Some designers discuss organizational structure in terms of a continuum with five markers.
At one end of the continuum is the functional structure with formal departments staffed by personnel with easily recognized responsibilities such as finance, production, marketing, and human resources. At the other end is a dynamic network structure that might be used by a small company to maintain maximum flexibility with limited personnel who may perform more than one job. Somewhat close to the network is the team structure where cross departmental groups may have significant responsibility for successful outcomes. Divisional structure is closer to functional structure with particular divisions being self-contained business units often producing a single product or group of products. The matrix structure falls in the middle, combining the advantages of functional specialization with the focus and accountability of the divisional structure.