Reading of Interest

Organigrams negatively influence manufacturing results. (Second post)

Putting aside the fact organigrams are a channel to communicate grades of subordination and it could creates negative response from operation’s base crew (the closest to the operation’s base the higher your level of subordination), let us explore an alternative brought by Prof. Michael Porter in middle 80’s when he started talking about organizational competiveness.

Organigrams negatively influence manufacturing results. (Second post)

Prof. Michael Porter diagramed the organizations as a system assembled by two different groups of activities. The groups are in fact, the main processes needed to make a business more competitive, giving to the managerial staff the ability to focus on key activities, which keep business healthy and profitable. Product & Market related activities would become the Primary activities later known as value chain. The other group known as support activities are the processes, which keep the value chain’s throughput satisfying final product demand.


This first approach evolve and ISO 9000:2000 series adopted the principles to stablish the Quality Management System based on process rather than departmental structure just because process approach makes companies able to achieve better results. Nevertheless, Business structure still represented as a pyramid. It is somewhat weird because an organigram is not able to show neither how business goes nor how process interact to assure the manufacturing throughput satisfy final product demand. It is also weird when ISO 9000 series Lead Auditors ask for organigrams during auditing process, knowing that the international standard promotes QMS based on process interaction rather than departmental structures

Prof. Michael Porter gave us a very useful tool to keep staff focused on key activities. Process map brought more benefits to medium sized companies or small sized during expansion or growing stages. Unfortunately, this group of companies still using Organigrams.

Medium and small size companies are limited to hire staffing, so it is a must to have it focused on key activities. Staff understood as supervising line is direct responsible for manufacturing results (cost efficiency = Quality + resource usage + manufacturing Line availability). This group of leaders must be very clear on their day-to-day main activities. As the matter of fact, you can find them loose into so many sterile meetings, so many e-mails to answer, and so many other task that they do and add no value to the final product. From my point of view, the main reason is the organigram, that it is the only reference they have to perform their job.


Organigrams focus supervisors on departmental interest not to perform the key activities to assure value chain throughput, based on my experience I have developed a standard process map. The map groups the minimum of process required to make a manufacturing business run smoothly. The process map works for every single sort of manufacturing business and it is more useful in consumers’ good kind of business. This process map called FAVMAN’s process map focus everyone to materialize the Company Vision see it from three different perspectives: Financial and sales, Environment and communities and Business & Talent management.

At this point, we cover the impact on operation’s base crew and supervisors. The last paragraph introduce a third area of impact. Negative impact also reach Business' Vision. An Organigram cannot describe neither the raw material path to become final product nor the way to link the value chain with Business’s Vision.

Next post will cover how FAVMAN’s process map facilitates both of the issues mentioned above. Thanks for comments received, that is energy to continue posting.