Weakness of Egalitarian & Latice Structures W.L. Gore & Associates uses the egalitarian and latice organizational structure, which have weaknesses in team management, compensation and rewards, evaluation and motivation, and policy enforcement (Mayhew, 2013) and has shown they do not always perform better than hierarchical teams (Edge, 1984). These weaknesses can cause problems in decision making, the qualifications of employees, how compensation structures are formed, performance standards, and implementing and enforcing organizational policies. These kinds of problems can lead to a chaotic work environment that causes issues with performance and return on investment.

Latice organizational structures allow for multiple working and career pathways and contain underlying entrepreneurial components. This can lead to issues in team performance and qualification of team members if the purpose and goals of the project at hand shifts. The hiring process has...

Therefore, the selection of team members for projects would have no formal method of choosing adequately qualified members. It would have to rely on the performance and known knowledge of employees in the selection of team member process.
Another issue with the entrepreneurial components is the creation of imbalance in the career pathways of individuals. Depending on the pathways chosen by individuals, an imbalance of expertise for various positions can be created if too many employees choose the same thing. It could create a problem of expertise in some areas of the organization where not many employees choose those career pathways.

Latice structures lack the ability to form compensation and reward structures based on the qualifications and levels of expertise of employees. There is a lack of standardization to provide competitive salaries and benefits. With no standardization, it is…