This paper addresses two foundational questions in business management: which organizational structure — functional or divisional — is more horizontal, and which factor is more critical to achieving change: readiness or capability. Drawing on Robbins and Judge (2009) and George and Jones (2008), the paper explains how divisional organizations operate as parallel independent units, making them more horizontal, while functional organizations rely on interdependent subcomponents working toward a shared goal. It then argues that while both readiness and capacity for change are necessary, readiness is the more practically important concept because its absence is less visible and more frequently leads to failed change initiatives.
Generally, the divisional organization is more horizontal in structure than the functional organization (Robbins & Judge, 2009). That is primarily because divisional organizations often maintain entirely independent business components with identical — or very similar — corresponding departments and subunits. They are essentially entirely independent organizations operating side by side (Robbins & Judge, 2009).
Conversely, functional organizations are less horizontal in structure because their various components are functionally related to, and generally depend on, one another to achieve a mutual objective (Robbins & Judge, 2009). Whereas the subcomponents of divisional organizations perform identical or similar functions, those of functional organizations usually perform different functions that cannot be performed by other subcomponents. Within a functional structure, individual subcomponents cannot produce the organization's final product by themselves; each contributes a specific element of the final product, but their individual output is insufficient except within the framework that combines the respective output of all subcomponents (Robbins & Judge, 2009).
In principle, there is no independent basis on which to say that either functional or divisional organization is necessarily "better" or in any way preferable to the other. That is because each structure is appropriate for different types of processes (Robbins & Judge, 2009). Generally, a functional structure is appropriate where the organization produces high volumes of less complex products, goods, or services. Meanwhile, a divisional or horizontal structure is more useful in connection with the production of lower volumes of specialized goods or services that serve different consumer needs across various applications and configurations (Robbins & Judge, 2009).
In some respects, readiness for change is functionally impossible without the capacity for change (George & Jones, 2008). It is possible for an organization to have the capacity for change before it is ready for change, but the converse — that is, readiness for change without a corresponding capacity for change — is purely imaginary. Stated differently, capacity for change is a prerequisite for readiness to change, but organizations can be capable of change before they are actually ready for it. One could argue that both the capacity for meaningful organizational change and the readiness for it are prerequisite components for successful change; neither can support effective change in isolation (George & Jones, 2008).
"Readiness more critical due to human and visibility factors"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.